Talk:Femme/Archive 1

Archive 1

Poorly researched and inaccurate

This page is poorly researched, inaccurate, and presents a biased view of feminism and lesbianism.

The page barely touches on the history of the term "femme," which used to apply exclusively to (cis-female) lesbians. Its origins are alluded to here: "Although it originated from the dichotomous relationship between butch and femme, femme is an 'independent, autonomous gender expression' which doesn't need masculinity to help define it or attract them sexually, since relationships between two people who identify as femmes is possible," but this misrepresents lesbian relationships by implying that all lesbians identify as "butch" or "femme" and relationships can ONLY occur between a butch and a femme. This is completely inaccurate.

There are many inconsistencies within this rather short article. The intro says: [Femme] is used exclusively for queer people regardless of whether they identify as female." But, in the section butch vs. femme, it says, "Specifically the femme identity gave the idea that women did not have to orient their sexuality around men." So, does femme only apply to females or not? Does it apply to lesbians or anyone who falls under the ever-widening queer umbrella?

The whole article is wrought with buzzwords that are never clearly defined. The article says "The radical rethinking of sexual liberation was starting to be born" without providing sufficient context. This sentence adds nothing and should be deleted. Honestly, I have no idea what the author is talking about.

The entire section "Emergence of queer theory and gender politics" is incoherent. It reads: Postmodernism and queer theory began “to examine the limits of not just gender itself, but the ways the concept of gender is defined, constrained, mandated, and rectified within the cultural discourse. And also the ways it can be reclaimed and re-signified.”[3] In modern contexts and the increasing awareness of femme invisibility,“the attention paid to the butch figure has been heavily critiqued by an emerging queering of femininity”[5] These new frameworks and perspectives allowed queer individuals to look at gender and expression in a whole new way in the context of the butch and femme identities, and begin to expand their individual possibilities and understandings of the terms along with the ideas of gender role play in general.[3]

These quotes are never explained. What do postmodernism and queer theory have to say about gender? Why is "the butch figure" critiqued. Who's critiquing this figure? It's never established that there even is an increasing awareness of "femme invisibility." I'm not really sure what femme invisibility is. I don't even know what a "femme" is, because this article said that femme used to refer to "feminine" lesbian partners but now can refer to any queer-identified person who accepts the label. Are lesbians being erased? Are effeminate men being erased? How does this erasure manifest?

The "Emotional Labor and Self Care" section is utter nonsense. There's a quote taken from an Autostraddle thinkpiece (not by any measure a reliable source) that again is given no context or interpretation. Then it says femme can refer to behaviors, or it can refer primarily to appearance, depending on who's using the term. These "femme" behaviors are never coherently explained. According to the article: "Femme have the unique ability to find power and strength in highlighting and appreciating their 'feminine' behaviors and characteristics such as self-care and putting in emotional labor and creating/maintaining relationships."

Why is this ability unique to femmes? Can only feminine lesbians be empowered by their femininity? Can only feminine queers be empowered this way? Why? Are heterosexual women barred from feeling empowered by their femininity? What even are feminine behaviors? Is it inherently feminine to take care of yourself (or is self-care something else) and form relationships with other humans? What is emotional labor? Why don't some femmes connect with it? Why is it associated with being femme at all?

The "Femme vs femininity" section is insulting to anyone who's studied feminism. Why the categories of "modern" and "traditional" feminism. Feminism is fighting against traditional roles for women, and by definition cannot be traditional. Is modern feminism any feminism that is practiced today? Because there are lots of disagreements within feminism at the moment. The definitions given are simplistic, and, as far as I know, not upheld by any feminist discourse. It should not be surprising that the definitions are atrocious, because the citation is a random Prezi presentation that could have been made by someone who has clearly not seriously studied feminist history and is not in any way an authority on the subject.

Is traditional feminism actually second wave feminism? Second wave feminism would hold that gender is a social construct and "femininity" is imposed on women (female-born people) as a tool of subjugation by men.

Are femmes a cohesive group of people? As mentioned, this article has not clearly defined femme. If all femmes hold the opinions mentioned in the "Femme vs femininity" section, femmes should be defined on those beliefs. Since as "femme" as defined by this article does not refer to a specific biological sex, sexuality, behavior or appearance, it seems that "femme" is a belief system more than anything. If there is no gender binary, why do masculinity and femininity even matter? Misogyny is hatred of women, not hatred of femininity (although they often overlap). A woman who is beat up for looking too masculine or for having sex with another woman is a victim of misogyny. A man who is beat up for wearing a dress is not a victim of misogyny. Why do femmes get to redefine words? Who are these femmes? Why are they no citations?

The section ends, almost comically, with, "More specifically femme is combining feminist ideas to self-empowering actions." There is nothing specific in this sentence. What are feminist ideas? We were just given two contradicting (albeit incorrect) definitions of feminism. What are self-empowering actions? How is identifying as femme increasing anyone's societal power? Feminism is literally a movement designed to empower women, what changes when feminism is combined with "self-empowering actions?" What does this sentence do but imply feminism is not empowering?

