Talk:Katherine Mayo

Untitled
I removed the Satanic Verses Comparison. It would fall in the NOT EVEN WRONG CATEGORY. Did any one call for the murder of Mayo? Was her book banned? Was any one associated with translation of the book killed?

This kind of stuff writing is pusillanimous. -SannuKi 65.96.165.73 (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Article is full of POV
This article is not about Katherine Mayo, it's a one-sided attack on a book that she wrote, without any effort at balance or neutral point of view, or even any proper critique of the book. There is practically nothing about her personal or professional life in here. Hohenloh + 21:23, 25 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I think she's best known for the "Mother India" book, which was a succès de scandale on its first publication, and still somewhat contentious between feminists and Indian nationalists in recent times. It's always good to legitimately expand an article, but I don't think it's necessarily bad if a short article is focused on what the subject is best known for... AnonMoos (talk) 15:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * We'll have to agree to disagree there. I'm not defending anything she wrote, I'm just saying that if there is to be an article about a person then it should follow the usual Wikipedia conventions that 99.999% of decent biographical articles do, and not be a one-sided rubbishing of something she did over a couple of years in a country far from home. This kind of thing denigrates Wikipedia. Over the past couple of days I've read a good bit of this infamous book and a number of reviews on it and re-read a good deal of Indian history (and I travelled around a fair bit of India in my salad days). The book is very thought provoking - and the worst bits are mind-bogglingly horrifying and true. As you know yourself, NPOV and all that - just calling it a heap of sh1t doesn't cut the mustard. Hohenloh + 04:52, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Her vicious, racist screed is just that, a vicious, racist screed. Numerous academics and scholars have exposed it as a vicious, racist, screed, and anyone who whitewashes her vicious, racist screed is just as guilty of it as she was.Handyunits (talk) 14:17, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, its not just one of her books that's so viciously racist, it's also her support for the racist Chinese Exclusion Act, as well as her gleeful praise of bloodthirsty genocides in the Phillippines, that lead the intelligent community to accuse her of racism.Handyunits (talk) 15:41, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

This article is terribly slanted, perverse really. The book is a brilliant expose of the abuse and dehumanization of women by mind-forged manacles of traditional religious neuroses and hallucinations. Sadly, it is all too relevant today. The book is written from an objective point of view, based on ideals of modern science, medicine and human rights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.23.98.21 (talk) 21:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Please contribute constructively to editing the article and not remove properly descriptive material without consensus. Also, wikipedia is not a forum to spread your racist views, but a collaborative edffort to build a worthwhile encyclopedia, so please keep that in mind.Handyunits (talk) 05:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Insane writing
Katharine Mayo is not a notorious writer. Her book is a very famous book.

Apart from that, it is quite curious that the Wikipedia page on her book has been deleted. What is happening on Wikipedia India pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.201.253.190 (talk) 07:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC)