The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must be logged-in to an autoconfirmed or confirmed account (usually granted automatically to accounts with 10 edits and an age of 4 days)
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject TikTok, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of TikTok on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TikTokWikipedia:WikiProject TikTokTemplate:WikiProject TikTokTikTok articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Men's Issues, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Men's Issues articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Men's IssuesWikipedia:WikiProject Men's IssuesTemplate:WikiProject Men's IssuesMen's Issues articles
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
A fact from Femboy appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 January 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that one academic described the introduction of femboys to Myanmar as a tactic to achieve an "ideological revolution"?
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
I'll review this one. Sourcing looks good; the hook is supported by the source (Fascinating article there) and the article more generally appears well sourced. Both image sources check out. Article is long enough, and was converted from a redirect today, so it checks out on newness as well. I like the second hook, but i think it can be shortened a little bit to pack more punch. What about ending it with "to achieve an 'ideological revolution'?"Generalissima (talk) 18:31, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A femboy After some consideration, I feel this hook might be better as an image hook. If so, the natural option is the one used in the article lede. The hook, after this, addition would read:
... that the introduction of femboys (example pictured) to Myanmar was a tactic to achieve an "ideological revolution"?
Or the same, but using specimen pictured, which is more amusing
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello Frzzl, happy new year! I'll take this one and will be claiming this review for points in the WikiCup. Interesting subject matter :) Expect comments within the next few days. All the best, Schminnte [talk to me]01:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Frzzl, I've added my comments. To help the article's further development, I've included some extra points as well that are not needed for GACR (these are marked "Non-GACR"). Feel free to action these or not: the review will be passed without any respect to them. Please respond to any comments by indenting your responses and adding your initial. All the best, Schminnte [talk to me]23:55, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Not GAR relevant, just a quick note that your signature (I think) caused an issue with the GAN script updating the talk page. I've fixed this for now, but I'd assume it'll do it again next time there's an update. You might want to check out the associated talk page diffs to see what happened. Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs)00:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'm prepared to pass this now. Thank you for your quick replies and readiness to make alterations: it was nice working with you again. Congratulations on your new GA! All the best, Schminnte [talk to me]20:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
This is a bit of a gut feeling, but I think it makes more sense to have §Attributes after §Usage. I think this is an "important stuff first" scenario, like defining the term first - S
Words as words should be in italics, not quotes (MOS:WAW). This applies to quite a lot of the text (e.g. "Femboy also spelled femboi"). An italic title will also be needed. - S
Done, italic title added. To confirm, italics when I'm referring to the term itself, no italics when I'm using it as a noun? - F
Yes, so things like "Femboy culture" and "Femboy aesthetic" are fine with no italics - S
Per MOS:ORDER, put the engvar template below the hatnote - S
Switched - F
Not sure if the two sentences of §Etymology deserve a level 2 heading. Thoughts on merging with §Usage under a combined heading? - S
Merged. I've put the subheading for the rest of it as "Definitions"; this could be "Definition"? - F
I think the plural is more representative as there are multiple dictionary definitions discussed - S
I think "criticised as an expression of hegemonic masculinity" in the lede qualifies as material likely to be challenged per MOS:LEDECITE and should have a cite in both cases - S
Removed - F
General copyedits:
§Lede
in traditionally feminine behaviours: "with" traditionally feminine behaviours? - S
The term originated in the 1990s as a slur [...] where trends such as "#femboyfriday" have received attention. Recommend split to help flow, maybe something like "...1990s as a slur. It has since spread, popularised through internet forums and social media like TikTok, where trends such as "#femboyfriday" have received attention." - S
Replaced, this is much better. - F
If we are linking non-binary, I feel transgender should be linked too - S
Fem wikilink should be in the first occurrence - S
an abbreviation - S
Corrected x2 - F
I feel a merge could be pulled off between the first two sentences (e.g. "The term femboy originated in the 1990s and is a compound from the words fem (an abbreviation of feminine and femme) and boy) - S
Done, and I've bundled the citations to look cleaner. - F
After the term was appropriated on the Internet, femboy communities began – by 2018, the term femboy was found almost exclusively on 4chan, especially on the /lgbt/ forum – the term has become popular on platforms such as Reddit and TikTok.: this construction strikes me as odd. I feel like removing the dashes for periods would help. Mock up: "After the term was appropriated on the Internet, femboy communities began forming. Around 2018, the term femboy was found almost exclusively on 4chan, especially on the /lgbt/ forum. It later became popular on platforms such as Reddit and TikTok." - S
