Talk:Femboy
Femboy has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: January 2, 2024. (Reviewed version). |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Femboy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
A fact from Femboy appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 January 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article contains a translation of Femboy from pt.wikipedia. (1190541003 et seq.) |
Proposed Deletion
[edit]Unless much substance is added, I think this would be better off at Wiktionary. A. Rosenberg (talk) 15:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Did you know nomination
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 00:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
- ... that femboys were actively involved in the Spring Revolution? Source: Tun, Aye Lei (June 2023). "Deconstructing and Reinforcing Gender Norms and Cultural Taboos in Myanmar's Spring Revolution". Journal of Burma Studies. 27 (1): 48–49. doi:10.1353/jbs.2023.0001. ISSN 2010-314X.
- ALT1: ... that the introduction of femboys to Myanmar was a tactic to achieve a "social and cultural ideological revolution"? same source as above
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/RoboCop statue
- Comment: Very happy to hear any proposed rewording of the hook
Converted from a redirect by Frzzl (talk). Self-nominated at 17:13, 18 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Femboy; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
- I'll review this one. Sourcing looks good; the hook is supported by the source (Fascinating article there) and the article more generally appears well sourced. Both image sources check out. Article is long enough, and was converted from a redirect today, so it checks out on newness as well. I like the second hook, but i think it can be shortened a little bit to pack more punch. What about ending it with "to achieve an 'ideological revolution'?"Generalissima (talk) 18:31, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- No problem, so alt1a is:
- ... that the introduction of femboys to Myanmar was a tactic to achieve an "ideological revolution"? Frzzl talk; contribs 18:36, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- Looks good, thank you for writing an article on this! Generalissima (talk) 18:41, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- ... that the introduction of femboys to Myanmar was a tactic to achieve an "ideological revolution"? Frzzl talk; contribs 18:36, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- After some consideration, I feel this hook might be better as an image hook. If so, the natural option is the one used in the article lede. The hook, after this, addition would read:
- ... that the introduction of femboys (example pictured) to Myanmar was a tactic to achieve an "ideological revolution"?
- Or the same, but using specimen pictured, which is more amusing
- Happily, the image given has copyright confirmed by OTRS, so this doesn't need a second review. I'll leave it to the promoter to choose between image hook or not. Frzzl talk; contribs 13:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- No problem, so alt1a is:
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Femboy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Schminnte (talk · contribs) 01:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello Frzzl, happy new year! I'll take this one and will be claiming this review for points in the WikiCup. Interesting subject matter :) Expect comments within the next few days. All the best, Schminnte [talk to me] 01:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Frzzl, I've added my comments. To help the article's further development, I've included some extra points as well that are not needed for GACR (these are marked "Non-GACR"). Feel free to action these or not: the review will be passed without any respect to them. Please respond to any comments by indenting your responses and adding your initial. All the best, Schminnte [talk to me] 23:55, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the speedy and in-depth review! I'll respond to them and make alterations sometime later today :D Frzzl talk; contribs 00:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Hi! Not GAR relevant, just a quick note that your signature (I think) caused an issue with the GAN script updating the talk page. I've fixed this for now, but I'd assume it'll do it again next time there's an update. You might want to check out the associated talk page diffs to see what happened. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 00:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I think I'm prepared to pass this now. Thank you for your quick replies and readiness to make alterations: it was nice working with you again. Congratulations on your new GA! All the best, Schminnte [talk to me] 20:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the speedy and in-depth review! I'll respond to them and make alterations sometime later today :D Frzzl talk; contribs 00:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
This is a bit of a gut feeling, but I think it makes more sense to have §Attributes after §Usage. I think this is an "important stuff first" scenario, like defining the term first - S- Done - F
Remove Sissy and Effeminacy from see also per MOS:NOTSEEALSO - S- taken out - F
Words as words should be in italics, not quotes (MOS:WAW). This applies to quite a lot of the text (e.g. "Femboy also spelled femboi"). An italic title will also be needed. - S- Done, italic title added. To confirm, italics when I'm referring to the term itself, no italics when I'm using it as a noun? - F
- Yes, so things like "Femboy culture" and "Femboy aesthetic" are fine with no italics - S
- Done, italic title added. To confirm, italics when I'm referring to the term itself, no italics when I'm using it as a noun? - F
Per MOS:ORDER, put the engvar template below the hatnote - S- Switched - F
Not sure if the two sentences of §Etymology deserve a level 2 heading. Thoughts on merging with §Usage under a combined heading? - S- Merged. I've put the subheading for the rest of it as "Definitions"; this could be "Definition"? - F
- I think the plural is more representative as there are multiple dictionary definitions discussed - S
- Merged. I've put the subheading for the rest of it as "Definitions"; this could be "Definition"? - F
I think "criticised as an expression of hegemonic masculinity" in the lede qualifies as material likely to be challenged per MOS:LEDECITE and should have a cite in both cases - S- Removed - F
- General copyedits:
- §Lede
in traditionally feminine behaviours
: "with" traditionally feminine behaviours? - SThe term originated in the 1990s as a slur [...] where trends such as "#femboyfriday" have received attention.
Recommend split to help flow, maybe something like "...1990s as a slur. It has since spread, popularised through internet forums and social media like TikTok, where trends such as "#femboyfriday" have received attention." - S- Replaced, this is much better. - F
If we are linking non-binary, I feel transgender should be linked too - Ssubmissive role could be linked to Gay sex roles#Bottom - S- Linked x2 - F
- §Etymology
Fem wikilink should be in the first occurrence - San abbreviation - S- Corrected x2 - F
I feel a merge could be pulled off between the first two sentences (e.g. "The term femboy originated in the 1990s and is a compound from the words fem (an abbreviation of feminine and femme) and boy) - S- Done, and I've bundled the citations to look cleaner. - F
- §Attributes
link 4chan - Slink HRT to Transgender hormone therapy - Ssuch as the use of hair dye and jewellery - S"The paper found that that": mistaken duplicate? - S- In my mind near perfect should be hyphenated - S
- Ignore this, my eyes must've glanced over the quote marks - S
Ditto above with "knee high" - S"traditional medical practise": In BrEng, this should be practice for the noun - S- All done - F
- §Usage
Repeat link for non-binary would be good - SNon-GACR: Dictionary.com should be in italics per MOS:WEBITALICS - SIf we are linking gender identity again, why not link sexual orientation - S- All done - F
- §Presence
After the term was appropriated on the Internet, femboy communities began – by 2018, the term femboy was found almost exclusively on 4chan, especially on the /lgbt/ forum – the term has become popular on platforms such as Reddit and TikTok.