The "Femmephobia and invisibility" section is useless. It is unclear what a femme is, but apparently it is possibly for someone to be perceived as "femme." If that is true, what are the characteristics that would cause someone to be seen as a femme? Three of the four terms (I do not know what femi-negativity is, and there is no link to help me find out) refer to violence experienced by transwomen. This implies that femmephobia refers to male-bodied people who have feminine characteristics. But I thought femmes were originally lesbians. I thought that today female-bodied people can still be femme. So why the focus on transwomen? The last two sentences are a load of jargon, and, again, nothing is defined. I still don't really know how femme invisibility manifests or who it is targeted against. I still don't really know why it matters. I still haven't been given concrete evidence that it even exists.

Overall, this article is poorly written, incoherent and inaccurate. Many statements are not sourced, and several of the sources provided (everdayfeminism, autostraddle, prezi) are not in any way reliable. Definitions, if given, are inaccurate, as in the case of "feminism" and "misogyny." If I am held to the same standards as the author, what is preventing me from saying that trans people believe that two people with penises can reproduce sexually, provided one of them identifies as a woman and the other a man? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.85.237.208 (talk • contribs)

These are some of the reasons why the new edit was made. The new version also provides a balanced explanation of how the use of the term has changed in recent years to include trans and non binary people by referencing those who have those identities. It also addressed some of this issues stated here and provided context to explain the political environment which the femme identity has existed over the years. PersistantFemmeSociety (talk) 02:15, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Revert of the recent rewrite

As seen with this edit, I reverted PersistantFemmeSociety (talk · contribs) rewrite of this article. I'm not a fan of either version, but the previous version (which was written by WP:Student editors) at least does not begin by limiting the term femme to lesbians in the lead and I think it is better organized. I will contact WP:LGBT about weighing in on this matter. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:35, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

One more thing: This is not the Butch and femme article. If this article begins to look too much like that one, it should simply be merged with that one. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:39, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

And "femme" is not simply a sexual identity, even when exclusively applied to lesbians; so PersistantFemmeSociety's lead stating "lesbian sexual identity" is something else to think about. PersistantFemmeSociety's version is a version that should be WP:Merged with the Butch and femme article...without any redundancy, of course. So if that version is implemented again, I will be arguing for a merge. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:57, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

On what basis is Femme not considered a "sexual identity" please provide evidence of this. It appears that rather then stick to actual facts of the history of term other users want to make it an ideological one. "femme" was a term that was limited to lesbians. The recent expansion only began in the 1990s as stated in the update. What are the reasons for suggesting otherwise? This article links to the Butch Femme article for the purpose that users can get a more extensive history of Butch and Femme. However the history of the LGBTQ Term Femme as it's own identity does require it's own page considering how the term has been used so widely today. PersistantFemmeSociety (talk) 00:41, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

I have contacted scholars who were mentioned in the edit and made them aware of this "revert" and the erasure of approximatly 30+ years of their work specifically on Femme identity. This does not appear to be a considered response but that someone is upset that they have been shown up for providing the wrong information. Information which is freely avalible online if you choose to go beyond what the latest hashtag on instagram is. To go from a well researched and referenced article to one that contains a few blog posts is not what the ethos of wikipedia is supposed to be. I cannot stress how angry people, Femmes are, with the reverted edit. PersistantFemmeSociety (talk) 00:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

The revert to the previous version appears to be a spiteful act. As someone who teaches women and sexuality as a guest lecturer as well as a actual FEMME woman and queer/lesbian scholar, who has lived that life. I suspect the newer author hasn't. I would therefore like an intervention from a third party at this point. To remove an entire edit simply because it centres the lesbian experience for something which was a lesbian identity in the first place seems ridiculous and almost homophobic and at the very least lesbophobic. As I had mentioned previously. the version was not only offensive but completely did not address how the history of the term has changed. Having to explain this to students and young queer/lesbian women who have no idea what Femme is besides the very modern usage is a nightmare and I expect better from a site such as this. PersistantFemmeSociety (talk) 00:53, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the "limiting" nature of using Lesbian ( again lesbophobia seems to be behind this) this is addressed later where, again, references, are used to explain how the term was then expanded to include trans identities and how this expansion is sometimes contested. Wikipedia is not here to placate people's "ideological" leanings. it is here to provide factual information where it is possible. PersistantFemmeSociety (talk) 01:00, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

I've decided to revert it back. I hope if Flyer22 Reborn wishes to revert it back again they consider to add all the references that were provided in my article. Otherwise as has already been pointed out on comments made about this page they have chosen to revert this for ideological reasons rather than ones that pertain to the history of the term. This article has provided space for ALL notions of Femme. Including the frankly ill thought out section on Femme as a form of "feminism" which was edited, to make sense and added to this version. If you wish to argue for a merge then you must then provide an explanation as to why your version of "femme" should should not also be merged into the Butch Femme article as that is where the term originates from. PersistantFemmeSociety (talk) 01:10, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Unless the previous editor can provide citations to dispute my article on why Lesbian should be not be leading the article ( beside some misinformed blogs from a website) actual peer reviewed citations their suggestions are purely ideological. The irony of this "revert" being made when I stated within the article "it has been argued that taking a term from an already marginalised Lesbian culture is a form of misogynist appropriation that undervalues lesbian identities, history and women’s autonomy to self identify outside patriarchal structures"cannot be ignored. PersistantFemmeSociety (talk) 01:14, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

