Talk:First-wave feminism

message: * Davidson, Dianne, Women on the warpath : feminists of the first wave, University of Western Australia Press, Nedlands, WA, 1997.
: Australian women were also granted suffrage in South Australia 1861(part) and 1894(full). See also, Bessie Rischbieth.  Is there a feminist project? ☻ Fred|☝ discussion|✍  contributions 12:09, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australia 

message: I'm removing the following text for the moment:
Both Stanton and Anthony believed that abortion was an imposition of the patriarchy upon women and that if decisions about abortion were placed into the hands of women, it would happen far less often (or cease entirely):
Much as I deplore the horrible crime of child-murder, earnestly as I desire its suppression, I cannot believe that such a law would have the desired effect. It seems to me to be only mowing off the top of the noxious weed, while the root remains. We want prevention, not merely punishment. We must reach the root of the evil, and destroy it.
− Susan B. Anthony, The Revolution, 1869.
For Anthony and Stanton, the root of the evil was men's political control over women through marriage, family and property laws as well as social control through the popularized notion of true "womanliness."
This text appears as a non sequiter. It would make sense only in the context of discussing abortion and contraception as issues for first-wave feminism. It's my understanding that, despite the fact that women like Stanton and Anthony supported it, legalised abortion was not a major rallying point for first-wave feminists, because 1) at the time, it was considered too radical and politically dangerous and 2) the first-wavers were divided on the issue. However, I don't know enough of the history to write this myself. 
Speaking of context, it strikes me as a peculiar omission not to mention that Anthony is obviously arguing against an anti-abortion law in the quote. 
I also dislike that there is so much attention to abortion in the text compared to other goals of the first wave. It's an important issue, and the position put forth in the quote is quite interesting. But, come on! If we're going to investigate the issues, let's at least give equal space to access to education and contraception, voting and property rights, divorce, abolition.... As a feminist I have strong opinions about abortion, but it does not define the movement, especially in the era in question.
 
208.120.219.31 23:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have taken two liberties, one to block quote the removed text in the above statement. The second was to undo the removal. I will restore it, however, the problem lies in the lack of development in this article. The text and quote may resemble something given to support an explanation of the abortion issue, as it relates to 'first wave', but this short article lacks the context for its presentation.  In contrast to the view given above, my own understanding is that legislation such as this, or the Contagious Diseases Acts (1864), were to so significantly impact on the health and welfare on Women (and children), that a notable current or goal emerged.  Vociferous opponents of these policies presented them as systematic or social practices that impacted directly on health, or led to higher rates of infant and adult mortality. It remained a foundation goal of some feminist organisations, if not the sole aim.  It was 'radical and politically dangerous', it would more likely be expounded outside of the conservative movement or by those with less ambitious goals. The frequent overlap of the association's membership would seen opponents seated at the same table. The issue remained important throughout the history of the feminism and was indisputably divisive.  I suppose I should provide some citation for this :P  ☻ Fred|☝ discussion|✍  contributions 09:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abortion 

message: Skipping from Woolstonecraft to suffrage, skips... a whole lot. Like a century of meetings, conventions, campaigns and lives. I've added an Expand tag to flag this issue. --Yamara ✉ 06:17, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: UK in the 19th century

message: Can you elaborate on "reforms in higher education, in the workplace and professions, and in healthcare."  I'm always looking for more details & I think others would like to know also.  Stars4change (talk) 06:00, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: When exactly was it possible for women to own property?  What year/s? Stars4change (talk) 06:01, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The history of feminism and Women and Islam articles say in the Middle Ages, depending on where one lived. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Elaborate reforms

message: I have reverted an edit which added information about how Black women, Catholic women and Jewish women were sidelined by WASP women in the first wave. The thoughts expressed were poorly shaped, with incorrect facts employed, such as "At a time when ALL American men were granted the right to vote..." This article discusses woman suffrage during times when not all could vote, as well as after the 15th Amendment which did not truly give the right to vote to all U.S. men; it gave the states leeway to demand that voters have money or property or whatever, but forbade them to limit voters by race or color or whether they had been slaves.
I don't think this article is the right place to hash out the differences between AWSA and NWSA—differences which were seen as very large if you were in NWSA or not so large if you were not. Both groups wanted female suffrage at the federal level. Anyway, I'm trying to limit the U.S. section for reasons of undue weight given to a global subject. Binksternet (talk) 02:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Race and religion in the first wave 

message: Everything in this article is appropriate, though it is only in draft-state. Lenin's October Revolution was essential to European feminism; for example, Alexandra Kollontai and Inessa Armand. Revan ltrl (talk) 20:44, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Europe 

