Talk:Femicides in Ciudad Juárez/Archive 1

Archive 1

Male homicides

Statistically there are 900% as many male homicides in this terrible area. Why is no mention made?

There is a section on it already: "In Relation with Male Homicides"

Keeponthesunnyside (talk) 18:29, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

The real question is: "Why is there an article about female homicides at all?" If they are being murdered at much much lower rates than men, it's really not notable. The implication seems to be that everyone expects men to be murdered in Mexico, and that this is acceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.123.216.45 (talk) 15:22, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Why is there an article about the Bermuda Triangle when statistically it's no more dangerous than any other stretch of ocean? Because people think the phenomenon is real. But this article in its current form doesn't make that plain. Initially it was widely accepted that women were being massacred. However, since then more reasoned analysis has shown this to be false. It was pointed out that the male homicide rate is much higher. But books, songs, movies, TV shows have all ignored this.--Jack Upland (talk) 18:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Simple question

The meat of this article is missing. It doesn't even to attempt answer a basic question 'why are/have these women being murdered and who is orchestrating it'? That's what I came to find out, not to read an exhaustive list of of celebrity responses which becomes tedious and doesn't address the main question. A very poor article; I'm amazed anyone could nominate it to be a featured article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.9.196.166 (talk) 02:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Umm are you kidding? Wikipedia isn't a group investigative journalists, the facts are what speak here, not speculation. At the same time I'll agree that the "Responses" section is horribly over-done and unmanaged, that's why I just tagged it for cleanup. Pfoot (talk) 15:39, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm in agreement that this article is seriously lacking in substance. Much has been written about the contributing factors to the murders of women in Juarez, such as the passage of NAFTA and the migration of poor, rural women to work in the maquiladoras at the border; the marginalization of poor women in Mexico, and the subsequent poor police response to their deaths in Juarez; the severity of domestic violence in the lives of many women in Mexico (as all over the world). That said, who's going to go ahead and do a really good edit on the article? I can try, but I'm brand new to Wikipedia...we'll see. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chimaria (talk • contribs) 23:16, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree also. Is this all the information that can be found? If so, then Mexican journalists really have their work cut out - the lack of pertinent details here is astonishing. What are the comparable figures for other cities of this size? What was the result of investigations that were concluded? What exactly were the "body clusters" described in the article? We have many bullet-point-style reactions but virtually no details on the murders and their circumstances. Most disturbing is the number "hundreds" - is this 100-200? 800-900? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.229.92.40 (talk) 06:48, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

The problem is, as discussed below, this article and a lot of its sources conflate a particular set of murders with homicides of women in general.--Jack Upland (talk) 10:41, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

old comments

I want to dedicate this page to the 360 women and whoever other victim may be found in the future, the women of Juarez.

May your souls rest in peace with God in Heaven

Antonio Sad and Outraged Martin

Roberto Bolano/2666?

Is it worth noting that these murders form the basis of the crimes described in Roberto Bolano's 2666? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.67.46 (talk) 00:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Merge suggestion

Looks like Juarez murders is attempting, with less success, to do what this page is doing. I suggest we merge it into here, or delete the other page entirely. Dkostic 05:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

support merge. Chris 01:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

long lists

Zaguiar, as a general practice, we don't include long lists of people and such in articles, such as those you have added. Such material is best referred to as external resources. Our first and foremost task to put together a solid, succint, and neutral overview of a given topic, although this can be a challenge with current events. -- Viajero | Talk 12:31, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Page moved

I moved this page. --ThomasK 08:21, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Graphic Picture

I removed the picture - if anyone wants to put it behind a warning of its graphic nature, that'd be more appropriate. 70.34.57.65 02:24, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - was just logging in to try to do that. It's a trigger and needs a warning if there at all.Schauspiele 02:29, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I disagree I think the picture should be posted. See the discussion on Prophet Muhammad and his picture for a long discussion on what to do with controversial pictures. 68.6.62.43 (talk) 05:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Factually inaccurate

This article is famously inaccurate. There have *not* been hundreds of dead women found in the desert around Ciudad Juarez. This is what amounts to a journalistic urban legend, repeated by one journalist after another until it takes on the aura of truth.

