Female Privilege Wikipedia article under attack by feminists, support it!

elitez · 2012-02-28T20:16:32+00:00

To be honest, the female privilege wikipedia page is pretty shit, and mentions nothing about the overall structures which enforce female privilege.

Still, it shouldn't be deleted.

DruchiiConversion · 2012-02-28T20:31:01+00:00

They're not wrong to do this. The Wikipedia rules talk very clearly about what constitutes new research - and taking two facts which are logically related and linking them together is amongst them. The sources you have on this wikipedia page are great for convincing rational people, but that's not good enough.

If you want a wikipedia page on this issue, you need to start by submitting articles about female privilege to reputable journals. This shouldn't be too difficult to do, and it'll pay you as well, if you're good enough at writing with scientific clarity. This is what the feminists did, and now they have a mass of bullshit publications about "patriarchy theory" and whatnot, which they can use to prop up literally any article they feel like on Wikipedia. We ought to do the same.

CedMon · 2012-02-28T19:18:16+00:00

Discussion on the deletion. Please be mindful that AfD discussions tend to be more civil so don't be inflammatory if you join in.

I do think that Female Privilege has a place on Wikipedia but as some of the commenter's have mentioned the current write-up isn't properly sourced and just looks like a mess, if we want this to be protected we will need to rebuild the page with proper sourcing that actually mentions the term "female privilege" (Not that I think that should be absolutely required but you don't want to leave a chink in the armor allowing for reasonable doubt to take down the page).

**Edit: Link to the page itself.

aetheralloy · 2012-02-28T20:46:00+00:00

Don't you get it?

This is why feminists took over university departments to churn out endless ranting biased papers.

It is so people can cite those papers to seem legitimate. It is so this very situation would happen - where the "male privilege" page is left alone because of all the links to feminist propaganda but the "female" privilege page isn't allowed because departments devoted to men's rights aren't allowed (and are actually fought viciously against by supposed gender egalitarians)

TheRealPariah · 2012-02-28T23:15:02+00:00

Have you seen the page? It's poorly written and barely cited. If this bothers you, try and fix it instead of automatically pushing the feminist, the matriachy! sort of shit.

lolmras · 2012-02-28T20:12:35+00:00

I saw earlier that it was marked for deletion... I have no doubt i my mind who's behind that. There's a feminist problem in Wikipedia. Time to watch it like hawks.

vintermann · 2012-02-29T06:24:56+00:00

Wikipedia is a political hellhole, in part because they are (at least publicly) in denial about their hierarchy and power games. You do know the radfem wing there is going to use the existence of this link as an excuse to disregard results they don't like, I hope?

Let them. Let wikipedia sink. It's better that it gets recognized for what it is, than that you should spend so much time playing their games just to get a slightly less obnoxious article.

t1k · 2012-02-28T20:50:39+00:00

I don't have a Wikipedia account to add it but this could be added to the Criminal Justice Section:

"Women should not be sent to prison and should instead serve community sentences, according to a new report by the Women's Justice Taskforce."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13666066

Il128 · 2012-02-28T19:56:12+00:00

This is pointless. Wikipedia is feminist and bigoted against men.
Click here.

Now look what is allowed. Click here.

kragmoor · 2012-02-28T18:58:18+00:00

I'll do anything to piss off feminists.

Wikiupdatemrawatcher · 2012-03-03T07:28:14+00:00

Article to be deleted, merged with men's rights.

2012-02-28T21:51:03+00:00

Just make sure the female privilege page is formatted in the same manner as the one on male privilege and you should be fine.

Throwthrowthrowzaway · 2012-03-02T01:28:51+00:00

Hahha, you guys are doing great! I was imaging folks like the op writing very accidentally funny illiterate essays on their oppression, or the r/men's rights guys pathetically and wannabee thuggishly stalking any editors who dare to ask for sources, as was done to Kevin last time by Ma99ie and little jay hammers, (also pretty pathetic and funny, but annoying for Kevin and a good example of why the mra movement as it's represented on here is not mainstream yet) but you guys are actually managing to soldier up to wiki standards.

Way to go, I hope they keep it, and the non -thug non- moron mra guys stick around wiki.

CedMon · 2012-02-28T19:32:36+00:00

This would be like getting a mens rights introduction to the SCUM manifesto.

But you guys don't believe it.

This is censorship plain and simple, wikipedia is a man hating organization.

It is the history according to feminism, why do you read or participate.

MRA should work to bring wikipedia down by letting others know it is as much a propaganda tool as Goebels used in Nazi Germany and the reason for it is the same.

To create a hostile environment in this country for men, a matriarchy brought on the back of a lie that their was a patriarchy.

Wikipedia is for Feminists, not scholars....let's us men be scholars.

lolmras · 2012-02-28T23:11:04+00:00

Y'know what's funny? There's literally nothing you guys can do. This article will be deleted. You would be better off deleting this post and going and doing something with a greater chance for success, like getting girlwriteswhat the republican nomination or something.

Title	Female Privilege Wikipedia article under attack by feminists, support it!
Author	AnonTheAnonymous
Upvotes	53
Comments	83
Date	February 28, 2012 6:56 PM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/qa0ut/female_privilege_wikipedia_article_under_attack/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/female-privilege-wikipedia-article-under-attack-by.1026923 https://theredarchive.com/post/1026923

Comments