message: the last paragraph on the United States draft is not neutral or verifiable:
Many white women excluded black women from their organizations and denied them the right to participate in events because they feared that the racist attitudes of Southern voters would affect their support of the women's movement. One notable instance of black exclusion was at a Washington parade in 1913, when activist Alice Paul did not allow the black feminist Ida Wells-Barnett to march with the other white women; instead, Paul told her that she could march at the back of the procession with the other black women.
Who is to say why white women put black women at the back of the line? If there is no citation, remove the text. Even with a citation, I would dispute its neutrality. To imply that no first-wave feminists were racist seems hardly realistic. It looks more like someone is trying to downplay a potential criticism of first-wave feminism, hence my dispute about its neutrality. Since I don't know much about how to edit Wikipedia, I won't try to edit the page myself; I'll just make a note here. 66.182.220.48 (talk) 03:57, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  United States 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on First-wave feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121029112001/http://mootmagazine.com:80/2012/08/16/woman-up/ to http://mootmagazine.com/2012/08/16/woman-up/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I would like to propose adding a link to equity feminism in the "see also" section. Where 1stwave is generally used in a historical capacity, this term appears to refer to a more recent values system with parallels drawn to 1st wave achievements. This cite for example compares the two:
:
This is not to say that 1stWave/Equity/Mainstream are necessarily synonymous, just that they have been compared as having similar aims in some contexts by a source enough that they appear to be related topics to one another. Any objections to this? 184.145.18.50 (talk) 19:35, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: EF in SA

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on First-wave feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120529040814/http://www.kvinfo.dk/side/341/ to http://www.kvinfo.dk/side/341
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:54, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on First-wave feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110709072000/http://www.npg.si.edu/col/seneca/senfalls1.htm to http://www.npg.si.edu/col/seneca/senfalls1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131722443400/http://www.bridgew.edu/soas/jiws/vol1/li.htm to http://www.bridgew.edu/soas/jiws/vol1/li.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060305022448/http://www.ipu.org:80/wmn-e/suffrage.htm to http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/suffrage.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:01, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on First-wave feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120428165606/http://www.bahai-studies.ca/journal/files/jbs/8.3%20Miller.pdf to http://www.bahai-studies.ca/journal/files/jbs/8.3%20Miller.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.wic.org/misc/history.htm,
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131023202457/http://www.utexas.edu/cola/depts/anthropology/courses/25931 to http://www.utexas.edu/cola/depts/anthropology/courses/25931
*Added  tag to http://www.womenshistory.com.au/timeline.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120415165154/http://www.rosadoc.be/site/rosa/english/pdf/factsheetsenglish/01.pdf to http://www.rosadoc.be/site/rosa/english/pdf/factsheetsenglish/01.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050921130244/http://www.class.csupomona.edu:80/his/skpuz/hst202/Woodhull/WQart.html to http://www.class.csupomona.edu/his/skpuz/hst202/Woodhull/WQart.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:51, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I am deleting the section on the Nueva Germania as a supposed feminist colony in Paraguay. The feminist relevance of this colony is dubious, and certainly not substantiated by the sources that are cited in support of this section. The sentence about this appears verbatim in several articles about feminism. Jazzcowboy (talk) 14:42, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paraguay and Nueva Germania 

