Talk:Postcolonial feminism

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

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): Kml388.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

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): Jaimemarita.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

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): PursuitOfAnA2016.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Cleanup

How else could this page be cleaned up? I edited a little, but since I'm a newbie I'm unsure whether to remove the cleanup tag. It could be that it's been edited enough since the tag was added. Help would be appreciated! Cowpepper 13:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Added a little more and went ahead and deleted the cleanup tag.Cowpepper 14:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

This is a great little article Cowpepper. :') DeanaG (talk) 02:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Editing the Postcolonial Feminism Page

I re-wrote the beginning of the page because I didn't think that it clearly explained what postcolonial feminism is. Also, I deleted the history section because it didn't seem to add information that was necessary for an encyclopedia entry. Instead, I incorporated a part of the definition of postcolonialism in the opening section because it is important to see the connection between feminism and postcolonialism. Also, I added some works that were written by the postcolonial authors listed on the page because a few of them didn't have anything next to their name. After that section, I added three quotes by postcolonial authors because I think it's important to have an example of the important works that have been written. I used more sources to define postcolonialism than were previously used, and I think that this has helped with clarification. I tried to use more examples as well because they help to show the true meaning of postcolonial feminism.

Nochurchbells (talk) 02:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Page Revisions

My classmate and I are planning on improving this page for one of our courses this semester. Just wanted to inform everyone in advance. More specifics to come! Thanks so much. If there are any problems with revising this page, let us know. Jessi.litman (talk) 03:39, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

After just a quick skim, some comments:

1. I wonder if this is a term used by women in third world, former colonial nations, or a concept created by westerners
2. is there some WP:Original research with phrases and ideas that might be only related or similar to postcolonial feminism actually identified as postcolonial feminism. If the similar idea does not use the phrase, it should be made clear. Real sticklers probably would even say that without a source saying they are similar, they should not be mentioned at all.
3. For example, I have to wonder if "post nationalist" feminism might be anti-state nationalism of some kind. see books.google search of her book; didn't find it but did see several references to it, one of which might have good material].
4. Most of the book sources probably are on books.google and the right search will bring you to the page where the material is so you can link to it at the page number, i.e. [http://books.google.com/etc p.23]. If there is no link, or if you want to prove that the ref says what you say it says, feel free to quote the most relevant info in the footnote.

Have fun! CarolMooreDC 17:17, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Added {{BLP sources}} because you have to ref that they call themselves or others call them Postcolonial feminist per WP:BLP (and WP:OR per comments above). Some people might agree with substance, but reject the term itself. It can be removed when all are referenced or removed if they can't be referenced. Thank you. CarolMooreDC 18:40, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your advice. We will definitely take that into consideration. Our plan to revise and expand this article will involve adding more information to the current sections “History” and “Relationship to Western feminisms” and substantially revising the introductory part of the page. We will also be creating new sections “Theories and Ideologies” and “Critiques of Postcolonial feminism.” We appreciate any advice or suggestions for sources as we work through this project. Thanks!

Michellesynhorst (talk) 06:29, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Peer review

This is a very well written article so kudos to you two for such a great job. However, there is always room for improvement so I will be adding to CarolMooreDc's points.

Firstly there are some grammatical errors:

• For instance in the last paragraph of the lead section, the opening sentence reads: "In addition to...because both groups are arguing that feminism does not account for racial differences." I believe it should read "In addition to...because both groups argue that feminism does not account for racial differences" since encyclopedic entries should not be in present continuous tense.

• The 'w' in women need not be capitalized as it has been in some cases.

• Missing 'of' in "This complicates the struggle of these women in terms of fighting patriarchy"

• Inconsistency in the word postcolonial. There are a couple instances of hyphenation, which should be removed since most of the article does not use hyphens.

• Subject verb disagreement in "There are indigenous feminist movement that take place" and "Postcolonial feminism works to bring the voices of Third World women to the forefront and allow their critiques of Western feminism and their own unique feminist models to shape our modern notion of feminism."(Relationship to Western feminism section)

Secondly, some important links are missing that I believe would add to the understanding of this article. For instance, in the history section you should add a link to the first wave of feminism. You can add it right after the section heading but a better idea might be to link the term when you mention it in the history section. Same goes for important relevant terms like postcolonial theory, feminism, gender inequality etc. I would also suggest adding these links in the See Also section.

