Talk:Emo killings in Iraq

Encyclopedic
Hello, the content seems okay to me (more than that - well referenced), but the structure of the text is a little too journalistic. Encyclopedistically, there should be first a short introduction / definition, then blocks like "History" and "Scope" and "Explanations" or something like that. But I am more familiar with German Wikipedia indeed. :-) Ziko (talk) 18:20, 12 March 2012 (UTC)


 * It's true, Ziko! I was a journalist for 15-ish years; it's hard for me to break out of that style. I would welcome help here if somebody wants to make this more like an encyclopedia article in style and tone. But if nobody does it, I will try to come back and do it myself, maybe next weekend :-) Thanks Sue Gardner (talk) 01:46, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Include in other articles
Please consider including a summary linking here in Human rights in post-invasion Iraq, Politics of Iraq, and Minority politics in Iraq et seq. (While you are at it, those sections seem to have very little about the status of women in post-invasion Iraq, which is reportedly extremely poor by both relative and absolute measures.) 70.58.13.84 (talk) 00:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

WRONG
Those who were killed in Iraq, aren't Emos those were just a bunch of Gay people, which were called Emo in a wrong situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.18.152.148 (talk) 14:29, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Violence against men or just homophobic violence?
This one has been controversial in its inclusion, as it does refer to events that happened explicitly to gay men, but it isn't for their gender that they were killed, but for their sexuality. There is currently no Wikipedia definition for 'Violence against men', but the 'Violence against women' article states "VAW... is gender-based, meaning that the acts of violence committed against women expressly because they are women, or as a result of patriarchal gender constructs." Changing 'women' for 'men in this paragraph, does the article qualify for inclusion? These men weren't killed "expressly because they are men", but there is an argument that patriarchal gender constructs caused this homophobic violence, as men are pressured to act a certain way within sexist societies. I would go further to say that, with the reference to their dress as emo, they were persecuted for dressing femininely, which would reinforce the patriarchal argument further. The question is, does the article qualify for inclusion in 'Violence against men', or is the category 'Homophobic violence' enough? --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 18:30, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm really not sure why there is debate on this. Only men were targeted, and they were targeted because they were behaving and dressing in ways outside of the male norm in Iraq. Thus, they were targeted because of their gender, because they violated gender norms, and because of a form of homophobia. I'm just quite confused why you think this isn't violence against men. Lesbians weren't targeted.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 23:20, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Further, this article from a women's rights NGO has a whole section on what they call gender-based violence against men. I quote: "Crimes committed as part of the Islamist campaign of "sexual cleansing" are a form of gender–based torture: they are gender–based because they seek to enforce prescribed social roles for men and women; and they constitute torture because state authorities have acquiesced to and participated in the violence." It's quite possible that many of the Emos targeted in Iraq weren't gay at all, but just didn't fulfill the current societal role expected of men. Violence against men, including sexual violence - in wartime (besides the obvious violence of combat) is a major issue, and more and more sources are covering this.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 02:41, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * LGBT tags should be removed imo. Yes homosexuals are being targeted and persecuted in Iraq, but these incidents had nothing to do with homosexuality, the attacks were aimed at individuals, usually teenager, who behaved and dressed in a manner perceived as nonconformist by local standards.--  K a t h o v o  talk 12:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Disagree that LGBT tags should be removed. Article regularly mentions that one of the reasons behind the assaults were the perception that they may be homosexuality and it was largely reported and written on as such. Unless you have some new research from Iraq I think we should leave it as it is --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 00:37, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Also I'm convinced for the articles inclusion in Violence against men, this does seem to be just as much tied to the perceived gender roles men have to live under as to their sexuality, and should most likely stay in the Violence against men category --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 00:33, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * seems like we have consensus at least between us. I agree the LGBT violence cats should remain, this was clearly caught up in that and RS agree.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 01:33, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think this is probably consensus enough to leave both categories in --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 01:42, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Emo killings in Iraq
Cyberbot II has detected links on Emo killings in Iraq which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://gayrights.change.org/blog/view/us_finally_condemns_anti-lgbt_violence_in_iraq
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:55, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Emo killings in Iraq
Cyberbot II has detected links on Emo killings in Iraq which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://gayrights.change.org/blog/view/us_finally_condemns_anti-lgbt_violence_in_iraq
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:52, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Unrelated Image?
In the background section of the article there is an image in the sidebar that appears to be a screenshot of the video game Quake III. The image is accompanied by the caption "The game that emos probably played." To my knowledge there is no mention of Quake III or video games at all in the article, is this image supposed to be there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.135.103.225 (talk) 09:37, 18 May 2018 (UTC)