: this construction strikes me as odd. I feel like removing the dashes for periods would help. Mock up: "After the term was appropriated on the Internet, femboy communities began forming. Around 2018, the term femboy was found almost exclusively on 4chan, especially on the /lgbt/ forum. It later became popular on platforms such as Reddit and TikTok." - S- Done, have swapped the present participle for a past one. - F
Non-GACR: I'm not sure about quoting subreddit names. Existing articles like r/science and r/place use no quotes. MOS:MINORWORK has no mention of internet sites, so I'm inclined to remove quotes unless there's another reason. This would also make it consistent with the unquoted /lgbt/ - SWondering why hashtag is linked. If its to be kept, it should be moved forward anyway - S- Done x2 - F
- §Reception
"has been praised for "breaking traditional norms of masculinity" and has been" remove has been repeat - S- Done - F
"Wearing a skirt as a famous straight cisgender man does next to nothing for the conversation surrounding gender fluidity. If anything, it emphasises the all-encompassing maleness." Could the quote be introduced before the colon? - S- It could be, but that paragraph is like 70% quotations - would it be better to stick it in a quote box by the side? - F
- It should probably remain in text to avoid giving special treatment to one viewpoint, I'm just worried that too a reader it could be seen as a continuation of Lee's quote or a completely different quote - S
- Shifted it around a bit, few more square brackets in there now haha - F
- It should probably remain in text to avoid giving special treatment to one viewpoint, I'm just worried that too a reader it could be seen as a continuation of Lee's quote or a completely different quote - S
- It could be, but that paragraph is like 70% quotations - would it be better to stick it in a quote box by the side? - F
- "called the "effeminisation" of society as an": as is not needed - S
- Done - F
"The alt-right have viewed the emergence of femboys a result" sounds a bit odd. Something like "The alt-right has viewed the emergence of femboys to be a result" flows better in my opinion - S- That sounds a little strange to me too; I've changed it to "deemed the emergence a..." - F
- §Lede
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
I'm a bit of a hypocrite here, but is (Lightning 2021) a reliable source per WP:DISSERTATION? If its been cited in other literature it should be fine - S- Annoyingly didn't find any citations, so I've removed it. - F
Non-GACR: I would love to see direct page numbers for journals - SNon-GACR: several refs are missing date and author - S- To the above two: I've added authors where they're available. Unfortunately since several of the journals I've used seem to be online only, the Foster & Baker and the Vaught simply have no numbers listed. - F
I can't see anything on Into: what makes this reliable? - S- My bad, also gone. - F
- Earwigs shows nothing but quotes, so a broad pass for copyvios - S
- Spotchecking six citations at random:
- Vytniorgu (2023): pass for verifiability and copyvio - S
Foster and Baker (2022)d: fail for verifiability as it mentions nothing about these quotes - S- Can I check which quotes you're talking about? If the ones in the § Reception, you're correct, I mixed up two quotes I was going to use, it's now fixed. If the ones in § Attributes, no, they're definitely there. I should note your previous point about hyphenating "near perfect" hasn't been done yet, because it's not hyphenated in the original. If we hyphenate it, is there some sort of "altered" tag I need to add? - F
- Near perfect was my mistake, its fine to leave I think. The reception quotes were what I was meaning ("d" meaning the fourth cite in the reviewed version), that looks fine now - S
- Can I check which quotes you're talking about? If the ones in the § Reception, you're correct, I mixed up two quotes I was going to use, it's now fixed. If the ones in § Attributes, no, they're definitely there. I should note your previous point about hyphenating "near perfect" hasn't been done yet, because it's not hyphenated in the original. If we hyphenate it, is there some sort of "altered" tag I need to add? - F
- En, En and Griffiths (2013)a: pass for both verifiability and copyvio - S
- del Campo (2023): pass for both verifiability and copyvio - S
- Tun (2023): pass for verifiability, slight fail for copyvio.
There is close paraphrasing in "femboy outfits were encouraged to attract media attention", which glosses "People also encouraged the adoption of femboy outfits to attract media attention" too closely - S- changed to "used to gain exposure" - F
- New Socialist (2018)b: is a fail for verifiability. The quote is "By 2018, this connection appears to have resolved with the /lgbt/ board’s users being predominantly transgender women.", which doesn't say anything about femboys being being found almost exclusively on 4chan - S
- perhaps "almost exclusively" is too strong, but Gleeson does write
‘Femboy’ is one term with which some /lgbt/ users refer to themselves as, and compared to repression seems like a relatively happy path. Often but not always assisted by HRT, this identifier is an ambiguous one which seems to be found rarely outside of 4Chan. Previously, the Femboy has been little heard of even across the rest of the internet,
, so I'm not too far off. Do you still need me to change it? - F- No need to change at all, I somehow missed this quote! Sorry for that - S
- perhaps "almost exclusively" is too strong, but Gleeson does write
- a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Article is sized appropriately, covering major viewpoints and aspects. It stays focussed on the subject of femboys throughout, with good use of summary style - S
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Good job balancing viewpoints in this contentious subject. Significant viewpoints, both positive and negative, are represented in the reception section, and neutral language is used throughout. Fringe beliefs are included, but clearly labelled to avoid a false balance. - S
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- The recent history of this page was originally setting off alarm bells, but on further inspection it mostly seems to be reverted vandalism. I wouldn't say that the remaining constructive edits are enough to call this unstable - S
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- File:Cavi.jpg: Licensed correctly with a VRT ticket. Caption seems fine - S
- File:Femboy flag.svg: PD tagged correctly as below the TOO. Requirements for unofficial flag use in articles are met as this is discussed in sources.
