Talk:Radical Faeries

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject LGBT studies (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Neopaganism (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neopaganism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neopaganism 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Gender Liberation?[edit]

What is "gender liberation" in this context? Martin

I meant both "liberation from gender roles" and "liberation from interalized oppression for people of societally disapproved or unrecognized gender or gender role." Feel free to make this clearer. Bill


These non-gendered personal pronouns probably need explanation when used in the text as the layman reader will not be familiar with them (I notice there is no article for vself currently to refer to though Spivak pronoun exists). I believe there is precedence for using vself but this might need careful explanation and discussion on this talk page for the change to stick in the article long term and unambiguous sources cited in the article. (talk) 08:42, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

To a point "(as himself/vself/zeself)" dosen't really add anything to the sentance and particularly to the article. Does it really matter to the Faerie article, that Justin Bond appers as Justin Bond matter except in the Shortbus article (or related such as Gay Shame or DUMBA)? Howaboutudance (talk) 08:54, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I would lean towards inclusiveness here, though articles should be pitched primarily in layman friendly language, this does not mean that we exclude diverse concepts or ignore fringe theories. Non-gendered personal pronouns are rarely used and this may be a case where their use in this article illuminates the character of the person being referenced. So long as this person is documented as identifying themselves in this way, there seems no good reason to deliberately exclude the terminology and our policies would indicate that it is good practice to use the same self-identifying terminology as as person uses to describe themselves (which is pretty much how we ever get to describe a person as gay, transsexual or bisexual in the first place). In terms of value, yes I believe that including the vself term adds encyclopaedic value in this context. (talk) 10:44, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
I actually could agree with you to a point, the challenge for me is to write it in a way that can educate and provide reference but also not detract from the article's subject, such as ending up writing couple sentances(or more) on non-gender pronouns. One solution maybe to link to invented pronouns to provide reference.thus it could be "Justin Bond (as Vself)". I would also suggest Gender-neutral_pronoun#Invented_pronouns as that link since it deals with non-Spivak pronouns Howaboutudance (talk) 23:18, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
It seems like a solution, though if there are some reliable sources that explain 'vself' explicitly then perhaps it would be a good opportunity to extend the linked article to cover this variation (I'm no expert in this area but perhaps others who sometimes read this page might want to suggest some sources?). (talk) 23:24, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
the cite in that section takes to site where Bond explicitly explained V's choice of, basically Bonded created it for V's own purposes. now within the guidelines ofWP:MOS#Identity that should be covered Howaboutudance (talk) 00:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposal on section names - local consensus needed[edit]

The section title "Bibliography" seems inappropriate for a non-biographical article. I propose a slight re-arrangement in line with common practices and WP:FNNR. I suggest the Bibliography section is moved after References and becomes Sources for citations where the intention is to cross reference to specific page numbers in key books in the References section ({{harvnb}} is often used as an easy way to do this). I also suggest that a new section of Further reading is added for publications directly about Radical Faeries but for which there are no current footnotes citing them as sources. Websites that are not directly cited or are not versions of printed publications I suggest stay in the External links section rather than moving any into the Further reading section. Note, if {{harv}} or {{harvnb}} is used for cross-referencing then associated sources should use the {{citation}} template. Your yea, nay or other suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks (talk) 14:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Inclusive vs. exclusivist language[edit]

I have made a minor adjustment to the intro para which, while not being a complete revert, is close to it. The sentence previously went:

Radical Faeries (also Faeries and Faes) are a loosely affiliated worldwide network of people seeking to reject hetero-imitation and redefine queer identity through spirituality...

which someone then edited to say:

The Radical Faeries are a counter-cultural movement designed primarily for gay men seeking to reject hetero-imitation and redefine queer identity through spirituality...

Now I really don't want to put off either editor from continuing to edit this page (especially since one of the editors in question has made several really great recent edits to this page), but the second edit is seems to me to be needlessly exclusivist in language, and besides, then very next sentence in both versions stated:

The Radical Faerie movement started in the United States among gay men during the 1970s sexual and counterculture revolution.[1] The movement has expanded in tandem with the larger gay rights movement, challenging commercialization and patriarchal aspects of modern LGBT life while celebrating pagan constructs and rituals...

Which clearly states the radical faeries were founded by (and the majority of radical faeries continue to be) gay men - which is one of its strengths. But there are people who aren't homosexual (such as heterosexuals, bisexual and asexuals) and there are also both female and gender-variant (including intersex people and non-binary-gender identified) faeries, so I think the language should remain inclusive rather than exclusivist. I have therefore mashed together the previous two edits to read:

The Radical Faeries (also Faeries and Fae) are a loosely-affiliated, worldwide network and counter-cultural movement seeking to reject hetero-imitation and redefine queer identity through spirituality. The Radical Faerie movement started in the United States among gay men during the 1970s sexual and counterculture revolution...

★★Violet Fae (talk)★★ 09:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Good move! I was the one responsible for the initial changes, but I think you've improved it :) (Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:11, 17 October 2011 (UTC))
No problem - glad to help! :) ★★Violet Fae (talk)★★ 10:19, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

dead links[edit]

These entries from the External Links section appear to be defunct:

I'm moving them here in case they resurface in the future. — HipLibrarianship talk 08:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Does it really need to be said twice?[edit]

"The Radical Faerie movement was a reaction against the social emptiness that many gay men felt was present both in the heterosexual establishment and the assimilationist gay community.[9]"

Someone needs to decide which paragraph this text belongs in and delete the other instance.CherylJosie (talk) 20:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

  1. ^ Thompson, Mark (21 January 2003), "Remembering Harry", The Advocate, Here Publishing, retrieved 2008-10-17