Talk:Transnational feminism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Mjiang94, KAnds42.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JTHicks.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nm537.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 5 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Deg226.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect[edit]

Should this page be redirected to Global Feminism? Any thoughts? --Grrrlriot (talk) 20:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It really doesn't say much that the average reader can make any sense of and looks like just a neologism better covered in the Global Feminism article. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 14:19, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Additions[edit]

I am looking to make substantial editions to content and organization of this article. I am doing this for a project to contribute to Wikipedia for my Gender and Economic Development class at the University of Utah. My plan is to first discuss areas such as the history of the topic, theories such as feminist theory, and transnational theory. Secondly, I will look to cover areas that transnational feminist are concerned with such as imperialism, colonialism, nationalism and how these interact with gender, race, etc. Lastly, I will try to give transnational feminism an everyday context by discussing activism and movements around labor rights, violence against women, and social empowerment. Comments would be greatly appreciated. Dougsimpsonwiki (talk) 22:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Definitely needs some references to show who is promoting phrase and why noteworthy. A lot of academics (what % male?) are coming up with all these new concepts which are a boon to their careers and then pushing them on feminism, feminists, and even the general public and raising hell when actual feminists don't buckle under. But an ideology like feminism can't be controlled - or sabotaged - by academics. So we'll see if there's any counter-arguments about that.
  • What is the view of these feminists on national states, since transcending them is implied view. Let's not forget all those anarchist/libertarian feminists running about who definitely transcend nationalism! (Though whether WP:RS show they use that phrase is another issue, but certainly if mentioned in any references.) Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 16:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
From my research transnational feminism is being promoted primarily by female feminists. Its origins are a little fuzzy, but it seems to be a relatively prevalent theme that is widely discussed. However, the representation on Wikipedia seems to be minimal. I am still working on doing more research on their view of the nation state and many other components. This is a class project so I am going to post up my additions to the article here for the requirement. Edits and comments are greatly appreciated. On another note, if you would like to move info to global feminism that works too. Dougsimpsonwiki (talk — Preceding undated comment added 04:32, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

Well rounded and interesting article. I found some grammatical errors throughout and places where commas should have been used. I can edit your article or I can tell you the areas that could use some editing, just let me know. Your Nationalism section could use some work, more information and/or concepts and footnotes would be nice to bolster this section up. I would also delete your empty sections until you have information for them to make it look less incomplete for the time being. You're abundance of links are great, but I would suggest not overusing them. I noticed you have several links for words like "feminism" throughout (and even in the same section). I suggest using one link for each word. If at all possible, i would try to include pictures as well (maybe of a notable scholar, like Mohanty). Connorreese (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 03:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This was an interesting topic to read about. It was informative about women and some of their views. It pointed out some counter arguments, but it made me want to know if there are more counter arguments. One thing that I did notice is that two last sections, violence against women and social empowerment did not contain any information. I am thinking you will add more later on. The article was straight forward and the citing was good. It may be a good idea to find some information about men's views on this subject. I don't know if that would complicate the article, but its just an idea. Tawneefranc (talk) 16:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[User talk:Tawneefranc|talk][reply]

Feedback[edit]

This version is much improved. It is clearer, has good referencing, and links. The first sentence might need addition of "feminist" (contemporary feminist paradigm). You need to break up some long paragraphs (e.g. Early history). I wonder if you could integrate any course readings. Mohanty is already there but maybe, *if relevant*, critique of postmodernism in Nzomo? You should probably delete the "Criticisms/concerns" section; alternatively, leave it in as well as the VAW and Social empowerment sections, but add one sentence each as placeholder followed by a reference each, and in the talk page leave a note inviting people to develop those sections. Looks good.BerikG (talk) 02:34, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Feeback/Suggestions[edit]

In response to Connorreese comments I did a number of things. First off, I completed all of the grammatical changes in the article you put forth. Secondly, I had trouble finding content on the nationalism section I had created, so I added one source I could find. I will also proceed to leave a note in the talk page to others letting them know they should help add to that section, as I was unable to do so. As you suggested I went ahead and deleted my empty sections, these were areas I struggled to find info on at the time and have rid my article of them. I tried to go through and make sure I didn't overuse links, though I only changed a few of them. Given the theoretical nature of this article and limited scope, I felt that pictures don't add much to the article, thus choosing to leave them out.

In response to Tawneefranc comments I couldn't identify specific counter arguments for transnational feminism. Though there are critiques of postmodern thought I had a hard time finding critiques more focused on transnational feminism. I tried to provide some other viewpoints, but couldn't identify strong, specific opposition. I went ahead and deleted the subject areas that didn't contain information, as I was struggling to find specific information for these areas. Regarding men's views on this topic I didn't really run across any in my research. The scholars on the topic are largely women, but there are some men, either way they hold relatively similar views on transnational feminism and those don't differ across their genders.