Nitpicking here, but I think the caption should say "A proposed femboy pride flag" or similar since this is one of many designs. Since there are multiple unofficial flags, we shouldn't label this the unofficial flag? - S- Fixed - F
- File:Femboy-UK.ogg is appropriately licensed :) - S
- Non-GACR: Suggest adding alt text for accessibility - S
- Non-GACR: Per MOS:IMGSIZE remove fixed px sizes - S
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall: An interesting and well-balanced article. A few problems to fix in GACR1&2, but still manageable - S
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
WP:ISATERMFOR
[edit]Hi, I recently edited this article changing the first sentences from "Femboy... is a slang term for a male or non-binary individual who express themselves with traditionally feminine behaviours." to "Femboy... is a male or non-binary individual who express themselves with traditionally feminine behaviours." This was to put it in line with the policy described in WP:ISATERMFOR, which states: "Most Wikipedia articles are not dictionary entries, and opening sentences like the above ought to be cleaned up in accordance with our Guide to writing better articles. Editors should boldly replace these cumbersome phrasings ("is a term for", "is a word that means", "refers to") with the more direct "is" construction". I don't see how this article would be an outlier in that sense, how is this article's scope distinct from what the articles for, say, butch, dandy or even boy do? Also, according to WP:REFERS, "the introduction is using a term, rather than mentioning it", meaning the article should be about what the word refers to, rather than the word itself, as that is what Wiktionary is for. Issan Sumisu (talk) 11:59, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, I understand. However, we do have articles about words themselves and pieces of slang; in a broader sense, something like Jazz (word) doesn't really belong on Wiktionary; in a narrower scope, see something like Twink (gay slang), or Femme. When I wrote this, I put it in the latter direction, where we're focusing on the word itself; indeed, that's how it's discussed in quite a few of the sources, especially the academic papers. I don't think femboy has enjoyed as much usage as a noun that dandy, for example. If you want to try rearranging the article to focus on what a femboy is, feel free, but right now, the majority of the article is about how the word is used and its associations so I think it would be a bit strange if the lede just went in a different direction. Frzzl talk; contribs 12:16, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Presence Section - History
[edit]I am not familiar with wikipedia editing and discussion etiquette, but I am very familiar with the history of this term from 2010 - present.
The sentence "Around 2018, the term femboy was found almost exclusively on 4chan" is not accurate and should be revised. More effort should be made to provide a complete history of the term's evolution since the 1990's. The term was frequently used in online communities connected to yaoi well before 2018. Its use before this time was very widespread, to the extent that sources to cite should not be difficult for anyone to find, regardless of their familiarity with the term. 2601:642:C003:8780:E866:8D84:D36C:65CE (talk) 04:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
@Skyshifter: Firstly, sex and gender are completely different things.
- Just because an individual has a penis does not mean that they are male.
- Just because an individual has a vagina does not mean that they are female.
- Besides genitals (external sex organs), sex is defined by presence of many anatomical structures such as gonads (internal sex organs e.g. testes, ovaries), accessory reproductive organs (uterus, fallopian tubes, cervix, prostate, etc.), sex hormones, secondary sex characteristics, etc.
- I know that anatomy has nothing to do with the article.
- But differences between sex and gender must be stated.
- Male ≠ man
- Female ≠ woman
- Intersex ≠ non-binary
- This is because sex and gender are different things.
- It is possible for people to be born without any gender, and they are called agender people.
- But it is impossible for people to be born without a sex.
what does intersex have to do with anything?
Many intersex people are non-binary, and can also use "femboy" as a label.
You said "we're talking gender here
"; "male" is not a gender; "male", "female", and "intersex" are sexes; "man", "woman" and "non-binary(ies)" are genders, along with the agender trait.
The lead sentence can either be:
- "A femboy is a male or intersex individual..."
- "A femboy is a man or non-binary individual..."
I think that the latter is better because the article mentions gender, and not anatomical sex.
Also, it would be better if all instances of sex are replaced with gender, except for the fact that sex has nothing to do with being a femboy. — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 15:11, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- @CrafterNova: Hello! Honestly, what you said at the beginning surprised me. I am one of the main editors of transgender topics at ptwiki, and I am literally questioning my gender identity! I'm genuinely sorry if my first impression was that I was transphobic; the complete reverse of that! I know well the distinction between sex and gender. Here we just had a misunderstanding regarding the usage of the word "male". Wikipedia's own article for Male states: "In humans, the word male can also be used to refer to gender, in the social sense of gender role or gender identity." And currently, the word "male" in the femboy article links to "male gender". So it is clear that "male" is referring to gender here. That's why I said we were talking gender there. I'd also note that we could be excluding AFAB male or non-binary femboys — which are completely valid — if our lead referred to male sex and intersex instead. Like you said, "sex has nothing to do with being a femboy", so we should indeed only be mentioning gender. The current lead is perfectly fine considering "male" refers to gender here; however, I'm not opposed of changing "male" to "man", if it clears up confusion. Skyshiftertalk 16:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Skyshifter: The article for male is not a Wikipedia policy. It is WP:VAGUE and confusing to use words, that generally refer to sex, to refer to words that generally refer to gender.
- The usage of "male" to refer to the "man" gender, and usage of "female" to refer to the "woman" gender cannot be justified, because if it were, then "intersex" could also be used to refer to "non-binary", but it isn't. There is no valid reason for such ambiguous usage of words, since it rather causes confusion to readers.
- This ambiguity in usage of words, for sexes and genders, is rather discriminatory, and, to be fair, transphobic in some cases.
