User talk:KayWine

Welcome!
Hello, KayWine, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:10, 6 September 2019 (UTC)


 * After much struggle I have located your use page. Icedcoffee2001 (talk) 14:35, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Howdy

Article topics
Hi! I wanted to give you some input on your potential topics:


 * Pink tax: I think one of your classmates has this as a potential topic, however I think that this is something that could comfortably handle two students at the same time.
 * Paper abortion: This is a really great article topic since it definitely has a lot of expansion potential.
 * Gender role: This article is pretty lengthy and looks to be relatively comprehensive, so it's going to be more difficult to find content to add. Now this doesn't mean that it'll be impossible to add anything, just that it may end up being a collection of smaller edits throughout the article as opposed to entire paragraphs or a new section.
 * Gender equality: This is lengthier and while it does have the potential for expansion, it looks like one of the biggest concerns is that it focuses more on gender inequalities with women and needs to be expanded on the topics of gender inequality for men and transgender persons. I think that someone in your class may have this as a potential topic, but I'm not entirely sure.

I hope this all helps! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:47, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

MRM
Hi, I saw that your edits to the article were removed by, who expressed concern that the language was changed in too many ways and that changes of this nature should be discussed on the article's talk page first. This is discussed here. Here's what they wrote:


 * I have just reverted your edit. I think that many aspects of it were problematic.  Let's take it line by line:


 * "Since the decision that followed Roe vs. Wade, which granted women the right to abortion, feminists have applauded the courts for instituting reproductive rights for women within the legal system"


 * I would argue that rights aren't granted or instituted, but recognized. It's also a POV selective statement.  I'm a feminist, and I also applaud the US courts system for Griswold vs. Connecticut, which was not a female-oriented repro rights case.


 * "Men's rights advocates, however, felt that this court case was an inadequate attempt at extending equal rights to all people, regardless of sex."


 * You'll find that people, regardless of sex, have the right to pursue an abortion if they're pregnant. Do I need a citation?


 * "Advocates for men's rights introduced the theoretical concept of elective abandonment in response to what they believed was an unequal division of reproductive rights created by the outcome of Roe vs. Wade."


 * This is fair, but I think it needs a citation quite badly. Incidentally, I think the paper abortion article should be renamed elective abandonment.  I should try to make that happen.


 * Due to its controversy among feminists, this subject hasn’t gained much presence in the justice system.


 * This is a statement without basis in fact. It hasn't gained presence in the justice system because it has no basis in existing law.  It also hasn't gained much presence in any legislature, but do you really think that "controversy among feminists" is enough to keep something from becoming law?  Also, what's "much presence"?  Does it have any presence?


 * Currently, if the mother decides she wants to abort or keep their child


 * I think you mean "if the pregnant person decides they want to continue their pregnancy or have an abortion." Children aren't aborted, pregnancies are.

Their points are definitely valid and should be taken into account. Also, since I can't verify the sourcing I do want to make sure that you're only summarizing the source material as opposed to drawing ties between the topic of elective abortion and the MRM, as the latter would be considered original research. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 01:47, 8 November 2019 (UTC)