Done, have swapped the present participle for a past one. - F
Non-GACR: I'm not sure about quoting subreddit names. Existing articles like r/science and r/place use no quotes. MOS:MINORWORK has no mention of internet sites, so I'm inclined to remove quotes unless there's another reason. This would also make it consistent with the unquoted /lgbt/ - S
Wondering why hashtag is linked. If its to be kept, it should be moved forward anyway - S
Done x2 - F
§Reception
"has been praised for "breaking traditional norms of masculinity" and has been" remove has been repeat - S
Done - F
"Wearing a skirt as a famous straight cisgender man does next to nothing for the conversation surrounding gender fluidity. If anything, it emphasises the all-encompassing maleness." Could the quote be introduced before the colon? - S
It could be, but that paragraph is like 70% quotations - would it be better to stick it in a quote box by the side? - F
It should probably remain in text to avoid giving special treatment to one viewpoint, I'm just worried that too a reader it could be seen as a continuation of Lee's quote or a completely different quote - S
Shifted it around a bit, few more square brackets in there now haha - F
"called the "effeminisation" of society as an": as is not needed - S
Done - F
"The alt-right have viewed the emergence of femboys a result" sounds a bit odd. Something like "The alt-right has viewed the emergence of femboys to be a result" flows better in my opinion - S
That sounds a little strange to me too; I've changed it to "deemed the emergence a..." - F
I'm a bit of a hypocrite here, but is (Lightning 2021) a reliable source per WP:DISSERTATION? If its been cited in other literature it should be fine - S
Annoyingly didn't find any citations, so I've removed it. - F
Non-GACR: I would love to see direct page numbers for journals - S
Non-GACR: several refs are missing date and author - S
To the above two: I've added authors where they're available. Unfortunately since several of the journals I've used seem to be online only, the Foster & Baker and the Vaught simply have no numbers listed. - F
I can't see anything on Into: what makes this reliable? - S
My bad, also gone. - F
Earwigs shows nothing but quotes, so a broad pass for copyvios - S
Spotchecking six citations at random:
Vytniorgu (2023): pass for verifiability and copyvio - S
Foster and Baker (2022)d: fail for verifiability as it mentions nothing about these quotes - S
Can I check which quotes you're talking about? If the ones in the § Reception, you're correct, I mixed up two quotes I was going to use, it's now fixed. If the ones in § Attributes, no, they're definitely there. I should note your previous point about hyphenating "near perfect" hasn't been done yet, because it's not hyphenated in the original. If we hyphenate it, is there some sort of "altered" tag I need to add? - F
Near perfect was my mistake, its fine to leave I think. The reception quotes were what I was meaning ("d" meaning the fourth cite in the reviewed version), that looks fine now - S
En, En and Griffiths (2013)a: pass for both verifiability and copyvio - S
del Campo (2023): pass for both verifiability and copyvio - S
Tun (2023): pass for verifiability, slight fail for copyvio. There is close paraphrasing in "femboy outfits were encouraged to attract media attention", which glosses "People also encouraged the adoption of femboy outfits to attract media attention" too closely - S
changed to "used to gain exposure" - F
New Socialist (2018)b: is a fail for verifiability. The quote is "By 2018, this connection appears to have resolved with the /lgbt/ board’s users being predominantly transgender women.", which doesn't say anything about femboys being being found almost exclusively on 4chan - S
perhaps "almost exclusively" is too strong, but Gleeson does write ‘Femboy’ is one term with which some /lgbt/ users refer to themselves as, and compared to repression seems like a relatively happy path. Often but not always assisted by HRT, this identifier is an ambiguous one which seems to be found rarely outside of 4Chan. Previously, the Femboy has been little heard of even across the rest of the internet,, so I'm not too far off. Do you still need me to change it? - F
No need to change at all, I somehow missed this quote! Sorry for that - S
Article is sized appropriately, covering major viewpoints and aspects. It stays focussed on the subject of femboys throughout, with good use of summary style - S
Good job balancing viewpoints in this contentious subject. Significant viewpoints, both positive and negative, are represented in the reception section, and neutral language is used throughout. Fringe beliefs are included, but clearly labelled to avoid a false balance. - S
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
The recent history of this page was originally setting off alarm bells, but on further inspection it mostly seems to be reverted vandalism. I wouldn't say that the remaining constructive edits are enough to call this unstable - S
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
File:Cavi.jpg: Licensed correctly with a VRT ticket. Caption seems fine - S
File:Femboy flag.svg: PD tagged correctly as below the TOO. Requirements for unofficial flag use in articles are met as this is discussed in sources. Nitpicking here, but I think the caption should say "A proposed femboy pride flag" or similar since this is one of many designs. Since there are multiple unofficial flags, we shouldn't label this the unofficial flag? - S
Non-GACR: Suggest adding alt text for accessibility - S