- Unfortunately, most Wikipedia policies such as MOS:GENDER, MOS:GENDERID, MOS:LEAD, etc. do not differentiate between sex and gender.
- I think it would be better if we propose changes to these policies at WP:VPP, which I have been thinking about for some time. — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 06:12, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Skyshifter: I have started a discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Sex and gender distinction in policies, but we need more support for such changes. Also, these changes are not limited to only policies, but also, essays, Wikiprojects, and all other pages in the Wikipedia namespace.
- I believe that such changes are absolutely important for gender-neutrality, sex-neutrality, and inclusivity of all people.
- As a fellow LGBTQ+ ally, I sincerely and humbly request for support for this proposal. — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 18:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @CrafterNova: Sorry for not responding to your ealier comment, I forgot. I don't think I have a formed opinion on the matter. From what I've seen, it does seem that terms like "male" and "female" can refer to gender very commonly in English, so looking from that perspective, it doesn't seem outright wrong to use the terms that way. Language can change over time, and it seems that "male" and "female" can refer, respectively, to "man" and "woman" nowadays. However, as a non-native English speaker, I can possibly be missing the nuances of the meanings or differences between the words male and man, and female and woman. Skyshiftertalk 19:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- "male" doesn't inherently mean AMAB. I would argue that transgender men are male despite being AFAB, for example. "male or nonbinary" and "man or nonbinary" IMHO mean roughly the same thing. Tdmurlock (talk) 08:47, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
Rewrite the "Presence" section?
[edit]I feel we should remove this; "Reddit has hosted both sexual and non-sexual femboy content: r/feminineboys was started in 2012 and has two hundred fifty one thousand members by February 2024; the site also contains the pornographic r/FemBoys."
I feel this is more of an "expression" thing as opposed to "presence", and tbh is this really need to be mentioned? 108.49.72.125 (talk) 21:19, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
please remove "bicalutamide" in Attributes section
[edit]In the "Attributes" section, there is a passing reference to femboys using bicalutamide as part of feminizing HRT to avoid breast growth. This is very much not accurate. I am a transgender woman on feminizing HRT, and I take bicalutamide daily. Bicalutamide is often prescribed as an antiandrogen, meaning it blocks testosterone. It does not, however, prevent any breast growth (I have a 34C chest). Tamoxifen can be prescribed to do so, but it also has some pretty dangerous side effects. Ashrose688 (talk) 11:06, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
Relevant?
[edit]"seeing that the muscularity of femboys as differentiating them from the labels of effeminate or gay." are femboys aren't effeminate? What? What does this even mean? The previous quote doesn't even mention muscularity. 172.99.147.181 (talk) 20:38, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
image displaying a femboy should be removed or changed
[edit]who is this random dude with a skirt and thigh high do we even have the permission for that image? this is un-encyclopedic Ratiorain (talk) 11:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- a) a Brazillian femboy Instagram model b) yes, check the VRT ticket on Meta c) why? generally it seems to sum up the core elements of being a femboy, and is immediately identifiable as such, so serves well as the lede image. not sure how it's unencyclopaedic, we're not WP:CENSORED - not an arguement per se, but it's on most of the other language edition wiki pages for Femboy. Frzzl talk; contribs 18:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- a Brazilian femboy instagram model? this doesnt sound too general for it to be put in a article that displays a neo-adjective, it should still be replaced with a more general image and not a random image of a Brazilian guy, perhaps a more popular figure will do the job. Ratiorain (talk) 19:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- We already have an image of a more notable figure who is or was known then as a femboy, of F1NN5TER, which has been around for over a month now. I see no problem with using a very casual(?) image here, perhaps it proves that femboys are less of a novelty, so to speak. Carlinal (talk) 12:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- a Brazilian femboy instagram model? this doesnt sound too general for it to be put in a article that displays a neo-adjective, it should still be replaced with a more general image and not a random image of a Brazilian guy, perhaps a more popular figure will do the job. Ratiorain (talk) 19:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Use of F1NN5TER's image
[edit]@Tamzin, I'm pondering over removing the image of F1NN5TER that you added, over its relevance to the attributes section. I'm concerned about applying images more loosely on this article, especially after I removed a poorly placed third image of a femboy (excluding the flag) and there doesn't seem to be any weight in adding F1NN5TER's image here. There's neither a cited mention of him nor Twitch although there is a mention of gender fluidity in a subsequent section. Maybe in terms of fashion his image is unique, but I don't see how it's enough to differ from the head image. Could you provide a justification or counterargument? Carlinal (talk) 13:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Carlinal: My argument would be simply, it makes sense for the attributes section to have an image of someone who exemplifies several of the things discussed in that section, and it is furthermore good for the article to have an image of a notable femboy (or a notable person who at least identified as a femboy when the photo was taken—bit less clear now). The image is of higher quality than the one in the lede, so if we're going to use only one, it should be F1NN5TER's... But I'm not sure why we can't have two. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 16:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Funny. I used basically this exact reasoning in a previous section. Guess I wasn't sure if that's a legit argument initially. Indeed, if a(n Internet) celebrity is into it, who wouldn't? Thanks for the response, I'll leave it alone. Carlinal (talk) 05:35, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Should be removed now that they openly identify as a trans girl and therefore the inclusion of it as well as calling them a "he" is derogatory. JackVegas7 (talk) 01:40, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- @JackVegas7 Where is the article calling him "a he"? You're acting as if you were F1NN5TER himself, because in all sources, news, and his social media accounts state he uses both he and she pronouns. So using "himself" is correct. If you act as if he is not genderfluid, the one misgendering him is you. LEILA FERRAZ (talk) 02:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- did they change their mind again or something? everything i have heard is that they're a trans girl, not genderfluid or something, but actively transitioning and openly a trans girl. Either way, genderfluid = not a femboy. Femboys are cis males. Still a bad image to have added (as well as them not really using the term to self describe anyways/believing femboys are a fad and its just a gateway to being trans, which is cringe lmfao.) JackVegas7 (talk) 02:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- https://youtube.com/shorts/tbyZNMEwpfs?si=sgb5L-sZSe9SJ1Q7
- they actively state they "made it 4 years" of being a femboy and no longer use the term. If nothing else its not accurate to have the image anymore. JackVegas7 (talk) 02:56, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- did they change their mind again or something? everything i have heard is that they're a trans girl, not genderfluid or something, but actively transitioning and openly a trans girl. Either way, genderfluid = not a femboy. Femboys are cis males. Still a bad image to have added (as well as them not really using the term to self describe anyways/believing femboys are a fad and its just a gateway to being trans, which is cringe lmfao.) JackVegas7 (talk) 02:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- @JackVegas7 Where is the article calling him "a he"? You're acting as if you were F1NN5TER himself, because in all sources, news, and his social media accounts state he uses both he and she pronouns. So using "himself" is correct. If you act as if he is not genderfluid, the one misgendering him is you. LEILA FERRAZ (talk) 02:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Proposed image change
[edit]I'd suggest changing the image titled 'a femboy' to another picture, that'd be a little more expressive, and preferably not contain a minor.