Talking about terms, I would be very careful with your use of the term Western Feminism. In the section "Relationship to Western Feminism" you seem to be referring to multiple forms of feminism as being western but this isn't clear until one reaches this particular section whereas the use of the term is frequent even before that part. In the former sections the use of the term seems to be referring to one entity/theory, which conflicts with the idea of multiple forms of feminism labeled as 'Western'. I suggest clarifying this term and its most common use in literature early on. If there is a Wikipedia page that talks in detail about the term then you can link it for clarification purposes too. "Third world feminism" is another term to be careful about. The term Third world feminism links back to your page but in the lead section you talk about postcolonial feminism as one of the Third world feminist movements and in the Critiques section you talk about postcolonial feminism and Third world feminism as two separate entities in danger. Please clarify what this term means and whether it should be redirected to this page. I am also confused by some other terminology like "universal sisterhood approach" and "white feminism". Readability of this article will improve significantly once these terms have been clarified.

Once again your efforts are praise worthy and I have tried to be bold in my criticism because I see good article potential here. I hope my feedback helps you achieve that goal (whether it is your goal or not)!

Kjhooda (talk) 03:23, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review, number two!

First of all, this subject is so interesting, I can't believe I've never heard of it before! It does a good job of being comprehensive as well by covering what seem to be the main issues.

I deleted two broken links you had, but other than the grammatical errors listed above the basics seemed to be pretty good. The one organizational suggestion I have is about the Relationship to Western feminisms section, which seems like large chunks of text that could use some breaking up. Perhaps splitting it into two subsections with two main points, like 'Criticisms' and 'Women as a group'? I feel like some divisions would make it visually a little bit of an easier read.

I have two content suggestions, one about the race section. Since this seems to be such a key point of the postcolonial feminist ideology, it would be interesting for that section to go a little more in depth about the history of the race debate between feminists. Maybe some stats to show demographics of either movement if possible? Secondly, I think it would be a valuable addition to have a section on policy action or suggestions from postcolonial theory they have to implement their ideologies. Are there countries in the world where postcolonial feminist theory plays into policy for women?

Finally, I wanted to complement you on the quote section at the end of the article. It is a nice touch to put some names/faces on the movement. If you could provide pictures of some of those women that would be a good addition too, visually anyway. The neutrality is also excellent in the entirety of the article, with both sides adequately represented.

I hope any of that was helpful! Lggernon (talk) 05:15, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Page Review

Great article! It is extremely comprehensive, well-written, and interesting.

The only possible problem I see is your wording may seem a bit argumentative at times. Perhaps stray away from words like "therefore" (as used in "History"), which can seem a bit argumentative.

In this same vein, although you include "Criticisms," you may want to be a bit weary of seeming too critical of other viewpoints in the other sections. I do not think it is very problematic, but sentences like: "In this way, postcolonial feminism works to account for weaknesses within both post-colonial theory and within Western feminism" may give that vibe. I think a little bit of rewording in this instance, possibly from "work" to "attempt," could make it seem less biased/argumentative. Just looking over each section to see ways you can maintain a more neutral tone would be beneficial.

Other than that, awesome job!

- Juliabarrow3

Thank you

Thank you all so much for your feedback! I have gone through and made all of the minor changes in grammar and wording that ya'll suggested. We will definitely be taking the organizational and content changes into account as we go forward in editing the page. We will work on adding more to the race section and potentially adding a policy section. We will also try to reword for clarity and neutrality. Again, thank you so much for your feedback!

Michellesynhorst (talk) 20:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Requested feedback

Sorry I was contacted to review this article and took almost a week getting to it. I fear that my procrastination and laziness may make my feedback pointless, but I hope that it's not. I made very small copy edits already, but here are some issues that you may wish to amend:

