Talk:Cyborg feminism

message: This article makes no sense whatsoever. --Anonymous
Whoever wrote that is dead-on. What the hell is this? Now robots have opinions on sexuality? I'm not even gonna bother trying to make this stupidity coherent. --Nqnpipnr
:I stubbed this article based on some request somewhere. I was as surprised by the subject matter as you were. I'm not sure I've interpreted this stuff correctly, but I think I get the general idea. Robots don't have an opinion on sexuality, that's the whole idea. If the body is replaceable by a machine (like in a full cyborg) the differences between men and women are reduced to their essence. As far as I understand it (which isn't very far), that's the sort of metaphor/thought experiment that cyborg feminism deals with. It doesn't really matter whether you think it's stupid or not, it's a movement, and Wikipedia should document it. I would welcome anybody researching this more thoroughly than I did. I'm not much of a feminist in the academic sense. risk 14:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

message: This article is riddled with post-modernist academic jargon, it needs a rewrite desperately! --MacRusgail 18:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Po-mo jargon

message: I'm not sure what the Anonymous commenter and Nqnpipnr are trying to achieve. Do they want to delete the article because they don't understand it? The Cyborg Manifesto is quite well-known and referenced often, especially in science fiction studies. I agree that it's a challenging and strange essay. However, it is indisputably important in the history of ideas.  And while this article could use expanding and some clearer explanation, it's not like postmodernism is a language from Mars.  A lot of good explanation is actually over on the page for Donna Haraway and we could bring some of that over into this article, as well as adding references to other work that supports the idea of cyborg feminism.
How about this - I'll invite some of the wiki-ers from the Feminist Science Fiction wiki to come over and edit the article in the next week or so. -- Liz Henry Lizzard 19:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read Donna Haraway's magnum opus, and to be honest, for all po-mos' posturing about discrimination one way or another, they are guilty of pseudo-academic elitism themselves. "it's not like postmodernism is a language from Mars." - it does enjoy obscurantism though. --MacRusgail 20:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Yes, let's work on it in a positive and constructive way

message: Wait, why is cybersex on there as a "see-also" link? ThatOneGuy 15:24, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the notion  of bodiless virtual sex bears a relation to the notion of bodiless virtual gender. Perhaps not the chatroom dirty talk that is today's cybersex, but certainly he fictional sci-fi cybersex that's shown or talked about in series like Ghost in the Shell, has some relation to this topic. risk 21:05, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cybersex?!

message: > If an expert is still needed for this article please be specific about the attention required.  If not please remove the expert request tag. →James Kidd (contr/talk/email) 05:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm removing the tag as it seems to be undefined.  If this is incorrect, please add it back. Thanks →James Kidd (contr/talk/email) 01:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expert request 

message: Without opinions from other scholars, this concept is clearly limited to this one woman, so I propose merging with her. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Awesimo (talk • contribs) 19:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seriously, this needs to be merged with donna haraway.