Just like Reddit has a majority of TIM MODs in particular Subreddits, Wikipedia has majority TIM Editors in certain Wikipedia pages.

I'm afraid to see what the definition of Lesbian is. Or the difference between how Man and Gay men are defined.

How interesting that it takes 5818 words, 112 references, and 5 further readings to define a woman, but it takes 1483 words, 25 references, and 5 further readings to define a man.

Moreover, the authors of said further readings on womanhood are: William H. Chafe, Rosalie Maggio, Cheris Kramarae & Dale Spender, Anne Commire, and Rénald Lévesque. The authors of further readings on manhood are Andrew Perchuk & Simon Watney & bell hooks, Pierre Bourdieu, Robert W. Connell, Warren Farrell, and Michael Kimmell & Robert W. Connell & Jeff Heam.

One notes that further readings on manhood contain one woman out of 8 credited authors/co-authors/editors, while further readings on womanhood contain 3 women out of 6 credited authors/editors. Whyever COULD that be?

I just feel strange when we need citations to define men and women, it should be something self-evident

I've downloaded the page for future reference, and I'm not going to lie. I think it could be changed for the worse. I wish we had the content of this same page from like 15 years ago.

Thank you. I'm trying to figure out my own little wiki project and I was stuck on how to go about this. It never occurred to me to look at Wikipedia's page because I'm so disgusted with them, but as it's still mostly a biology-based article, I'll look at what sources they used and go from there.

And no. No, I will NOT be mentioning TIMs in the article.

A couple additional notes:

One, I'm having issues with the software as it is not displaying images properly. I may be going without images for a while until I figure this out because it seems more important to me to have the project than to delay it even more than I already have over little details like this.

Two, I'm aware of Feminist Wiki. I have wanted to do this project for most of twenty years and prefer to take a more Dworkin approach to it: I don't care if they're feminist women, I want to talk about women. Let the world see there's more to us than a pair of augmented tits, some high heels, and some lipstick. And it'll only be a wiki, not a bunch of other online stuff.

Loving the illustration of a welder 👩‍🏭 as the epitome of womanhood. Good work everyone.

Why the tell are TIMs even mentioned?

[–] hmimperialtortie AGP = evil 14 points

Because Wikipedia is swarming with them, from what I’ve heard, like most tech companies.

Wow, that made my day to see!!! Very surprised TRAs haven’t ruined it.

they have, it's one paragraph hidden in there, see my comment above

I don’t count one paragraph at the very bottom as ruining it. The majority of it says that women are female. With how Wikipedia usually is, I’m pleasantly surprised that it doesn’t make womanhood strictly about gEnDeR iDeNtItY and stereotypes.

[–] bellatrixbells BoobatrixRex 25 points

LOL Look up "trans woman". Last time I went it said "a trans woman is a woman who has incorrectly been assigned male at birth".

That's a lot of words to say "a man who thinks he's a woman".

they really want to change the meaning of words. So apparently we are who we are because a random doctor blessed us with "assigning" our sex?

Ah yes, wikipedia, the great bastion of truth, where 91% of edits are done by men.

Did I miss something? Maybe it was edited already by the time I got here, but it says "A woman is an adult female human." which is correct.

[–] [Deleted] 22 points Edited

Can somebody with an account just remove this paragraph altogether and ban the person/brigade who wrote it for spreading misinformation/lies to children and people the world over?

Trans women have a male sex assignment at birth that does not align with their gender identity,[3] while intersex women were born with sex characteristics that do not fit typical notions of female biology

"... do not fit typical notions of female biology" I love how they tried to make it sound similar to the trans women definition. Never in my life I have heard "notions" to describe scientific facts.

Update: So I went ahead to search the definition and I found " do not fit the typical definitions for male or female bodies". So yeah the word notion was made up probably by a TIM, how are people like this allowed to edit wikipedia just like that

I feel like a script highlighting how astronomically stupid this is would be perfect as a Risitas meme. I'm chuckling already.

Load more (4 comments)