• The lead section should summarize the article. I see that the article includes a section on criticism of postcolonial feminism, but the lead makes no mention of this. All subheadings of the article's content should have some reference made to it in the lead.
• You discuss Western culture but don't explain what that is. Provide a link to Western civilization in the lead.
• Your language is inevitably going to be somewhat technical and abstract, but the first sentence includes the phrase "effects of colonialism are inextricably bound to the unique gendered realities of non-white and non-Western women in the postcolonial period." Do you think that most readers will understand what that means? The term "unique gendered realities" is probably too technical for the introductory claim in the article. Cf. MOS:JARGON.
• At the risk of splitting hairs, your final sentence in the lead seems to make unwarranted assumptions: Are all postcolonial feminists non-Western? Surely, not all black feminists are. Nor are all feminists women.
• Link terms that might be unfamiliar: middle class, first wave feminism, [[person of color|women of color]], etc. You and I know what these mean (although I don't know that much about technical terms in feminist theory!) but we cannot assume that casual readers do. Try to imagine someone who isn't college-educated reading this and see which terms are probably ones you encountered in university education and which ones you learned in casual conversation to figure out where to provide links or possibly brief explanatory notes. Almost all of these potentially confusing terms can be clarified simply by providing a link—you don't have to generate much new copy.
• "radicalized feminist movements"—link to radical feminism
• This first section purports to be a history, but doesn't actually explain the history of postcolonial feminism (pcf): it just explains a lacuna in Western feminism. How did pcf come to be? Are there major figures, texts, or organizations who founded it? Have there been rifts or breakthroughs since that time? When and where did it emerge? I get the impression that postcolonial feminists themselves don't live in the West, but that's not necessarily true. You start to answer some of these questions with the next paragraph, but not all of them and it's confusing that you are attempting to explain the history but don't actually give the history of pcf.
• Is there a less jargon-y way to say "promotes a more macrocosmic viewpoint of the multiple and complex layers of oppression and influence within society"?
• Link feminist theory, colonization, Third World, [[Moral agency|agency]], intersectionality, patriarchy, ethnocentric, etc. See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Linking.
• Avoid unsourced claims or weasel-y/peacock-y words. E.g. if Chandra Talpade Mohanty is a principal theorist in pcf, then I can either have a citation that shows that she is within this article or you can simply link her name and I will see how principal she is in the article on her. You also claim that the essay "Under Western Eyes" was influential but provide no source. Whom did it influence? Simply put, there was a time when you didn't know anything about this topic, so how did you learn all of these things? How did you know that this essay was influential? After I return from work, I'll thrown in several {{cn}} tags: provide sources where you can and if you think that I've tagged something which doesn't need further explanation, feel free to remove it. I always err on the side of using this tag too much, so just remove any that seem pedantic or unnecessary. You can also use the same source more than one time to justify a claim, so you can refer to earlier instances of that source. How to do this can be a little confusing technically using the <ref> tage, so please ask me if you aren't sure how you want to use a single source multiple times.
• What is "the universal sisterhood approach and initiative"? If we don't understand the claims that supporters like Morgan make in the first place, we can't understand why and how pcf criticizes it, just that it does. An article on pcf should focus on it and not go into depth about the intricacies of other feminist perspectives, but providing the basic outline of what those perspectives claim is necessary for understanding why pcf is even relevant.
• Here is a more direct passage that equates feminists with women (a critique that I made earlier): "However, the feminist in the developing world experiences the legacy of socio-cultural oppression, in addition to the political issues that are entangled with the decolonization process. This complicates the struggle of these women in terms of fighting patriarchy, who don't..." Are all feminists in the developing world women? Are all women in the developing world feminists? Surely not. Also, avoid using contractions outside of quotations. Note that you used "don't" in this sentence and "do not" in the next. Small editorial copying like this is not as important as issues related to sourcing and neutrality, but being internally consistent makes for a more enjoyable and intelligible reading experience. Furthermore, you revert between using sharp quotes (such as: ‘ and ’), straight quotes (that is, apostrophes: '), and quotation marks ("like these"). Doing some simply copyediting with a critical eye will smooth out these small issues which are hobby horses of mine.
• The first paragraph in "Relationship to postcolonialism" makes reference to broad concepts like Western notions of social progress and "traditional practices and roles taken up by women—sometimes seen as distasteful by Western standards" but it would be much more helpful if you could provide examples. For instance, can you name a traditional practice or role taken up by women (sometimes seen as distasteful by Western standards) which is a form of rebellion against colonial oppression? Also, avoid the use of scare quotes.
• The section on race mentions that there is a "perceived relationship between postcolonial feminism and other racialized feminist movements, especially black feminism" but the first sentence in the section on the relationship to Western feminisms says that "Postcolonial feminism is critical of Western forms of feminism, notably radical feminism and liberal feminism and their universalization of women's experiences." I'm confused: are there other radicalized feminist movements than radical feminism? Is pcf a type of radical feminism? Is it opposed to radical feminism? It's possible that I'm just too ignorant or a bad reader, but this is confounding to me.
• "Some acknowledge the differences among..." Who? Some will say that the Earth is flat. Provide concrete examples in the text. "Feminist scholars such as X and Y acknowledge the difference among..." is much stronger since someone will claim virtually anything that you can imagine.
• I tagged the quotations section with {{Move to Wikiquote}} and it was removed but I'm not sure why. Wikipedia is not a directory of quotations and Wikiquote is. Also, the introductory text to that section is frankly obvious: Of course, "many feminists have contributed to postcolonial feminism by using written words to express their ideas and opinions, which have been of great importance to the postcolonial feminist movement."
• The purpose of a see also section is to provide links to related topics that won't necessarily appear in the text of the article. You can definitely prune this by removing items that have already been mentioned (e.g. black feminism) or which have only the most tenuous association (I removed United Nations, which was already linked anyway.) Note that {{Feminism sidebar}} at the top of the article and {{Feminism}} at the bottom also navigate several of these articles.
• Are there any pictures that you can add to spruce up the article? E.g. of pcf theorists, of Third World women engaging in acts which are subversive of Western standards of social progress, of public spaces which include colonial objects related to women's experiences? If not, it's not necessary but articles with pictures are far more likely to be read.
• Are there high-quality external links that you can add? See WP:EL.