In response to BerikG I went ahead and changed the first sentence as you suggested. I went ahead and worked on breaking up the first section "Early History" into paragraphs and some subsequent sections also. I looked into trying to include Nzomo, but it didn't seem to exactly work. I say this, because Nzomo takes into many of the same practical concerns (like individual histories etc.) that transnational feminists take into account. I feel in this area both Nzomo and transnational feminists differ from some aspects of postmodern thought and therefore Nzomo isn't necessarily the best critique of transnational feminism. I went ahead and deleted the sections you suggested deleting, as I didn't really have enough info on those sections to properly cite them at this time. Dougsimpsonwiki (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 06:53, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Further Feedback/Suggestions[edit]

Hi all, I'm interested in editing this article for my Feminist Economics class. I'd like to suggest to differentiate the usage of the term "transnational feminism" in academic discourse as a paradigm from the actual movement and the actual things that people who identify as transnational feminists have accomplished. I think that because there are so many branches of feminism, it would be helpful to position this particular branch among the wider range of feminisms and explain why it is different. To that vein, a history of transnationality or globalization and feminism would also be helpful. I think we should also further develop the sections on race, colonialism, imperialism, nationalism, and economics. Angelaslin (talk) 03:49, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback on recent revisions[edit]

Hey Angela!

Your revisions have added a lot of illuminating detail to the topic and clarified what exactly is meant by the term, and how it is distinguished from other ‘feminisms.” The “Usage” section you added could perhaps be condensed by taking more of a summary style. Or, if you decide to keep all the quotes in their full form, they should be more clearly set apart using block quote formatting.

The language is fairly academic, which could present a barrier to readers less familiar with feminist theory in particular or social science academic discourse in general. I would proofread for readability to a layperson, and also proofread for potentially confusing wording and Reference number errors.

The article is generally well-sourced, but you should review your additions to make sure that you include the appropriate reference each time you mention a specific scholar.

Lastly, the article is currently duplicated internally: after the first “References” and “External links” sections, almost all of the earlier content sections appear a second time—these duplicates should be removed.

Overall, great work!--KAnds42 (talk) 01:09, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Hey Angela, I really like what you've done here in adding to the Introduction, Usage, and History sections. I think reformatting Usage would be helpful - currently, I'm not sure why there are so many different cited definitions for transnational - I don't know why each one is unique. Also, a lot of these quotes use pretty dense academic language, which may not be helpful on Wikipedia. Maybe possibly add in links to other pages throughout these definitions?

Sourcing, formatting, and neutrality are generally good. A few notes - In Early History’s first paragraph, Meridians isn’t cited, and in Early History’s third paragraph, cites for Desai and Blackwell/Wu are needed since you're paraphrasing claims you make. Other than that, there are some spelling errors - do a copy edit if possible!

Quick additional note on Early History - our reading this week mentions that CEDAW was very informed by transnational feminism. This could possibly be a heavy-traffic page to link to.

Mjiang94 (talk) 12:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Critiques of Transnational Feminism[edit]

First of all, I love this page. It's insightful, concise and informative. This page is a must for anyone wanting a loose introduction to transnational feminism or any feminist theory. The greatest strength of this page is in the author's expansion on the objective ramifications of the core transanitonal feminist issue on colonialism, imperialism, and capitalism. With that being said, we need to include critiques of transnational feminism. It's important for advocates and proponents of theories to be aware of the criticisms and opportunities within those theories; the same goes for transnational feminism. It shows that outstanding research is aware of certain contradictions, but still working to cultivate inclusive perspectives on legacies of imperialism, colonialization, and even capitalism. I'd like to include such a portion with a key article by Sylvanna Falcón as a primary source. Falcón recognizes the duality of transnational feminism and encourages scholars to be more inclusive when addressing imperialist privilege. The following is the reference for the article to be used. Thanks!

Falcón, Sylvanna M. (2016). Transnational feminism as a paradigm
for decolonizing the practice of research: Identifying Feminist
principles and methodology criteria for US-based scholars. Frontiers, 37(1).
doi: 10.5250/fronjwomestud.37.1.0vii

JTHicks (talk) 20:17, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Transnational 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:23, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting some help[edit]

Hi,

Recently initiated a new Draft:Sexual politics and looking for proactive help in updating and expanding the article. Please do see if contributing to Draft:Sexual politics would interest you.

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 02:29, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Highlighting of AF3IRM?[edit]

Hello, I have not edited previously but I was on this page and was highly troubled by how AF3IRM is listed as "the first organization to openly and purposefully put transnational feminism"... to me this feels inaccurate in that I can think of other older transnational feminist organizations (although it could be debated whether they declared themselves as transnational feminist organizations so I can understand that). I am mainly troubled because this organization is well known for its anti-sex work stance and is highly controversial for the ways in which they engage with sex work rights organizers and sex workers. I do not want to invite harassment onto people or organizations by linking directly to anyone's social media profiles, but multiple groups (which it could be argued are also transnational feminist organizations, but are not included under the header of Transnational Feminist Organizations, which ONLY includes AF3IRM) have spoken out about both their conduct and their position [i would be willing to privately send links if anyone is interested]. From my perspective (as someone who has never edited Wikipedia before but uses it frequently) there are multiple options for what to do: don't list AF3IRM as a transnational feminist organization and remove the section "transnational feminist organizations" (since AF3IRM is the only one listed), keep AF3IRM listed but note their SWERF ideology and controversies (the only link is to the organization's homepage itself so controversies would not be explained if a reader clicked the link for more information), and/or add additional transnational feminist organizations, so that AF3IRM is not representing all transnational feminist organizations.

Also, just reading-wise, I found it strange that no other organization has a blurb/mission statement attached but AF3IRM does? So I also think either every organization should have a blurb or none of them should have one. Also, the AF3IRM blurb is not cited (but I felt that my criticism went beyond "citation needed")

I am kind of new to Wikipedia so please let me know if there are like Wikipedia standards I am ignoring here

A1c0bb (talk) 03:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Transnational_feminism&oldid=1207355243"