Non-GACR: Per MOS:IMGSIZE remove fixed px sizes - S
Overall: An interesting and well-balanced article. A few problems to fix in GACR1&2, but still manageable - S
Pass/Fail:
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
WP:ISATERMFOR
Hi, I recently edited this article changing the first sentences from "Femboy... is a slang term for a male or non-binary individual who express themselves with traditionally feminine behaviours." to "Femboy... is a male or non-binary individual who express themselves with traditionally feminine behaviours." This was to put it in line with the policy described in WP:ISATERMFOR, which states: "Most Wikipedia articles are not dictionary entries, and opening sentences like the above ought to be cleaned up in accordance with our Guide to writing better articles. Editors should boldly replace these cumbersome phrasings ("is a term for", "is a word that means", "refers to") with the more direct "is" construction". I don't see how this article would be an outlier in that sense, how is this article's scope distinct from what the articles for, say, butch, dandy or even boy do? Also, according to WP:REFERS, "the introduction is using a term, rather than mentioning it", meaning the article should be about what the word refers to, rather than the word itself, as that is what Wiktionary is for. Issan Sumisu (talk) 11:59, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I understand. However, we do have articles about words themselves and pieces of slang; in a broader sense, something like Jazz (word) doesn't really belong on Wiktionary; in a narrower scope, see something like Twink (gay slang), or Femme. When I wrote this, I put it in the latter direction, where we're focusing on the word itself; indeed, that's how it's discussed in quite a few of the sources, especially the academic papers. I don't think femboy has enjoyed as much usage as a noun that dandy, for example. If you want to try rearranging the article to focus on what a femboy is, feel free, but right now, the majority of the article is about how the word is used and its associations so I think it would be a bit strange if the lede just went in a different direction. Frzzl talk; contribs 12:16, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Presence Section - History
I am not familiar with wikipedia editing and discussion etiquette, but I am very familiar with the history of this term from 2010 - present.
The sentence "Around 2018, the term femboy was found almost exclusively on 4chan" is not accurate and should be revised. More effort should be made to provide a complete history of the term's evolution since the 1990's. The term was frequently used in online communities connected to yaoi well before 2018. Its use before this time was very widespread, to the extent that sources to cite should not be difficult for anyone to find, regardless of their familiarity with the term. 2601:642:C003:8780:E866:8D84:D36C:65CE (talk) 04:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Skyshifter: Firstly, sex and gender are completely different things.
Just because an individual has a penis does not mean that they are male.
Just because an individual has a vagina does not mean that they are female.
Besides genitals (external sex organs), sex is defined by presence of many anatomical structures such as gonads (internal sex organs e.g. testes, ovaries), accessory reproductive organs (uterus, fallopian tubes, cervix, prostate, etc.), sex hormones, secondary sex characteristics, etc.
I know that anatomy has nothing to do with the article.
But differences between sex and gender must be stated.
Male ≠ man
Female ≠ woman
Intersex ≠ non-binary
This is because sex and gender are different things.
It is possible for people to be born without any gender, and they are called agender people.
But it is impossible for people to be born without a sex.
what does intersex have to do with anything?
Many intersex people are non-binary, and can also use "femboy" as a label.
You said "we're talking gender here"; "male" is not a gender; "male", "female", and "intersex" are sexes; "man", "woman" and "non-binary(ies)" are genders, along with the agender trait.
The lead sentence can either be:
"A femboy is a male or intersex individual..."
OR
"A femboy is a man or non-binary individual..."
I think that the latter is better because the article mentions gender, and not anatomical sex.
@CrafterNova: Hello! Honestly, what you said at the beginning surprised me. I am one of the main editors of transgender topics at ptwiki, and I am literally questioning my gender identity! I'm genuinely sorry if my first impression was that I was transphobic; the complete reverse of that! I know well the distinction between sex and gender. Here we just had a misunderstanding regarding the usage of the word "male". Wikipedia's own article for Male states: "In humans, the word male can also be used to refer to gender, in the social sense of gender role or gender identity." And currently, the word "male" in the femboy article links to "male gender". So it is clear that "male" is referring to gender here. That's why I said we were talking gender there. I'd also note that we could be excluding AFAB male or non-binary femboys — which are completely valid — if our lead referred to male sex and intersex instead. Like you said, "sex has nothing to do with being a femboy", so we should indeed only be mentioning gender. The current lead is perfectly fine considering "male" refers to gender here; however, I'm not opposed of changing "male" to "man", if it clears up confusion. Skyshiftertalk16:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Skyshifter: The article for male is not a Wikipedia policy. It is WP:VAGUE and confusing to use words, that generally refer to sex, to refer to words that generally refer to gender.