I always feel like a jerk reviewing articles because I end up making a laundry list of complaints, but this article is actually very fine for someone who just started on Wikipedia and better than a lot of the writing that I've done here. You have all done a fine job and everything can always use some improvements, so please don't be disheartened by my take seeming so negative. I hope that when your assignment is done you'll consider sticking around here and helping out. If so, please don't hesitate to contact me for any assistance or even just to brainstorm collaboration (you could teach me a thing or two!) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:59, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Also One last thing which I meant to mention earlier: Is "Gender Forum" a good source? Outside of this reference, all of your others are from university presses, which are always going to be good. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:03, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Good Article Nomination

An IP with only two previous (and long past) edits nominated this article for Good Article status. I have reverted this nomination, as it seemed like a drive-by that wouldn't be followed up on. As it says on the GA instructions page about nominators, "it is highly preferable that they have contributed significantly and are familiar with the subject"; the first is clearly not the case, and there is no evidence that the latter is true either.

If one of the people working on the article believes the article is ready, meets the criteria, and wishes to do such a nomination—I saw there were comments above indicating that further expansion is anticipated, which may indicate that the article isn't sufficiently broad as it currently stands (broadness being one of the criteria)—please feel free to do so. Please see the GA instructions page for more information, if so. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:03, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for your interest in the page. My partner Jessi.litman and I have been working for the past few months researching postcolonial feminism and revising this article. We have already responded to the feedback above and improved the article. We think that at this point it is sufficiently developed to be nominated for good article status. We plan to follow-up and check on the page as the nominations and future critiques of the page play out. So at this point, we think it is appropriate that the article be nominated for Good Article Status. Thank you for your support!

Michellesynhorst (talk) 06:00, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

BlueMoonset, thank you so much for helping us out. Just to clarify, I was actually the one who originally nominated the article, but I was accidentally not signed into my wikipedia account, which explains why it seemed as if an IP nominated the article. My partner just re-nominated the article and we are excited for the process. Many thanks. Jessi.litman (talk) 06:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Postcolonial feminism/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 14:18, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Michelle and Jessi, I'll be glad to conduct this review. Thanks for your work on it so far; I still have many checks to do on this, but at first glance it looks like quality work. As a side note, I see from your talk pages that you're both seniors, so congrats on presumably being about to graduate!