message: In the United Kingdom section it says "women were attending many leading medical schools, and in 1915 the American Medical Association began to admit women members."  Why is that in the UK section?
Also in the UK section it says "Many women served in the armed forces during World War II, when around 300,000 American women served in the navy and army, performing jobs such as secretaries, typists and nurses."  I was not aware we brought so many women from the USA to the UK do admin and nursing jobs.  Is it an error it is in the UK section?
Furthermore, in the UK section it says "New Zealand was the first country to grant women the right to vote at a national level, while Finland, as well as some American states gave women voting rights at a state level before Australian women obtained that right across the nation."  None of those countries are in the UK!  (Also, Finland gave women voting rights at a national level.)  SandJ-on-WP (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  UK / USA / other country confusion 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on First-wave feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120410101433/http://www.sais-jhu.edu/pressroom/pdf/nafisi_112810.pdf to http://www.sais-jhu.edu/pressroom/pdf/nafisi_112810.pdf
*Added  tag to http://hera.minisisinc.com/ROW_IMAGES/Online%20Exhibits/Notice.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.womenshistory.com.au/timeline.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110524111223/http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/web/common.nsf/key/HistoryEarlyFederalPeriod to http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/web/common.nsf/key/HistoryEarlyFederalPeriod
*Added archive https://archive.is/20121223062718/http://www.keele.ac.uk/history/currentundergraduates/tltp/SUFFRAGE/DOCUMENT/FEMITALA.HTM to http://www.keele.ac.uk/history/currentundergraduates/tltp/SUFFRAGE/DOCUMENT/FEMITALA.HTM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120415011232/http://historia.fcs.ucr.ac.cr/articulos/esp-genero/2parte/CAP12Vicky.htm to http://www.historia.fcs.ucr.ac.cr/articulos/esp-genero/2parte/CAP12Vicky.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.class.csupomona.edu/his/skpuz/hst202/Woodhull/WQart.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:07, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The #Origins section has various problems, including repetition, disorganization (e.g. Wollstonecraft mentioned in every paragraph but the first), choppy (the last paragraph sounds like a series of disconnected assertions that read like unconnected bullet points), and some very awkward, even near-incomprehensible wording that sound like awkward machine translation:
*  —Huh?
*  —Translated?
Also, although there are five references, it's not enough, and there many unsourced assertions, including the entirety of paragraphs two and three, and much of the last one.  I'll take a crack at starting on the organization issue, by adding some subsection headers, but much additional work needs to be done here.  
Finally, if there was translation going on here (the Featured Article in French would be the logical source, though I haven't checked) then an attribution statement is a legal requirement (not just a guideline or policy recommendation) per WMF licensing, and I don't see one anywhere in the edit history. Mathglot (talk)
:::::Above text added 3 December 2017
:I removed the repetition tag because this is now solved by giving Wollstonecraft her own subsection. Some citations are still missing, especially I doubt that Rousseau is the father of the Enlightenment. A reorganization also took place, however it is not nice to split a section (Origins) into a subsection without section header and a subsection with a header (Wollstonecraft). So I have left these two points tagged. --Cyfal (talk) 18:26, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The Origins section remains a problem. The major thing to me seems to be the huge overemphasis on Wollstonecraft.  Given the mere context setting role for this section of the article, Wollstonecraft probably should have only one or two sentences.  The reader can consult the two "main" articles called out under the section head (or a Wollstonecraft link, for her) if more detail is desired. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 22:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins section needs work 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on First-wave feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121001100954/http://www.abc.net.au/ola/citizen/women/women-power.htm to http://www.abc.net.au/ola/citizen/women/women-power.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120910000810/http://www.iwdc.org/resources/suffrage.htm to http://www.iwdc.org/resources/suffrage.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:24, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In response to a similar proposal, I'm proposing that the timeline list in this article in section #Timeline be moved to its own article: Timeline of first-wave feminism (see examples at List of timelines). Woodsy lesfem (talk) 03:52, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: Added notification of this discussion at Project FEMINISM.    Mathglot (talk) 09:11, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

text: Note: Added notification of this discussion at WT:Splitting.   Mathglot (talk) 09:11, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:   Checking back in. The timelines here and here almost entirely overlap with the U.S. entries of the timeline on this article. I'm not sure exactly what should be on the first-wave feminism timeline. Should it only be things that resulted from suffragist/women's activism, or from any legal advancement in women's rights, regardless of the cause? The 1809 Connecticut law and early women's property acts, for example, aren't necessarily a direct result of women's activism. Woodsy lesfem (talk) 23:39, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Split proposal: Timeline

message: I just removed three events from the timeline, because they were not (or little) known outside the Bahá'í community. If we include events that are meaningful only for a single religious community, we would also have to include events of all other religious communities (as far as I know, some Quaker communities were pretty progressive). I also have the impression that the section on Persia gives undue coverage to the Bahá'í community. Rsk6400 (talk) 09:25, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I also removed the section on Persia. The whole section looked like Bahá'í self-promotion. The lede defines First-wave feminism as occurring "throughout the Western world". Iran (Persia) is not part of the "Western world", and if we look at communication processes among feminists, we will see that Bahá'í feminist positions had little (if any) influence on Western feminists. I didn't remove the section out of anti-Bahá'í feeling (the Bahá'í community has suffered a lot and is still suffering), but to keep the article focused on its subject. Rsk6400 (talk) 12:39, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Events of the Bahá'í community 

message: Hello, this article barely mentions first-wave feminism in Latin America. Virginia Bolten, Carolina Muzzilli, the Luisi sisters, Delmira Agustini must be included. --179.26.209.125 (talk) 00:38, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin America 

message: — Assignment last updated by Saroka26 (talk) 18:31, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: HIST 2010 Early U.S. History

message: — Assignment last updated by Jackchen314 (talk) 14:15, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Intro to Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies-16