The usage of "male" to refer to the "man" gender, and usage of "female" to refer to the "woman" gender cannot be justified, because if it were, then "intersex" could also be used to refer to "non-binary", but it isn't. There is no valid reason for such ambiguous usage of words, since it rather causes confusion to readers.
This ambiguity in usage of words, for sexes and genders, is rather discriminatory, and, to be fair, transphobic in some cases.
Unfortunately, most Wikipedia policies such as MOS:GENDER, MOS:GENDERID, MOS:LEAD, etc. do not differentiate between sex and gender.
@CrafterNova: Sorry for not responding to your ealier comment, I forgot. I don't think I have a formed opinion on the matter. From what I've seen, it does seem that terms like "male" and "female" can refer to gender very commonly in English, so looking from that perspective, it doesn't seem outright wrong to use the terms that way. Language can change over time, and it seems that "male" and "female" can refer, respectively, to "man" and "woman" nowadays. However, as a non-native English speaker, I can possibly be missing the nuances of the meanings or differences between the words male and man, and female and woman. Skyshiftertalk19:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"male" doesn't inherently mean AMAB. I would argue that transgender men are male despite being AFAB, for example. "male or nonbinary" and "man or nonbinary" IMHO mean roughly the same thing. Tdmurlock (talk) 08:47, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rewrite the "Presence" section?
I feel we should remove this; "Reddit has hosted both sexual and non-sexual femboy content: r/feminineboys was started in 2012 and has two hundred fifty one thousand members by February 2024; the site also contains the pornographic r/FemBoys."
please remove "bicalutamide" in Attributes section
In the "Attributes" section, there is a passing reference to femboys using bicalutamide as part of feminizing HRT to avoid breast growth. This is very much not accurate.
I am a transgender woman on feminizing HRT, and I take bicalutamide daily. Bicalutamide is often prescribed as an antiandrogen, meaning it blocks testosterone. It does not, however, prevent any breast growth (I have a 34C chest). Tamoxifen can be prescribed to do so, but it also has some pretty dangerous side effects. Ashrose688 (talk) 11:06, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relevant?
"seeing that the muscularity of femboys as differentiating them from the labels of effeminate or gay."
are femboys aren't effeminate? What? What does this even mean? The previous quote doesn't even mention muscularity. 172.99.147.181 (talk) 20:38, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
image displaying a femboy should be removed or changed
a) a Brazillian femboy Instagram model b) yes, check the VRT ticket on Meta c) why? generally it seems to sum up the core elements of being a femboy, and is immediately identifiable as such, so serves well as the lede image. not sure how it's unencyclopaedic, we're not WP:CENSORED - not an arguement per se, but it's on most of the other language edition wiki pages for Femboy. Frzzl talk; contribs 18:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
a Brazilian femboy instagram model? this doesnt sound too general for it to be put in a article that displays a neo-adjective, it should still be replaced with a more general image and not a random image of a Brazilian guy, perhaps a more popular figure will do the job. Ratiorain (talk) 19:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We already have an image of a more notable figure who is or was known then as a femboy, of F1NN5TER, which has been around for over a month now. I see no problem with using a very casual(?) image here, perhaps it proves that femboys are less of a novelty, so to speak. Carlinal (talk) 12:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Use of F1NN5TER's image
@Tamzin, I'm pondering over removing the image of F1NN5TER that you added, over its relevance to the attributes section. I'm concerned about applying images more loosely on this article, especially after I removed a poorly placed third image of a femboy (excluding the flag) and there doesn't seem to be any weight in adding F1NN5TER's image here. There's neither a cited mention of him nor Twitch although there is a mention of gender fluidity in a subsequent section. Maybe in terms of fashion his image is unique, but I don't see how it's enough to differ from the head image. Could you provide a justification or counterargument? Carlinal (talk) 13:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Carlinal: My argument would be simply, it makes sense for the attributes section to have an image of someone who exemplifies several of the things discussed in that section, and it is furthermore good for the article to have an image of a notable femboy (or a notable person who at least identified as a femboy when the photo was taken—bit less clear now). The image is of higher quality than the one in the lede, so if we're going to use only one, it should be F1NN5TER's... But I'm not sure why we can't have two. