Talk:Kyriarchy/Archives/2015

No criticism section?

Can somebody with some familiarity/expertise on this topic please create a criticism section? It seems unlikely that nobody has criticized this. Guy Macon (talk) 11:51, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Here is a typical criticism: http://rancom.wordpress.com/2010/10/01/why-no-one-should-use-that-word-kyriarchy-instead-of-patriarchy/ Alas, it's a blog and thus not acceptable as a reliable source on Wikipedia, but I cannot believe that such a controversial topic has no criticism from reliable sources. I would rather have the criticism section be written by someone with some familiarity/expertise on this topic, so I am tagging the article with Template:POV-check. -Guy Macon (talk) 21:48, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Seems to me that perhaps you have an agenda to push and simply want others to do the legwork for you 50.51.141.117 (talk) 06:17, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

not a constructive response. 149.169.131.238 (talk) 22:18, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Read WP:AGF. — BozoTheScary (talk) 06:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Would any one have contention with expanding this section? Katie3byea (talk) 22:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

If you add a criticism section that is compliant with Wikipedia's policies (especially those that deal with having to use reliable sources) and WP:UNDUE, I'm sure no one would have a problem with it. Feel free to drop me a note on my talk page if you need a hand with anything. Kevin (kgorman-ucb) (talk) 23:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

There seems to be some disagreement about what it truly means, or at least about the limits of what it can mean. [1][2] So, authoritative criticisms may be more about "expropriation" of the concept than of the original coiner's intent. — BozoTheScary (talk) 06:22, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

There does seem to be disagreement...it would be helpful if we could get reliable sources that discussed the differences, since neither of those sources seem to meet the requirements. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:37, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Can anyone explain what there is to criticize? Linking to reddit for criticism suggesting radical feminist's opinions on this term should hold any relevancy is ludicrous. This term is intersectional and an evolution of feminist theology — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.75.63 (talk) 15:47, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Is this reliable, maybe not because it is opinion? http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/sep/10/kyriarchy-and-patriarchy. It hints at a possible criticism: "Kyriarchy has the potential to settle the age-old argument about "privileged" feminism once and for all. Perhaps that's why it's so frightening to those that balk at the term, and will dismiss this as yet another example of woman-eating-woman. ". Problem with this is it doesn't say "who" balks at the term. Popish Plot (talk) 19:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed Changes

I primarily want to focus on changes to the usage section. In particular, I want to expand on kyriarchy's relationship with patriarchy, the differences especially. I also want to further describe the structure of Kyriarchy, specifically how Florenza describes it as having a pyramid structure in her book Political Theology. Other changes include citation clean up, a correction of what hierarchy is in relationship to kyriarchy and other minor corrections. Ingen124 (talk) 11:09, 22 October 2015 (UTC)