Two numbers have been conflated here: (1) the number of women raped and murdered and left in the desert, and (2) the total number of women murdered in Ciudad Juarez and its surroundings during the same period of time, under any circumstances.

Ciudad Juarez is a huge city with a population in the millions. It is hardly surprising that 350 to 400 women have been murdered there in the last 10 to 15 years. But the vast majority of those murders have nothing to do with gangs of torture-rapists. They are everyday murders, and only a fraction of them are unsolved.

The actual number of dead women found in the desert is at least ten times smaller than the figure given.

Michael Snyder

Also, while not an inaccuracy, the article inappropriately states that the Mexican Federal government dropped the case. This is inflammatory and inaccurate in terms of the spirit of good reporting. The Mexican government never recommmended that investigations into the murders be abandoned. They merely said that since no federal laws were being violated, the onus of investigating the murders falls within the purview of local and state authorities (as stated in the sited article).

---

Re-write it with appropriate references if it's inaccurate. Pfoot (talk) 15:39, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

The conflation has continued, but the desert murders have almost disappeared from the article. See my comment below.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Linguistic Note

This is begging to be re-written. In the first paragraph it says: "...in the northern Mexican city of Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, a border city..." Ciudad means city. So this is how it reads: "in the northern Mexican city of city of Juárez, Chihuahua, a border city..." a little redundant, don't you think?

It should say: ... the violent death of hundreds of women in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, a Northern Mexico border city across the Rio Grande from the US city of El Paso, Texas. Most of the cases remain unsolved [1].

The official name of the city is Ciudad Juarez, it is not redundant, "Ciudad" is part of the name of the town. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.114.35.177 (talk) 06:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Anonymous person who said 'cuidad' is part of the name of Juarez is wrong. Cuidad MEANS city, and no one calls Juarez "Cuidad Juarez" except in American speakers, who most often have no idea what Mexican words even mean. And yes, I do mean "Mexican" because it is not Spain, and except perhaps in Mexico City, most people do not speak Castilian Spanish. They are Mexican people and they speak Mexcian. And yes, this page needs a LOT of work. Specifically, I would start with the first paragraph and change the "hundreds" and add, "unofficially, 1000's of women ..."

Help... adding info

I am writing a paper on International influence on this issue. Does anyone have more info about what organizations have reviewed this case? What years? Adding some of this to the page would be very useful, in maybe a reaction section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.71.242.37 (talk contribs) 19:33, 28 November 2006

Murder image

That was not vandalism. The warning was for the squeemish and someone {cough...foxsportsradio...cough) already uploaded the same image, yet I get a last warning alert. Dang, there needs to be consistensy, but I feel bias in this, because I, the Jewish woman, gets a last warning alert, while FoxSportsRadio, the Anglican man, just gets his image deleted. Dang, that just feels wrong. So, just to let you know, either it's vandalism both times, by a Jewish woman and an Anglican man, or it's not vandalism either way. Catherine Woods 02:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Link Removed

I removed the link to the Australian website Women of Juarez. It is a blog about "Women style, info and shopping". SHAME ON THE OWNER OF THE BLOG! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.43.132.72 (talk) 23:39, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Other Perspectives

This article would be strengthened by mentioning other perspectives. Charles Bowden on C-SPAN (about 10:40 in the video) commented that murders of women make up about 10% of total murders in Juarez, which, while large in absolute terms, is a small fraction of the human rights catastrophe unfolding there. This disputes the idea that women are being systematically targeted, as this article implies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nburns1980 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