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 16:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Funny. I used basically this exact reasoning in a previous section. Guess I wasn't sure if that's a legit argument initially. Indeed, if a(n Internet) celebrity is into it, who wouldn't? Thanks for the response, I'll leave it alone. Carlinal (talk) 05:35, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should be removed now that they openly identify as a trans girl and therefore the inclusion of it as well as calling them a "he" is derogatory. JackVegas7 (talk) 01:40, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JackVegas7 Where is the article calling him "a he"? You're acting as if you were F1NN5TER himself, because in all sources, news, and his social media accounts state he uses both he and she pronouns. So using "himself" is correct. If you act as if he is not genderfluid, the one misgendering him is you. LEILA FERRAZ (talk) 02:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
did they change their mind again or something? everything i have heard is that they're a trans girl, not genderfluid or something, but actively transitioning and openly a trans girl. Either way, genderfluid = not a femboy. Femboys are cis males. Still a bad image to have added (as well as them not really using the term to self describe anyways/believing femboys are a fad and its just a gateway to being trans, which is cringe lmfao.) JackVegas7 (talk) 02:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
they actively state they "made it 4 years" of being a femboy and no longer use the term. If nothing else its not accurate to have the image anymore. JackVegas7 (talk) 02:56, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed image change
I'd suggest changing the image titled 'a femboy' to another picture, that'd be a little more expressive, and preferably not contain a minor.
I mean, that's great, but what exactly is wrong with the head image we have right now? I don't think it's a problem with a teen if it's over identity expression, my argument being that femboy isn't exclusively pornographic, and if it's used as a comfortable label among minors in the same way that "trans" or "non-binary" are, then that's perfectly fine. I encourage it, even.
Great points being made, and thanks for clarifying the model's age! I guess my suggestion to change the image would be more about expression rather than age after all. There are much better images out there of femboys when it comes to calrity. If we want to do a good job expressing what a femboy is through a picture, we should use one where the model is wearing as many of the attributed clothings and elements as possible ( not just thigh highs and skirts, but crop tops, arm warmers, fishnets, dolphin shorts etc.). The current model only dressed feminine from the waist down. I think as the face of the femboy identity we could use a picture much more telling.
Hmm, looks like it got deleted immediately. Túrelio said there's "No evidence of a free license at the claimed source." Can you contact them about this? Perhaps the file can get a ticket of confirmation about its license. Carlinal (talk) 17:26, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should a dropshipping store really be an external link? While there is some blogs about femboy culture, I really think there are some better options for additional infomation. 628318Tau (talk) 02:34, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Has a number of incorrect parts with no real backing?
1: There is no sexual connotation inherent to the term. Femboys are non-sexual at a baseline, and their definition is completely unrelated to sex.
2: Feminine "behaviors" is not accurate, as generally the common definition for femboy reflects a personality along the lines of a normal average male as opposed to behaving in ways considered traditionally feminine. The femininity, or "fem" in the word "femboy" is related to the appearance of the individual, not the personality.
3: Gender variance is also inaccurate, as femboys are cis males. It is not accepted broadly to be anything other than cis males, though some contend this point, very few agree with them, and the general consensus is cis males are the only ones eligible to be considered femboys, with no other gender identities being applicable to the term, instead falling under the category of "roseboy" or similar terms.
4: In gender studies it is NOT a term for trans people, as it is seen as heavily derogatory to refer to a trans individual as a "femboy" or similar terms such as "tomboy"
5: In porn studies there is no clear cut role for femboys, nor is it used specifically to denote a "submissive" individual, nor is it considered an identifier for a submissive male.
6: The term "boi" means young gay man??? What? Its just a slight change in spelling for boy. Not once has boi been used to mean "young gay man", not in pop culture nor in technical terminology.
7: Non-binary individuals are not femboys. Femboys are exclusively cis males.
8: "femboi" is simply an alternative spelling to Femboy, with no specific connotation towards other gender identities or anything. The word you would look for for non-cis male identities fitting the description would be roseboy, as femboys are exclusively cis males.
9: Sissies have nothing to do with femboys, as it is a fetishization of being trans, not anything to do with being a femboy.
10: It is not used to signify a bottom role, nor is that the purpose of the term. A femboy is a femboy, that does not come with a role attached.