I got in touch with a femboy and got his approval to use his picture Elagabalus83 (talk) 14:20, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- I mean, that's great, but what exactly is wrong with the head image we have right now? I don't think it's a problem with a teen if it's over identity expression, my argument being that femboy isn't exclusively pornographic, and if it's used as a comfortable label among minors in the same way that "trans" or "non-binary" are, then that's perfectly fine. I encourage it, even.
- Also, I did some research over the credited model in the image (Cavi.jpg), CavifaX. He has a Newgrounds account stating he's 27. If the Newgrounds account isn't actually him I'm interested in a counterargument. ∩^ω^∩ Carlinal (talk) 05:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Great points being made, and thanks for clarifying the model's age! I guess my suggestion to change the image would be more about expression rather than age after all. There are much better images out there of femboys when it comes to calrity. If we want to do a good job expressing what a femboy is through a picture, we should use one where the model is wearing as many of the attributed clothings and elements as possible ( not just thigh highs and skirts, but crop tops, arm warmers, fishnets, dolphin shorts etc.). The current model only dressed feminine from the waist down. I think as the face of the femboy identity we could use a picture much more telling.
- I'd love to hear your thoughts or even a counterargument :D it's always nice to debate with smart people ⸜ᵔ ω ᵔ⸝ Elagabalus83 (talk) 19:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply! I wouldn't mind if you uploaded the image anyway, that means we have more options. Carlinal (talk) 21:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the opportunity! I got permitssion from the model and uploded the picture (Jo The Femboy.jpg) Elagabalus83 (talk) 11:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm, looks like it got deleted immediately. Túrelio said there's "No evidence of a free license at the claimed source." Can you contact them about this? Perhaps the file can get a ticket of confirmation about its license. Carlinal (talk) 17:26, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the opportunity! I got permitssion from the model and uploded the picture (Jo The Femboy.jpg) Elagabalus83 (talk) 11:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply! I wouldn't mind if you uploaded the image anyway, that means we have more options. Carlinal (talk) 21:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Joost europapa 91.233.50.127 (talk) 09:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
"Femboy Aesthetic" in External Links
[edit]Should a dropshipping store really be an external link? While there is some blogs about femboy culture, I really think there are some better options for additional infomation. 628318Tau (talk) 02:34, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Has a number of incorrect parts with no real backing?
[edit]1: There is no sexual connotation inherent to the term. Femboys are non-sexual at a baseline, and their definition is completely unrelated to sex.
2: Feminine "behaviors" is not accurate, as generally the common definition for femboy reflects a personality along the lines of a normal average male as opposed to behaving in ways considered traditionally feminine. The femininity, or "fem" in the word "femboy" is related to the appearance of the individual, not the personality.
3: Gender variance is also inaccurate, as femboys are cis males. It is not accepted broadly to be anything other than cis males, though some contend this point, very few agree with them, and the general consensus is cis males are the only ones eligible to be considered femboys, with no other gender identities being applicable to the term, instead falling under the category of "roseboy" or similar terms.
4: In gender studies it is NOT a term for trans people, as it is seen as heavily derogatory to refer to a trans individual as a "femboy" or similar terms such as "tomboy"
5: In porn studies there is no clear cut role for femboys, nor is it used specifically to denote a "submissive" individual, nor is it considered an identifier for a submissive male.
6: The term "boi" means young gay man??? What? Its just a slight change in spelling for boy. Not once has boi been used to mean "young gay man", not in pop culture nor in technical terminology.
7: Non-binary individuals are not femboys. Femboys are exclusively cis males.
8: "femboi" is simply an alternative spelling to Femboy, with no specific connotation towards other gender identities or anything. The word you would look for for non-cis male identities fitting the description would be roseboy, as femboys are exclusively cis males.
9: Sissies have nothing to do with femboys, as it is a fetishization of being trans, not anything to do with being a femboy.
10: It is not used to signify a bottom role, nor is that the purpose of the term. A femboy is a femboy, that does not come with a role attached.
11: Boywife is a word with nothing to do with femboys, instead relating to a male who takes on a traditional housewife role, with feminine qualities being optional beyond that. The most hyper masculine man on earth could be considered a "boywife" fitting the role of a housewife.
12: "Pussyboy" is another word for the slang term "cuntboy" which is to denote a male with female genitals, and a derogatory slur for trans men, generally those who are pre-op.
13: "Exclusively seek to be" that whole sentence is outright just, incorrect, and with no substance or backing. Sounds more like a fetishization as opposed to anything substantiated by reality, and therefore is irrelevant fluff unfitting to the article, as well as an unnecessary and inaccurate addition to it.
14: Femboys have certainly been fetishized, and with that being a problem, a great deal of division has happened within the community itself, with strict definitions being made and those falling outside of it harshly judged and berated for using the term inaccurately.