1. Wah.
2. No, that's a drug war.
3. This is a specific phenomenon that does not exist in other areas with similarly high death rates. If you want to write an article on the self-imagined "human rights catastrophe unfolding there", that's a separate article.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 03:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Did you watch the portion of the video that I linked to? Bowden claims to have been responsible for starting the entire interest in femicides in Juarez, and his name is not even mentioned in the article. So, you don't have to take from it what I did, but I think the C-SPAN video is highly relevant to this subject, so I urge somebody to at least think about referencing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nburns1980 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Added Cleanup Tag

The "Responses" section is a huge mishmash of unrelated stories; if we want these all in the article they should at least be organized better. Pfoot (talk) 15:39, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed Revision and Expansion

Hello all! I have read through all of your comments and I am planning to revise this article so that it provides a more thorough and well-rounded analysis of the issue. As many of you mentioned, I agree the page is inadequate. I intend to revise the page using scholarly resources as evidence and a neutral point of view. In addition, I hope to provide a comprehensive description of this complicated, yet important issue. Some of the issues I would like to add to the page are: the concept of femicide and feminicide, the available statistics from 1993-2011, police and governmental response, suspects, activism, impact of NAFTA, a description of the maquila industry, the role of organized crime and drug trafficking, potential solutions, and policy implications. As part of my revision, I would like to remove the section on reactions. The current section is far to lengthy and not beneficial. I think the section I will add on activism will cover the aspect of reaction in a more productive manner. I hope that these revisions will provide the international Wikipedia community with a better understanding of the issues surrounding violence against women along the border.

I will be revising the page over the next few weeks. I wanted to open up the discussion to the revisions I am planning to make. I welcome any feedback or input that might help strengthen the article! Cnovoa17 (talk) 05:18, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

322: Peer Review

Great job on the article! I just have a few comments regarding the article (you can decide to not take it of course). I think that the definitions (paragraphs), 'Femicide' and 'Feminicide,' should go before 'Statistics.' Definitions always give a good backbone to concrete knowledge. More links throughout the article would be nice, I found myself wanting to know the exact definitions of various terms/words used in the article. There are a significant number of quotes in the article. Do you think that you could reword them in your own words? Maybe put convictions as a subtopic to "Police and governmental response"? I still would have liked to have read an example or two when you wrote about the certain 'Mexican legislation" or organizations fighting against female homicides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allyssa.abacan (talk • contribs) 14:23, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Again, great article! Allyssa.abacan (talk) 15:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback!I agree, beginning with the definitions would help the flow of the article. As far as the quotes, I chose to use them if I was asserting facts or statistics that were not my own words and could be considered controversial. The killings of females in Juarez is a controversial topic so I wanted to be extremely careful with how I presented the material. I will try to paraphrase some of the quotes where possible. I also agree with moving convictions as a subsection of "Police and governmental response." I will look into adding some examples of specific organizations as well. Thank you again for your feedback!Cnovoa17 (talk) 00:46, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review

Great lead and great job linking! The lead is short and to-the-point, which makes it very appealing. I think it would be helpful to the traffic on this site if you found a closely-related main article that you could link as the main article in the beginning. This would help your article circulate better.

In your second subsection, add a coma after "February 2005". Though I see the relevance of murders committed in Chihuahua, you might consider making their connection more explicit, and find a way to subtlety defend the fact that you are citing statistics for a different city than the one your article is focused on. Have you considered entitling the page "Female homicides in Mexico"?

I still think it is important that you explain the explicit difference between femicide and feminicide, beginning first with explicitly stating their definition in the first sentence. If it is necessary for some lead-up to occur before you give a short definition, make sure that you make a clear definition, distinct from the other one, easily accessible to your readers, either in the beginning, end, or a clearly marked part of your subsection. I still do not really understand the difference. I do recognize some differences and the primary framework difference between the two of them, but any impatient readers will likely give up. The subsection is very well-done, however, it would help to add in that simplified addition.

