Talk:Heteronormativity/Archive 6

message: I removed all content of the discussion page as of 2.June 2004 here, although a few paragraphs will remain on the discussion page itself. -- AlexR 01:33, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: * This is equivalent to putting the article in a series, which is reasonable. It is an important term in critical theory. Yes, there are other important terms that are not marked. This is not the point. The point is that major terms in critical theory should have a box pointing towards other resources for people who came to the term looking for information on them, much like major figures in philosophy (Immanuel Kant) have the series box at the bottom. I have, however, trimmed the box so that it takes up slightly less space. Snowspinner
** Than can be done with a link, and needs not to be done with a still-too-big box, which will leave casual readers with the impression that this article is critical theory only, which it is not. Funny how you removed that debate to the archive already, isn't it? The box goes, because this article is not only relevant for critical theory. And I am saying that again: Those boxes are seen to be problematic in most of the Wikipedia, not just by me. If you keep insisting of this box, this isn't the last revert war you will find yourself into, that is predictable. -- AlexR 10:23, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a hijack when there's another box on the page for a different project/grouping.  You had half a point when it was the only box on the page, but now that there's an LGBT box (at the top, no less), there's no reason to exclude the critical theory project's box at the bottom.  It goes in.  Or is that only members of the LGBT community can claim the page for their own? Justin Johnson 13:48, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Project Critical Theory again

message: As one of the recently debated sections shows, the article has a very bis problem - the basic heteronormative assumption of sex = gender identity = gender role = sexual orientation is not defined anywhere anymore; it must have gotten lost during the edit wars. Consequently, the article is very likely somewhat confusing; that should go back to the very beginning of the article. I am however to tired to do so right away, so do we have a volunteer here? -- AlexR 04:20, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very basic problem 

message: I heartilly object to the removal of the objections section. Sam Spade 06:35, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure why. If, as you claim, the term has little use outside of Wikipedia, it wouldn't have many objections that are worth noting, would it? Or are you saying the term is more widely used than you'd suggested. Where are these objections actually coming from? Snowspinner 14:08, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  for the record 

message: Wikipedia:NPOV dispute, Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute. Read the policies, and try not to be so silly. Sam Spade 21:37, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: And who but you debates the accuracy and the neutrality of this article? There is nobody else I can see.  -- AlexR 22:31, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: Also, why don't you read them yourself, Sam? -- till we *) 17:14, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[NPOV]] 

message: *"'Queer commentary shows that much of what passes for general culture is riddled with heteronormativity [the view that heterosexuality is and should be the norm]' (Berlant any í Warner 1995, 349)." The Mismeasure of Desire: The Science, Theory, and Ethics of Sexual Orientation (Ideologies of Desire) by Edward Stein, 
*"heterosexism, heteronormativity Heterosexism is discrimination against lesbians and gays...In 1975 the Dutch lesbian feminist Purple Semptember staff named heteronormativity an instrument of perpetuating power. Both lesbian feminists and queer theorists address the compulsory nature of heterosexuality (see lesbian feminism; queer theory). However, 1990s queer theorists focused on transgressoin and deviance while lesbian feminists focused on structural analysis. The difference: lesbian feminists regard a heterosexual man buying a prostitute as normative heterosexuality, queer theorists regard it as transgressive/progressive. See also: heteropatriarchy; homophobia" Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories by Lorraine Code, 
*"Compulsory heterosexuality (or what some have called 'heteronormativity') functions to underline the fact that heterosexuality is an institution, a practice, with its own set of expectations, norms, and principles of conduct." Gender, Race, and Class in Media: A Text-Reader by Gail Dines, 
*"Heterocentrism. Heteronormativity. These terms were coined recently to refer to the placing of heterosexual experience at the center of one's attention, or the routine assumption that heterosexuality is "normal" and that any other sexuality is "deviant." ibid
These are mostly for Sam's benefit. Hyacinth 00:39, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes again 

message: After much debate on the subject, Hyacinth suggested creating clear guidelines for writing and placing boxes in Talk:Heteronormativity, which is a good idea, in my opinion. Here, therefore, my attempt can be found: User:AlexR/Article series boxes -- AlexR 16:48, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  General proposal on Article Series Boxes