Talk:Virginity test

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

2007-11-6 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)
Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.
Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 20:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)hi that penis only inside then virginity will go ............. but only inset for 3 time not more then that but the sprem did not go inside .......... if we go for test what result will come answer me[reply]

NPOV

This article reads as an essay for the abolishing of virginity tests. Although the controversy surrounding these inspections should be noted, the article needs to, in my opinion, be completely rewritten. I am not knowledgeable in this area, but if anyone is, please help out. —W. Flake (talk) 19:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. In fact, it may very well be an essay for the abolishing of virginity tests. I'm in the same position as you regarding a rewrite, though. –anamexis ^talk/_contribs 12:59, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've started removing the absolutely horrendous stuff, like the complete cultural intolerance (fine, it can be called a barbaric practice, but the article amounts to saying "Africans do this because they're stupid and backwards". This is not in any measure acceptable for wikipedia). This is an absolutely horrendous attempt at an NPoV article, and blatantly racist.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 19:41, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, it looks like Porter28 is the one who stuck the essay in. I've tried to recover some of the info from before they did it, but it was really only one source. However, that source is a news article, and can be used to make the article useful.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 19:44, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

I'm going to be working on a complete rewrite over the next couple of days, since it seems like there's a consensus that the article needs it. I'm hopeful that once this is properly formatted and not so POV, it will have the potential to be a really good article. It's certainly an interesting subject. I'd appreciate any comments or suggestions or other help. AnEmptyCageGirl (talk) 21:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Text

I deleted the following paragraphs because I couldn't find a way to fit them into the article. If you can, please add them back in. I'm saving them here for future reference.

One piece of advice given to mothers is to start checking their daughters early. “[around the age of two or three]..Just as you wash her body and comb her hair, you can check if she’s still ‘clean’ down there.”^[1] Public testing begins about age five and continues until marriage. In performing a virginity test, not all ‘testers’ feel the truth lies in hymen. They will judge a girl’s external genitalia, the flatness of her stomach, and the tautness of the muscles in her thighs.^[1] Others will look for a white dot somewhere inside the vagina or a white lacy veil (the hymen). AnEmptyCageGirl (talk) 23:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Men are able to get a certificate that says they have been tested and are free of infection, but these can be falsified.^[1]

AnEmptyCageGirl (talk) 00:26, 5 March 2

References

^ ^a ^b ^c Cite error: The named reference LeClerc-Madlala was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Most women have hymens?

I deleted the section that said most women have hymens because a New York Times article is not a sufficient, nor scientific, source. Drumpler (talk) 21:29, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your deletion, which removed 3 sources. The NYT article was is credited to an author with an MD; why do you believe it is unreliable? VQuakr (talk) 03:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article in question doesn't deal directly with what the Wikipedia article says it does. Hymens are only covered briefly in a very short text on sexual abuse. It seems like the article is being used in a very self-serving manner. Perhaps it would be more appropriate to consult something that summarizes a study on the matter? Drumpler (talk) 00:06, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I just deleted the one fragment and revised the sentence. The article claims it was a study, but it was an informal article written about abuse. Likewise, a sample size where all girls (even a large amount of girls) have hymens doesn't mean there can't be girls without hymens. You just have to present one specimen without a hymen for the claim to be falsified. Was that ever considered when this section was written the way it was? Drumpler (talk) 00:14, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most women do have hymens but that doesn't mean they could pass this kind of "virginity test". Women who've been sexually active for decades all still "have hymens"; that doesn't mean anything. The hymen doesn't ever disappear; it thins out, stretches, and develops holes over time. Whether newborns might be born without a hymen misses the point pretty spectacularly. Most of those hymen-having newborns will grow up and not tear their hymen their first time, because it will already be thin and stretched enough to accommodate a penis. Aside from cases of an imperforate hymen, those that do tear it will be doing it unnecessarily. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.172.156.69 (talk • contribs)

"two finger test" banned in India

According to the current version, the test was banned on Jan. 29 2012. The report of [Rights Watch] does not read as if this test was banned. --Fatmike182 (talk) 11:40, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to this news story [1] HRW has called for it to be banned.--Auric 20:05, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Royal affirmation

The testing for virginity amongst Zulus has been revived as a measure to reduce the spread of AIDS. Virginity for girls has also always been a cultural norm, or at least aim. This is not a matter of "Royal affirmation" at all!Royalcourtier (talk) 00:43, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's got to be one of the most ineffective ways to reduce the spread of HIV. The law quite clearly comes from the royalty rather than any public health specialist so I think it is fine to leave it as "royal affirmation". -- haminoon (talk) 04:06, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Virginity test. 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/20070302031417/http://www.newsfromafrica.org/newsfromafrica/articles/art_3746.html to http://www.newsfromafrica.org/newsfromafrica/articles/art_3746.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: 5 June 2024).

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) 05:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bias / unsubstantiated claims?

Some of the language in this text, while not necessarily factually incorrect seems to imply outrage by the author and, in some instances, makes unsubstantiated claims, especially in the subsection "Example of violence against women". Language like "In societies around the world, especially patriarchal ones" (which societies? when is a society deemed patriarchal?) and "These attitudes create a framework for men to assume control over female sexual behaviors, and has led to women's punishment, and even death" (which framework? what sort of control? what sort of sexual behaviors? citation?) seem also to go beyond the scope of the article to make more general comments about patriarchal systems and the injustices they imply. There are more examples of this throughout this article which I can't all cite here but I hope you get the point. I generally agree with these claims but the article seems very clearly written from a non-neutral point of view and seems to be needing an overhaul. Chris-schannes (talk) 12:18, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would add to that what does In Iran, testing is performed for both formal and informal reasons, and examiners view such testing with ambiguity about the accuracy and certainty of the diagnosis and uncertainty about ethics and reproductive rights. even mean? The source just seems to me to be feminist agenda pushing. --2001:BB6:7A68:1C58:B03B:D60E:B7F4:D898 (talk) 11:44, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UK Royals Virginity Test

I think Diana was tested for virginity before she was allowed to marry Prince Charles. I wonder if it is a regular feature. In any case it should be mentioned somewhere. Surjit Singh (talk) 03:08, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[LeClerc-Madlala-1] Cite error: The named reference LeClerc-Madlala was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[1]