Difference between revisions of "Talk:Gender differences"
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
I will remove the tautology, and then we can discuss what to do about the rest. [[User:CogitoErgoSum|CogitoErgoSum]] 10:23, 4 August 2008 (EDT) | I will remove the tautology, and then we can discuss what to do about the rest. [[User:CogitoErgoSum|CogitoErgoSum]] 10:23, 4 August 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | =="The problem with"...= | ||
| + | |||
| + | This portion of the article: | ||
| + | |||
| + | <blockquote>The problem with the feminist view (or agenda) is that it assumes the truth of its own dogma. It simply asserts that gender differences are a [[social construct]], but without supplying any proof of this. Worse, they refuse to consider any evidence in favor of innate differences.</blockquote> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ...reads flatly like an essay. Furthermore, I can't see any way it can be rewritten to be encyclopedic. Unless reasonable defense is given, I will be removing it. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 12:23, 4 August 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 16:23, August 4, 2008
Social engineering ... Radical Feminists? Aren't all feminists radical? They all question God's order. RogerDailey 11:29, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
This page is a total violation of Conservapedia Commandment 5, "No personal opinion."
Besides, the statement "Men are more masculine, and women are more feminine" is a tautology because masculine means "like men", and feminine means "like women". Therefore it is saying, "Men are more like men, and women are more like women." It's redundant.
Furthermore, there are some absurd generalizations in the text of the page.
I will remove the tautology, and then we can discuss what to do about the rest. CogitoErgoSum 10:23, 4 August 2008 (EDT)
="The problem with"...
This portion of the article:
The problem with the feminist view (or agenda) is that it assumes the truth of its own dogma. It simply asserts that gender differences are a social construct, but without supplying any proof of this. Worse, they refuse to consider any evidence in favor of innate differences.
...reads flatly like an essay. Furthermore, I can't see any way it can be rewritten to be encyclopedic. Unless reasonable defense is given, I will be removing it. Wandering 12:23, 4 August 2008 (EDT)