Your motives section is great, and explains many of the lingering questions throughout the article.

"Contributing factors" turned out to actually pull together all the different ideas very well. It would be nice if there was a more logical progression between each factor, however, it is clear that that cannot be done. You did well tying together what you have.

I still think that it makes more sense for Maquiladoras to come before NAFTA because I think it is necessary to explain what a maquiladoras factory is before you talk about NAFTA and its impact on that industry. However, of course you know what is best!! :)

I think you could add this article to the Mexico category, the Mexico portal, and the feminism category.

Great article! Lbockhorn (talk) 03:44, 8 April 2012 (UTC)lbockhorn

Thank you so much for your feedback! Linking my article to a main article is a great idea! Perhaps I'll try linking to the "Ciudad Juarez" main page. Thank you for catching that typo. I included a few stats from Chihuahua to show that it is a regional problem but I also included the specific stats from Ciudad Juarez along with that so I hope that clears the confusion. I will look in to making the distinction between femicide and feminicide more clear. Basically, femicide refers to the murder of women and girls and the impunity that surrounds them, while feminicide refers to the murder of women and girls but then also includes the aspect of state inaction which is important to help researchers study the murder of females in places like Ciudad Juarez where there has been perceived state inaction in response to the murders of females. I agree with the order of Maquiladora and NAFTA sections. Thank you again for all of your valuable input! Cnovoa17 (talk) 01:09, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I really enjoyed reading your article. I felt that you have a lot of informative information that allows for a quick read for readers to quickly become educated on the topic. I just have a couple of thoughts -- first, in the femicide section, don't wait so long to define the term. the other sentences you have in between can be put after the definition. I also feel that you repeat things several times throughout. I think that I have this perception because of similar sentence structure and language, instead of actually seeing the same thought over and over. I would try to diversify some of your sentences more. Lastly, I think your article is very well organized, the only confusing parts are the motives and contributing factors sections. Both are important but I feel that they are so similar that different titles may not be needed. Or maybe, just move contributing factors to be underneath motives instead of starting a new section at the same level. Amacune (talk) 15:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

About the guilty ones

You say at the start of the article that most of the homicides have found no solution, but in the rest of the article your "fury" is directed against the male population of ciudad juarez. So who told you the guilty are that people are you in direct contact with god? the new name of wikipedia will be the godly enciclopedia. Anyway if logic has any reason why should a man kill their woman? To desappear from the earth in the next 50 years by having no sons? I'm not sherlock holmes but this is not a good reason to kill 700 people — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.6.152.217 (talk) 21:45, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Rewrite Needed

• As discussed under "Factually inaccurate" above, this article conflates a particular set of murders (presumed serial killings, with the bodies dumped in the desert etc) with female homicide in general. Due to subsequent editing, the details of that set of murders have largely been removed, though traces of specific references remain (such as the description of victims - but I guess most Mexicans do have black hair). As it stands, the article implies that after hundreds of homicides there have been only a few convictions.
• As statistical analysis has shown, the rate of female homicide compared the total is not high in this city (10%). It was homicide in general (90% men) that was high. According, to the Ciudad Juarez article, it had the highest homicide rate in the world.
• While this topic is notable, it is the local and international reaction (including books and films) that makes it notable. The article is upside down. This information about the reaction should be at the top of article.
• The article should have details of the specific murders that sparked outrage, rather than implying it was female homicide in general.
• We do not need long definitions of femicide/feminicide. This can be done on in the article femicide.
• Much of the article is sourced from activists pushing the "femicide" analysis. It is unbalanced.
• The "contributing factors" are not very relevant as they ignore the reality of the statistics.
• This is a feminist equivalent of the Bermuda Triangle.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:00, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Move request Suggestion

I would like to request to moved this page to Femicides in Ciudad Juárez. Eric S.V. (talk) 17:24, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Why?--Jack Upland (talk) 03:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Archive 1