15: Femboys have no desire to transition. They are comfortable as males and seek nothing further besides maintaining a feminine appearance. A femboy seeking to transition is what is known as an "egg", which is a person who is on the verge of a realization of a trans identity.
16: "Around 2018, the term femboy was found almost exclusively on 4chan" Who...who wrote this? have they just...never been on the internet, ever?
17: "femboy outfits" is an active contradiction considering the fact that this article also makes the correct claim that being a femboy has no inherent need to crossdress nor is it a mandatory part of the identity.
Generally this article needs a great deal of touching up. A lot of incorrect information or contradictory info is present. JackVegas7 (talk) 01:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- You will need to provide sources to support all this, especially since most of your claims seem to be contradicted by sources already in the article. I don't have time right now to go through all of them, but just taking a few at random:6. is supported by [1]
7. is supported by [2]
8. I'm not sure what you're objecting to; the only place the article distinguishes the sematics of "femboi" from "femboy" is "the variant femboi may refer to "softer" individuals
" which is supported by [3]
10. is supported by [4]
16. is supported by [5]Overall the article seems well-sourced; if you see any statements that are not sourced you can bring them up here, but objecting to sourced content without providing any sources that support your opinions is not actionable or constructive. CodeTalker (talk) 03:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)- First source substantiates no claims, simply makes it on its own without any precedent set for it. Furthermore, research into it claims the term is used for significantly more than the applied term used here, denoting everything from trans, genderqueer, or as a regular definition I saw on research, a lesbian who adopts a boyish apperance. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Boi
- https://www.dictionary.com/browse/boi
- https://lgbtqia.fandom.com/wiki/Boi
- With so many contrasting definitions from various sources, its relevance to the article is largely fluff at best.
- 2nd source is a source of contention upon research, but the broader consensus is that cis males are the only femboys, and from a stricter definition, would be the common consensus and proper definition (with Roseboy being pointed out as an alternative term for those outside of cis male requirement within the page itself.) https://gender.fandom.com/wiki/Femboy
- Furthermore, a major LGBTQ app's wiki also explicitly makes the statement of femboys being exclusively cis males. https://taimi.com/wiki/femboy-what-is-it-what-does-it-mean
- 3rd source has no corroboration, and upon research I could find nothing else that explicitly called a difference between the two. Even the wikipedia page for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effeminacy#:~:text=Femboy%20(alternatively%20spelled%20femboi)%20is,portmanteau%20of%20feminine%20and%20boy. simply declares it as an alternative spelling.
- https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=femboi
- Other similar sites define or lump the two together as a net, and therefore any external usage is either A: unrelated to femboys and the page, or B: is simply just an alternative spelling used in slang the same way "ion" is short for "i dont" or "hai" is another way to say "hi".
- 4th source is majority speculating and interpreting multiple sources as well as actively providing both sides of the coin involved directly quoting another source by saying "the problem is that we assume feminine men are bottoms in the first place. The all-consuming need to conform to archetypes punishes every gay man—why is it that, thousands of years on from Ancient Greece, we still bow to a heteronormative ideal of a masculine top and feminine bottom? (O’Flynn, 2018)", which would also refute the claim that the source explicitly supports or confirms this as set in stone, and often refers to the concepts of people fetishizing or stating roles alongside the term as "sexual fantasy" and arent considered definitive or outright claims to definiting the word, and the femboy term comes with no inherent bottom definition, otherwise concepts such as "femboydom" or the japanese equivalent of "josou seme" https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Josou%20Seme would be contradictory and nonexistent. Furthermore, the source also claims the usage of the term results from "sexual fantasies" in that manner, as opposed to any real definition. This source does not support the claim made, and the only two usages of the term femboy within the paper are both quoting people using the term in relation to either conversations had casually and not in direct definition, or in regards to a sexual fantasy without explicit definition attached. Simply stating an effeminate male is automatically a femboy is incorrect as well, as that would mean individuals such as James Charles, RuPaul, and other similar figures are femboys, when it is not the case, and more a matter of self description based on the definition already available.
- Even simply looking up the phrase "femboydom" or "dom femboy" produces a number of results, already shooting down any concept of it being an inherently assigned position by term. A bedroom role is outside the definition of femboy and therefore is unassociated, as well as the source not contributing to the claim made.
- 5th Source does NOT support that claim either. In fact, there is no mention of 4chan on the page itself, and the examples of usage show common usages on everything from tumblr to reddit as far back as 2014. JackVegas7 (talk) 03:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- i am a femboy who doesnt identify as particularly more "submissive" or dominant, has only ever dated women.. bothers me to see an article like this being taken seriously, thank you for working to debunk it 73.72.68.45 (talk) 19:07, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Had it cited at me before, and then just looking through it shows a number of inaccuracies. If you wish to help, further find sources for my points in this previous post and perhaps we could get it updated to be improved to accurate depictions, as a number of sources are contradictory or just do not support or make the claim they are stated to validate. JackVegas7 (talk) 05:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hiya, I wrote the majority of this article, although I'm aware innaccuracies have been introduced by others (especially Chumchumlol) since I wrote it. When I did it, I pretty much took every source that had information on femboys, and collated them, and tried to make sure to include the author in the prose when something was controversial. If you'd like to improve the article, please do so: however, anything you can't just delete stuff that you think isn't true, and new information needs Wikipedia:Reliable sources: wikis, UrbanDictionary, "look it up" aren't.
