User:Nelso497/sandbox

Second-wave Feminism - Social Changes (or possibly criticism?) Tuesday, November 27th

According to Ella Howard, the feminist critique on media was to focus on empowering women, by showing a more equal and a more respectful view on women. According to Jessica Shipman Gunson, during the second-wave feminist movement, menstruation was looked at as a choice that a woman had. The movement focused on the empowerment of many things, including women having power over their own bodies. This stance was manipulated by contraceptive marketing by portraying their bodily rights as acts of empowerment. Gunson quotes an advertisement slogan, "Repunctuate you life with fewer periods." While the term "repunctuates" has dual meanings, both definitions imply a negative connotation on menstrual cycles.

According to Andrea Berry, in the 1970s and 1980s, personal hygiene advertising to women was the most popular. She explained how there were creative strategies in terms of advertising to women. In the 1970s, the female demographic was thought of as "comparative" which held the idea that women would be most likely to compare a product to another product in the same category. In the 1980s, the female demographic was thought of as "the user endorser" which held the idea that if a woman used their product, she would endorse it by giving her personal reference on her experience using it to other women. Berry went on to explain how the most common communication objective in personal hygiene marketing was that their products are there to give women the ability to take control of their lives when they were feeling most vulnerable. In the 1970s and 1980s, personal hygiene products were advertised in a very dull manner. The advertisements were made to be discrete because menstrual cycles were thought of as embarrassing. The marketing during second-wave feminism was manipulative due to the fact that it forced women to be embarrassed by their normal bodily functions. The discrete marketing of feminine products was a driver of the negative outlook on menstrual cycles because the messages it carried forced the public to abide by that social norm.

According to Ahmed and Janice Belkaoui, during second-wave feminism, female advertising was focused on the idea that women have limited purchasing power because they were not thought of as high-income earners, or the breadwinner. Marketing of small-ticket items such as things for the home and health care supplies were focused on women while the marketing of important buying decisions, such as cars or stocks and bonds, were marketed towards men. They concluded that until the arrival of feminist criticism directed at mass media, female marketing was completely misinterpreting the activities of their female demographic.

Marketing strategies to the female demographic throughout second-wave feminism shaped the negative connotation of menstrual cycles. The idea that menstrual cycles are optional backhandedly shamed women for their bodies by marketing the idea that their products are what give women their power. In a way, the advertisements strip women of their power by enforcing the idea that they will only have power if they use such products. The stereotypes of women as housewives and low-income earners drove females to be the main demographic of small-ticket items. While women were the focus of the advertisements for products for the home and personal hygiene products, the advertisements for anything other than products related to personal feminine hygiene were much more eye-catching. Both categories of advertisements shared the same female demographic but due to the shameful connotation with menstrual cycles, personal hygiene advertisements were made dull due to the completely unethical embarrassment tied to those products.

Woods, C. (2013). Repunctuated Feminism: Marketing Menstrual Suppression Through the Rhetoric of Choice. Women's Studies in Communication, 36(3), 267-287.

Howard, Ella. (2010). Pink Truck Ads: Second-Wave Feminism and Gendered Marketing. Journal of Women's History, 22(4), 137-161.

Berry, A. (2010). A Look into Ladies Home Journal: Tracking the trends and changes of strategy, themes and messaging in women's health and beauty products advertising from 1970 to 2009. (Electronic Thesis or Dissertation). Retrieved from https://etd.ohiolink.edu/

Belkaoui, A., & Belkaoui, J. M. (1976). A comparative analysis of the roles portrayed by women in print advertisements: 1958, 1970, 1972. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research (Pre-1986), 13(000002), 168. Retrieved from https://ezproxy.lib.uwm.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/208728766?accountid=15078

The changes that I have made is the addition of the second half which contains the information from my second and third source. I tied together more information on the female-oriented demographic of marketing during the second-wave to strengthen the impacts it had on the negative connotations realted to periods.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Peer Reviews

The draft that I am reviewing is Separatist Feminism. ·Does the draft draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view? → This draft isn't biased if that was the point of the question. They brought together important main points that strengthen the explanation of the issue though, which helped me understand where the issue is coming from.

·Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? → "It’s not about advocating for an island of lesbians cut off for eternity from half the human race (OK, I wouldn’t turn it down, but I’ll admit it’s not practical)" In their parenthesis, the statement was slightly person. It's definitely okay for this assignment but I would not publish that on Wikipedia.