PersistantFemmeSociety, either version of the article has issues. I know this because I know the literature and because I am familiar with Wikipedia's rules/standards. I know, for example, that the literature on what "femme" is has broadened from being so limited to the lesbian identity. I did not object to the term being noted as one that is associated, or primarily associated, with lesbian identity, but rather to how the text was presented. Given the broadened aspect of the term, I questioned the way you limited the term for the WP:Lead sentence. I wondered if it would be better to use a broader lead sentence and then note that the term has been primarily used as a lesbian identity. The previous lead is better about covering the application of the term. It used poor sources, but I can easily use better sources to support what was there. And calling "femme" a "sexual identity" is limiting because the term is much broader than that for lesbians and non-lesbians. Not to mention that "femme" is not a standard sexual identity; categories like "heterosexual," "bisexual," "homosexual," "gay" and "lesbian" are. I am not interested in your claims about what authors you have contacted, or your claims about what femme people like you think about my revert. And your lesbophobia claims against me are ridiculous, as a number of editors can attest to. But I will state this: Per WP:Content fork, I will eventually merge this article with the Butch and femme article. Whether that is me simply merging it, since I seem to have your blessing to do so, or via me merging it per some form of WP:Dispute resolution, it will be merged. As noted above, the version that I reverted to is not "my version", but it certainly is less of a content fork than the version you've created. I am not interested in debating you on ideological leanings, or anything else, really. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:25, 6 April 2017 (UTC) Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:30, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

But while we're on the subject of ideological leanings, I suggest you keep WP:Advocacy in mind. Your username coupled with what you've stated above and how you've edited does not inspire the belief that you are editing neutrally. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:35, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Tumblr as a source

Please, let's not do that. Tumblr is not a good source for anything, there is no fact-checking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.27.129.113 (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

I agree. But regarding this, you also removed "bisexual" from the lead and the WP:Hidden note about it. I reverted that part since those sources support "bisexual" and the hidden note is specifically about those two sources. You don't have to like that "femme" also refers to bisexual women, but it does. And removing it against what WP:Reliable sources state will get this article WP:Semi-protected once again. This is not the place for lesbian vs. bisexual drama/politics. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Why is it not mentioned that "femme" is French for woman?

Sounds important to me. --77.131.58.118 (talk) 17:42, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

User:Flyer22 Reborn, why did you vandalize the article by removing relevant information? Quantum Knot (talk) 16:40, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Quantum Knot, Wiki's are not WP:Reliable sources. There is no need to bold the term again. See MOS:BOLD. There is no need for etymology material. And my reverts are not vandalism. Read WP:Vandalism. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:30, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

User:Flyer22 Reborn, you deliberately made an edit that obstructed the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia presenting the sum of all human knowledge. That's called vandalism. Since you've doubled down (removed information instead of fixing the formatting...) rest assured that I will report you. Quantum Knot (talk) 18:30, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

There you go, a reputable dictionary and no more bold. Since you didn't provide any policy about your opinion on etymology and I have seen plenty of articles with etymology information, I went ahead and included the information again. Quantum Knot (talk) 18:48, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

You misunderstand how this site is supposed to work. This includes you misunderstanding what this site considers vandalism even after I pointed you to the policy on it. We do not include etymology material for every entry just because it exists. Like WP:ONUS states, "While information must be verifiable to be included in an article, all verifiable information need not be included in an article." That you reported me at the WP:Edit warring noticeboard for reverting unsourced material and then reverting poorly sourced material was inappropriate. I'm not going to continue arguing valid points to you. I'm sure that the etymology material you added to the lead will eventually be removed, or at least moved out of the lead per WP:Lead. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:25, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Juiste informatie jongensnaam Femme (Fries)

Bronnen;

Prisma taal voornamen:

Femme M (mannelijk) Fries en Groninger naam. Tweestammige verkorting uit de kindertaal, met reductie van de r, van Frede-namen waarvan het tweede lid met m- begon, bijv. - -mar, dus Frede-mar (deze naam heeft ongeveer de betekenis 'beroemde beschermer'; zie -fred- en -mar-). Fem en Femme ook eenmaal vr. aangetroffen (gem. Hennaarderadeel 1946).

Zie ook; Femmy v Verkorte vorm van Eufemia of vr. vorm van Femme (mannelijk)

Bron; Het nieuwste voornamen boek Van Berkel.Deelstra-Boerhof.Horjus

Femme (mannelijk) Fries Betekent 'vermaard door vrede' sterk verkorte vorm van een samenstelling van Germaans Frithu 'vrede' en mâr 'vermaard'.

Zie ook; Femke v (Fries) Koosvorm van Femme (mannelijk) 'vermaard door vrede'. Natasja79 (talk) 08:27, 22 November 2019 (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): Takkygirl1153.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)