- Once the disruptive editing on this (don't worry, not by you) has stopped, I'm going to come back to the article in a couple of months and tidy it up, and if there are any new sources, I'll add them. I'll try to make it clearer when it's the opinion of a scholar - Professor X saying that the word femboy is used in the porn industry to mean Y is different from saying that "dom femboys don't exist", so I'll make that less ambiguous if no-one else does before me. Once again, please do introduce your suggestions, but only if you can actually reference it, or it's just mess for others to clean up . Frzzl talk; contribs 16:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Aight
- also, "professor x sayin y in porn industry" i know what you are talking about, and he made multiple claims otherwise and mostly seemed to just look over a bunch of stuff from various views. Let me know when you intend to continue and I will happily provide my own expertise in the matter (Having been apart of and within the community for over a decade now) and provide sources as I did to previous questions and comments to my other breakdown of what that guy brought up to me. Sources are still there if you wish to implement my fixes, although it seems I cannot edit stuff manually so I haven't tried to, well, implement them. JackVegas7 (talk) 03:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- furthermore, a "reliable source" for a slang term could and would definitely include stuff like an official site regarding lgbt activity, and urban dictionarys highest voted option, dictionary sites regarding definition, the only one I could say you have a case for is the Wikis but those get corroborated by other sources alongside them. JackVegas7 (talk) 03:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Had it cited at me before, and then just looking through it shows a number of inaccuracies. If you wish to help, further find sources for my points in this previous post and perhaps we could get it updated to be improved to accurate depictions, as a number of sources are contradictory or just do not support or make the claim they are stated to validate. JackVegas7 (talk) 05:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- i am a femboy who doesnt identify as particularly more "submissive" or dominant, has only ever dated women.. bothers me to see an article like this being taken seriously, thank you for working to debunk it 73.72.68.45 (talk) 19:07, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
this article is inaccurate and creepy
[edit]im a femboy, i prefer women. as many do. what is this fetishistic nonsense abt being a"bottom gay identity". wikipedia editors are such incels i stg 73.72.68.45 (talk) 18:45, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- the other person who pointed out that this article is terrible and incorrect is doing the lords work 73.72.68.45 (talk) 18:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Most femboys are generally gynosexual, but thats not really something relevant to simply defining us so I never felt the need to get verified sources and whatnot to add it. We could definitely work to improve it. JackVegas7 (talk) 05:52, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
[Original heading: Reverted many of your edits on "Femboy" 7/26/2024]
Good afternoon my fellow American. I have reverted many of your edits for misunderstanding the contents of the articles which have been presented. You claimed that "Social Media + Society" was an article, however it was a scientific publication. You also claimed that it was referring to challenging heteronormative views of masculinity. That is simply not what the paper is referring to. It is referring to how beauty is rewarded digitally and it is showcased with femboys. It is also not referring to heterosexual content as triumphing homosexual content for the reason it is heterosexual, the paper is referring to how homosexuality tends to be more unpopular than heterosexuality. It has nothing to do with hereonomativity. I also reverted your claim of "The alt-right have deemed the emergence of the femboy a result of the LGBT chemicals conspiracy theory" because it is entirely nuanced to claim every self-proclaimed alt-right individual believes femboys to be a byproduct of the chemicals. For there is complexity which goes into political affiliation. However, a few of your edits were good and those were upheld. I once again removed a few anecdotes in which you and the people have added. Jolly day! Chumchumlol (talk) 21:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Chumchumlol, I am not American, but thank you for being willing to discuss this with me.
Due to femboy culture's popularity among the youth, some have speculated regarding the longevity of the femboy culture
is not what the cited source is saying. It is not saying that the femboy culture is dying out, but an individual femboy may not be able to stay a femboy as they age.- Source: "Obvious questions arise in the face of the expressed desire to live through a prolonged boyhood: whereas other non-binary identifications commonplace elsewhere online, such as ‘agender’ or ‘androgyne’ suffer from simply being difficult for many to grasp, ‘Femboy’ seems evocative enough, but to be suggestive of a state that will struggle to be sustained. Can one remain a Femboy by the end of one’s 30s? 40s?"
As well as avoiding the difficulties which come alongside gender dysphoria .
I don't see the cited source mentioning gender dysphoria. Can you point to a specific quote?"representing an element of sexual fantasy"
A direct quote was modified. A big no no. The source says "represents" not "representing". Brackets are used to indicate changes.Many have deemed the emergence of the femboy a result of the LGBT chemicals conspiracy theory
The source says that view is common to members of the alt-right, not to everyone. How about "many members of the alt-right"?- I think Specifically, men’s engagement with the traditionally feminine domain of beauty and appearance is often veiled in allusions toward masculinities’ hegemonic qualities, particularly heterosexuality and muscularity, undermining the inclusive potentials of their content online.
A scientific publication of Social Media + Society has said the "femboy aesthetic" on TikTok "map[s] onto and reinforces extant patterns of gender inequality", and "how beauty is rewarded symbolically and materially in online spaces.
I think we are arguing with semantics here, but scientific journals do publish articles, in most senses of the term. See the article on academic journal: "Content typically takes the form of articles presenting original research, review articles, or book reviews."- A direct quote was also modified without any brackets. I think we have differing interpretation of the study. First, the study was limited to the most popular creators only, not all creators on Tiktok. It would be misrepresenting the source to say otherwise.
- Secondly, I disagree the study is about beauty standards. It is about "radical" TikTok creators fail to challenge heteronormativity. It only discusses beauty as it relates to gender associations. Few examples from the study pointing this out:
- First sentence: "News reports and online comments suggest that social media applications like TikTok play an important role in challenging traditional notions of masculinity."
- "Specifically, men’s engagement with the traditionally feminine domain of beauty and appearance is often veiled in allusions toward masculinities’ hegemonic qualities, particularly heterosexuality and muscularity, undermining the inclusive potentials of their content online."
- "Although these depictions have become slightly more varied (Barry & Martin, 2016; Ricciardelli et al., 2010; see also Attwood, 2005), they continue to reflect vestiges of the hegemonic male—namely they depict men who are heterosexual, muscular, and white (Waling et al., 2018)."
- "In this way, men police the boundaries of normative masculinity and heterosexuality, asserting that, though they may transgress gender expectations, they are neither feminine nor gay" Ca talk to me! 06:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Alright Ca, let me start out by saying that I indeed make a rookie level blunder by not adding a source in for the "As well as avoiding the difficulties which come alongside gender dysphoria". I had the source pulled up but I forgot to cite it and now I have it and it'll be adjusted for. Now that has been completed.