11: Boywife is a word with nothing to do with femboys, instead relating to a male who takes on a traditional housewife role, with feminine qualities being optional beyond that. The most hyper masculine man on earth could be considered a "boywife" fitting the role of a housewife.
12: "Pussyboy" is another word for the slang term "cuntboy" which is to denote a male with female genitals, and a derogatory slur for trans men, generally those who are pre-op.
13: "Exclusively seek to be" that whole sentence is outright just, incorrect, and with no substance or backing. Sounds more like a fetishization as opposed to anything substantiated by reality, and therefore is irrelevant fluff unfitting to the article, as well as an unnecessary and inaccurate addition to it.
14: Femboys have certainly been fetishized, and with that being a problem, a great deal of division has happened within the community itself, with strict definitions being made and those falling outside of it harshly judged and berated for using the term inaccurately.
15: Femboys have no desire to transition. They are comfortable as males and seek nothing further besides maintaining a feminine appearance. A femboy seeking to transition is what is known as an "egg", which is a person who is on the verge of a realization of a trans identity.
16: "Around 2018, the term femboy was found almost exclusively on 4chan" Who...who wrote this? have they just...never been on the internet, ever?
17: "femboy outfits" is an active contradiction considering the fact that this article also makes the correct claim that being a femboy has no inherent need to crossdress nor is it a mandatory part of the identity.
You will need to provide sources to support all this, especially since most of your claims seem to be contradicted by sources already in the article. I don't have time right now to go through all of them, but just taking a few at random:6. is supported by [1] 7. is supported by [2] 8. I'm not sure what you're objecting to; the only place the article distinguishes the sematics of "femboi" from "femboy" is "the variant femboi may refer to "softer" individuals" which is supported by [3] 10. is supported by [4] 16. is supported by [5]Overall the article seems well-sourced; if you see any statements that are not sourced you can bring them up here, but objecting to sourced content without providing any sources that support your opinions is not actionable or constructive. CodeTalker (talk) 03:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First source substantiates no claims, simply makes it on its own without any precedent set for it. Furthermore, research into it claims the term is used for significantly more than the applied term used here, denoting everything from trans, genderqueer, or as a regular definition I saw on research, a lesbian who adopts a boyish apperance. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Boi
With so many contrasting definitions from various sources, its relevance to the article is largely fluff at best.
2nd source is a source of contention upon research, but the broader consensus is that cis males are the only femboys, and from a stricter definition, would be the common consensus and proper definition (with Roseboy being pointed out as an alternative term for those outside of cis male requirement within the page itself.) https://gender.fandom.com/wiki/Femboy
Other similar sites define or lump the two together as a net, and therefore any external usage is either A: unrelated to femboys and the page, or B: is simply just an alternative spelling used in slang the same way "ion" is short for "i dont" or "hai" is another way to say "hi".
4th source is majority speculating and interpreting multiple sources as well as actively providing both sides of the coin involved directly quoting another source by saying "the problem is that we assume feminine men are bottoms in the first place. The all-consuming need to conform to archetypes punishes every gay man—why is it that, thousands of years on from Ancient Greece, we still bow to a heteronormative ideal of a masculine top and feminine bottom? (O’Flynn, 2018)", which would also refute the claim that the source explicitly supports or confirms this as set in stone, and often refers to the concepts of people fetishizing or stating roles alongside the term as "sexual fantasy" and arent considered definitive or outright claims to definiting the word, and the femboy term comes with no inherent bottom definition, otherwise concepts such as "femboydom" or the japanese equivalent of "josou seme" https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Josou%20Seme would be contradictory and nonexistent. Furthermore, the source also claims the usage of the term results from "sexual fantasies" in that manner, as opposed to any real definition. This source does not support the claim made, and the only two usages of the term femboy within the paper are both quoting people using the term in relation to either conversations had casually and not in direct definition, or in regards to a sexual fantasy without explicit definition attached. Simply stating an effeminate male is automatically a femboy is incorrect as well, as that would mean individuals such as James Charles, RuPaul, and other similar figures are femboys, when it is not the case, and more a matter of self description based on the definition already available.
Even simply looking up the phrase "femboydom" or "dom femboy" produces a number of results, already shooting down any concept of it being an inherently assigned position by term. A bedroom role is outside the definition of femboy and therefore is unassociated, as well as the source not contributing to the claim made.
5th Source does NOT support that claim either. In fact, there is no mention of 4chan on the page itself, and the examples of usage show common usages on everything from tumblr to reddit as far back as 2014. JackVegas7 (talk) 03:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
Generalissima (talk) 18:41, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