Here's a few, more to follow later:

• Please note that I'm making some minor tweaks as I go, mostly for concision of phrasing and to break up long paragraphs. If you find any of them not to your liking, please feel free to revert--and check to make sure I haven't inadvertently added any new errors.
• One minor omission from the lead and body is to give a good fix on what years the movement originated (ditto second-wave feminism). It would also be helpful to also name a few more seminal works in the movement to give a sense of when they were coming out, not as a list, but among the history section. (Also, when did Mohanty's essay "Under Western Eyes" appear?) One section mentions "within the last twenty years", but it would be good to fix this time in years per WP:REALTIME, since the article could still be in use another five or ten years from now. Are there any particular works with which the movement can be said to begin, the way Orientalism or the Feminine Mystique were for their respective movements?
• Similarly, it would be helpful if more leading figures in the theory beyond Mohanty if possible. Anne McClintock and Gayatri Spivak might be each worth a mention, though I don't mean to suggest that either is required. Lourde's contribution to the movement could also be clarified in the text. This article does an excellent job of summarizing the main arguments of po-co feminism, but feels a bit context-free; it's not clear what specific debates (in time and place) these theorists have entered in, what figures they've criticized, or what the highlights of their movement have been.
• I'd suggest also mentioning some literary authors generally considered to write from a postcolonial feminist perspective like Jamaica Kincaid, Ama Ata Aidoo, Bapsi Sidhwa, Bessie Head, Gloria Anzaldua, and Arundhati Roy.
• "This criticism claims that postcolonial feminism is divisive, arguing that the overall feminist movement will be stronger if women can present a united front." -- claims is on the list of words to avoid, since it implies that an argument can't be substantiated. How about "states" or "argues"? -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:18, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
• "So feminist theory during the first century of feminism failed to account for differences between women in terms of race and class—it only addressed the needs and issues of the white, Western women who had started the movement." -- this is a bit of a judgement, and edges up against WP:NPOV. I'd suggest saying "according to later theorists," or some phrase like that.
• "by relating gender issues to other spheres of influences within society" -- could you give an example here of what you mean by "spheres of influence"? I wonder if just "influences" would be a better word, if what's mean here are things like race and class.
• "when in reality the scope of feminist theory is limited" -- this seems to be a quite POV statement--that "in reality" the po-co feminists are right and mainstream feminists are wrong. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:01, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Let me know your thoughts on the above, and thanks again for contributing this high-quality article. Literary theory articles on Wikipedia are often jargon-filled, incoherent disasters; you've done a good job with this one in making it accessible without dumbing it down. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:01, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Since it's been a week without response and these areas remain unaddressed, I'm not listing the article at this time. But I do want to note that this was a narrow fail; I hope someone will take it the rest of the way soon. (I may myself, actually). Thanks again for your work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Additions to the Page

I'm currently a student at LSU and I have chosen to make additions to your article. It is edited very well and is very informative, but I would like to make a comparison of third world feminism and the colonial and postcolonial influence of race as to how it relates to postcolonial feminism. I know that there are points made on the topics already, but I would like to contribute a more in depth approach to it. PursuitOfAnA2016 (talk) 00:16, 17 March 2016PursuitOfAnA2016 (talk) 14:10, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Student comment: relationship to indigenous customs

I am a student at the University of Chicago. Perhaps this article would benefit from a subsection on the relationship between Postcolonial feminism and indigenous (precolonial) customs, to reflect the notion that some precolonial cultures were relatively gender-equal and colonial intervention established patriarchal institutions that have persisted after de-colonization.Alejandralr (talk) 02:56, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Postcolonial 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303175959/http://www.genderforum.org/fileadmin/archiv/genderforum/genderealisations/weedon.html to http://www.genderforum.org/fileadmin/archiv/genderforum/genderealisations/weedon.html

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) 03:12, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Reverting of 'imperial feminism'

@Vif12vf:

Hi, your revert (dif) of the edit content "...Postcolonial feminism opposes imperial feminist ideology." by User:AlizayZehra is due to not being accompanied by any reference or is in disagreement over the content?

Since User:AlizayZehra seems to be working on Draft:Imperial Feminism with due references. User:AlizayZehra likely to have some position and hence it is better to discuss.

Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 03:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: CMN2160C

==Wiki Education assignment: CMN2160C== This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2022 and 16 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lubakhalil (article contribs).

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article was the subject of an educational assignment at Rice University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2013 Q1 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 15:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-03

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2024 and 10 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Abicc18 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Fruitninjalover.

— Assignment last updated by Momlife5 (talk) 15:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)