- As for "representing an element of sexual fantasy". I have removed the quotations and the problem is solved.
- As for "due to femboy culture's popularity among the youth, some have speculated regarding the longevity of the femboy culture", a source has been cited.
- As for "Many have deemed the emergence of the femboy a result of the LGBT chemicals conspiracy theory". I accept your bipartisan proposal to replace the sentence to "many members of the alt-right".
- As for
- "A scientific publication of Social Media + Society has said the "femboy aesthetic" on TikTok "map[s] onto and reinforces extant patterns of gender inequality", and "how beauty is rewarded symbolically and materially in online spaces."
- I reject your idea to change that to
- "An article in Social Media + Society has said the "femboy aesthetic" on TikTok "map[s] onto and reinforce[s] extant patterns of gender inequality", and "how beauty is rewarded symbolically and materially in online spaces".
- Because it is still simply not an article but rather a scientific publication. However I will change it to
- "A scientific publication of Social Media + Society has said the "femboy aesthetic" on TikTok "map[s] onto and reinforce[s] extant patterns of gender inequality", and "how beauty is rewarded symbolically and materially in online spaces."
- I understand that you disagree the study is about beauty standards. But I ask you hearken to what the author has stated here's a direct quote from the abstract "our findings contribute to a broader discussion of the role that social media play in reproducing inequality along the lines of gender, race, and sexuality, including how beauty is rewarded symbolically and materially in online spaces." So yes, it is indeed partially about beauty standards.
- As for your claim that "It is about "radical" Tiktok creators fail to challenge heteronormativity." I would like to point out that the source cited disagrees with you. They say "we find that TikTok creators both challenge and reinforce traditional notions of masculinity, subverting widely recognizable tropes, and gender norms". So no, they did not fail to challenge. They did challenge.
- "In this way, men police the boundaries of normative masculinity and heterosexuality, asserting that, though they may transgress gender expectations, they are neither feminine nor gay" is quite the humorous part of the article where they're referring to how some don't consider liking femboys to be homosexual whatsoever.
- However, it does not have anything to do with "A scientific publication of Social Media + Society has said the "femboy aesthetic" on TikTok "map[s] onto and reinforces extant patterns of gender inequality", and "how beauty is rewarded symbolically and materially in online spaces."
- For that reasons I'll be upholding my edits/revising them. Thank you for reaching out. Chumchumlol (talk) 03:23, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- I appreciate the responses to my comments. However, there are some elements I still think are problematic.
- The quote "As well as avoiding the difficulties which come alongside gender dysphoria" is sourced to a anonymous opinion piece on an advocacy organization Genspect. It only represents on person's experiences so it would not be a reliable source for the claim. Same goes for due to femboy culture's popularity among the youth, some have speculated regarding the longevity of the femboy culture", It is cited to an student-run newspaper in Oxford University. It would not be a reliable source for scientific claims related to sociology. Also, I don't see anywhere in the cited article saying that femboy culture is disappearing. Can you point to a quote in the cited article?
- I do not understand your remark "Because it is still simply not an article but rather a scientific publication." Journals are publications that publish articles in a routine basis. Reputable publishers use the word "article" to describe their content: Every year, we accept and publish more than 470,000 journal articles Research Articles should not exceed 5 printed pages in the journal
- Removing the quotation marks in "representing an element of sexual fantasy" would be a worse solution since it is now unattributed copying of someone else's words. Use brackets instead like previous versions of the page.
- I still disagree, but I do see your point. Would you like to get a third opinion on how to most accurate summarize the Social Media + Society article?
- On a unrelated note: I don't know how proficient you are in English, but "destroyed" has very strong and negative connotation in the English so using such words like "Revision of what Ca destroyed" would not be appropriate in a collaborative environment. Ca talk to me! 11:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just wanted to chime in to agree that Genspect should absolutely not be cited for anything per the past RSN discussion on it and it's general status as a WP:FRINGE organization. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 01:13, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've removed the two sentences cited to Genspect. Flounder fillet (talk) 20:52, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just wanted to chime in to agree that Genspect should absolutely not be cited for anything per the past RSN discussion on it and it's general status as a WP:FRINGE organization. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 01:13, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have relocated the discussion from my talk page to let other editors weigh in. Ca talk to me! 15:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2024
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "also spelt femboi, is a slang term for males" to "also spelt femboi, is a slang term generally used when referring to males or non-binary persons". This will allow for the page to encompass more uses of the word "femboy" as it is used to refer to non-binary persons who are feminine. ItsThatOneJack (talk) 01:05, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- This would need a source. See WP:V, WP:PROVEIT. Flounder fillet (talk) 01:54, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Partly done. The body already said this, so no further source was needed, although I've gone ahead and copied the source up to the lede anyways, as ledecites are generally a good idea on definitions of slang terms. I went with somewhat broader wording tha requested, though, as, per the source, "femboi" can also refer to women and transmasculine people. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 02:26, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Tomgirl vs femboy.
[edit]So, Is tomgirl and femboy the same thing? Or are they different? Should I add tomgirl to redirect to this page? Miyunya (talk) 10:38, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- The best place to ask this is probably WP:RD. Also, tomgirl is already a redirect. Flounder fillet (talk) 02:27, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia good articles
- Social sciences and society good articles
- Wikipedia articles that use British English
- Wikipedia Did you know articles
- GA-Class LGBTQ+ studies articles
- WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies articles
- GA-Class Internet culture articles
- Low-importance Internet culture articles
- WikiProject Internet culture articles
- GA-Class Pornography articles
- Mid-importance Pornography articles
- GA-Class Mid-importance Pornography articles
- WikiProject Pornography articles
- GA-Class Men's Issues articles
- Unknown-importance Men's Issues articles
- WikiProject Men's Issues articles
- Pages translated from Portuguese Wikipedia