Talk:Violence against women

Title of Sexual and gender-based violence in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel
Please see the section "Gender-based signifier" at Talk:Sexual and gender-based violence in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. There is some discussion on the aptness of the name, but I feel that most editors there have knowledge of and interest in Israel/Palestine and less so about sexual and gender-based violence, so editors with expertise in this area may be able to make a useful contribution to discussion. BobFromBrockley (talk) 08:26, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 June 2024
doemstic = domestic 2603:8000:D300:3650:7DF4:F5F4:69E5:4CB6 (talk) 03:21, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ —C.Fred (talk) 03:23, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Editorializing, second wave feminism, questionable sources
I've never questioned a page before, so bear with me.

The inclusion of Brownmiller surprised me. She certainly does not pass the sniff test on neutrality or verifiability (as many psychologists, psychiatrists, and other feminists of her era point out).

Language like:

"Since immemorial times, women, due to their lesser physical strength, and other limitations inherent to them, such as menstruation, pregnancy and breastfeeding, have found themselves subjugated to the other half, the male, of humanity"

Seems blatantly un-neutral and unverifiable.

"Such violence may arise from a sense of entitlement, superiority, misogyny or similar attitudes in the perpetrator or his violent nature, especially against women."

This sort of thing belongs in pages about feminist theory of sexual assault. This isn't verifiable -- the cited authors aren't psychologists, and aren't writing based on science. This branch of theory is dubious from a psychiatric perspective. The introduction of this article reads vaguely like second wave soapboxing. In short, that source is reliable only insofar as it relates to feminist theory; it's not an authoritative treatment of sexual violence against women, and makes historical and psychological claims of dubious truthiness (and, ultimately, of dubious verifiability). Feminists have debated the validity of that work for a long time, but nobody contends it to be neutral. Thejosephfiles (talk) 06:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)