|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Liberal feminism article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|WikiProject Feminism||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Politics||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Assigned student editor(s): Mindiirwin.|
"Because of this approach to self-ownership, liberal feminists also tend to support legalising or decriminalizing cannabis and lap dancing, a position often challenged by radical feminists and by the religious right. Liberal feminists tend to view the criminalization of prostitution to be a legislative act rooted in patriarchal control over the personal and business affairs of women, and thus repressive."
This sounds a bit more like libertarian feminism than liberal feminism. I'd be inclined to remove this unless somebody can come up with a citation for it. Part of the problem is that "liberal feminism" a political position very few people actually consciously subscribe to. Betty Friedan was its clearest exponent. Gloria Steinem is the best known "liberal feminist", but if you look at her writing, her ideas are more "radical feminism lite" than anything. Peter G Werner 22:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
"Liberal feminism tends to have a neutral vision towards different gender; it requires women to mould themselves to fit a citizenship that had already been constructed in the welfare of men." I'm not an expert, but this seems to lack neutrality and perhaps expresses a radical feminist view of liberal feminism? OwenSaunders (talk) 03:14, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- Two years later and that ridiculous sentence is still here. An anonymous user noted that (and had their edit reverted.) Seriously, that sentence being here for this long is fucking pathetic. This article is RIFE with POV. Why even pretend there's an NPOV policy if something like that can hang around for two fucking years?
- Let me add on. The entire intro section unabashedly consists of criticism of liberal feminism, buoyed by quotes from people who are not liberal feminists. It seems like an intro to a subject shouldn't ENTIRELY be focused on what its critics say. But well maybe I'm just crazy and don't get how Wikipedia is supposed to work. Excalibre (talk) 02:01, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- I've removed this sentence, and the rest of the criticism in the lead - it was all entirely unsourced. It should be re-added only if it's attributed to a reliable source (and even then, should say 'critics argue...' or something similar rather than just stating these criticisms directly). Robofish (talk) 20:46, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Liberal 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/20131029053715/http://www.nwpc.org/history to http://www.nwpc.org/history
|checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting
|needhelp= to your help request.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
|needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.