·Does the draft make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? → It doesn't make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people but what they did write was, "It is up to us women what we want from males or what we don't want from them." I wasn't sure if I should have added this quote to the last question or this one but saying "it is up to us women" is not a claim that I would publish on Wikipedia.

·Does the draft focus too much on negative or positive information? → Considering the topic, I personally don't think they focused too heavily on positives or negatives. Everything was pretty factual and had good reasoning behind it. There are clearly more negatives than positives in separatist feminism but they did a good job on not holding a negative stance while writing their draft. ·Are there any unsourced statements in the draft, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? → They have all of their sources at the bottom but I would recommend putting in-text citations to show which parts came from where. −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−− Second Wave - Feminism Social - Changes Birth Control

According to Ella Howard, the feminist critique on media was to focus on empowering women, by showing a more equal and more respectful view on women. According to Jessica Shipman Gunson, during the second wave feminist movement, menstruation was looked at as a choice that a woman had. While the movement focused on the empowerment of many things, including women having power over their own bodies. This stance was manipulated by contraceptive marketing by portraying their bodily rights as acts of empowerment. Gunson quotes an advertisement slogan, "Repunctuate you life with fewer periods." While the term repunctuates has dual meanings, both definitions imply a negative connotation on menstrual cycles.

Woods, C. (2013). Repunctuated Feminism: Marketing Menstrual Suppression Through the Rhetoric of Choice. Women's Studies in Communication, 36(3), 267-287.

Howard, Ella. (2010). Pink Truck Ads: Second-Wave Feminism and Gendered Marketing. Journal of Women's History, 22(4), 137-161. −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−

https://search.alexanderstreet.com/view/work/bibliographic_entity%7Cbibliographic_details%7C2605124#page/1/mode/1/chapter/bibliographic_entity|bibliographic_details|2605124 Review of Radical Sisters: Second-Wave Feminism and Black Liberation in Washington, D.C. (Anne M. Valk, 2008) written by Leandra Zarnow, fl. 2008 (Alexandria, VA: Alexander Street, 2008), -1 page(s) guides.library.uwm.edu/womens

Article "A RAINBOW OF WOMEN": Diversity and Unity at the 1977 U.S. International Women's Year Conference Mattingly, Doreen ; Nare, Jessica Journal of Women's History, Summer 2014, Vol.26(2), pp.88-112,210-211

Second-Wave Feminism in the United States, ed. Stephanie Gilmore (Urbana... Year (IWY) was in many ways the zenith of U.S. second-wave feminism, producing Chicago/Turabian (16th edition) Harvard 1 MLA (7th edition) MLA (8th edition) Mattingly, D., & Nare, J. (2014). "A RAINBOW OF WOMEN": Diversity and Unity at the 1977 U.S. International Women's Year Conference. Journal of Women's History, 26(2), 88-112,210-211.

2nd assignment related to sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-wave_feminism Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Are some areas under- or over-developed? This article is relevant in terms of the topic of second-wave feminism. It is very detailed but I wouldn't necessarily say it's overdeveloped because the topic has a lot of information that goes into it. Is it written neutrally? For the most part yes, it is just giving information about the topic. Does each claim have a citation? Are the citations reliable? The claims do have citations and the citations at the bottom of the page are valid. What can you add? Consider posting some of your ideas to the article's Talk page. I am not informed enough on the topic to add any information that would benefit this page but I hope to be able to do so after we research as a class.

1st assignment related to sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? The article is very related to the topic due to the fact that the topic of marketing is broad. There wasn't anything that distracted me but the article is very dense with information which is why I feel like I might need to find a more specific topic as I continue my research. Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? The information needs serious editing, to say the least. There is a lot of outdated information and some useless stuff as well. If this article can get the editing it needs it would be great because it has a lot of great information! What else could be improved? Honestly, a lot! This just needs to be editied to take out useless information along. There is also a lot of outdated information and information that doesn't have sources backing it up. I know that it is due to the fact that this topic is widely searched and it is broad so people may have just thrown their two cents in without backing it up. Nevertheless, this can all get fixed.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? I mean yes the article is neutral because it is just information about what marketing is so there isn't any way to be biased. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? All of the related concepts that are subtopics of marketing are talked about so I feel as if the article explains everything very well the problem is only with the quality of some of the information.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Some of the links work, some don't have links but the few out of the 60 that I examined seemed to be okay. Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? The sources were from a wide variety of places. I recognized some of them, for example, the American Marketing Association and the textbook that I use for school. Those both seem appropriate, reliable and neutral.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There are many conversations about confusing marketing information with people just going back and forth about what is and isn't true. It's rated a class C and I don't know if it's a part of any projects.