Misplaced Pages

Talk:Man: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 08:51, 9 February 2005 editMahagaja (talk | contribs)Administrators92,669 edits →Pictures← Previous edit Latest revision as of 08:21, 21 December 2024 edit undoRoxySaunders (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions3,011 edits →Why doesn't English version of the article man have images of influential men?: ReplyTag: Reply 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Skiptotoctalk}}
''"In modern western society, few wear clothing generally associated with female gender roles."''
{{Talk header}}
I thought this was so in all societies, not just western. Are there modern societies where the men cross dress? ] 15:18, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=/Archive index
|mask=/Archive<#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes}}
{{Notice|]
'''Important Note:''' The most appropriate image to use at the top of this article is a highly controversial issue with many valid viewpoints. Polite discussion and negotiation of the viewpoints is welcome below as we continuously strive to find an image which best matches the current ''']'''.


]. Please add new images there rather than on this talk page, although the image discussion is welcome here.
The above quote should say "In modern western society, few men wear clothing generally associated with '''western''' female gender roles"
''Any image which has not shown support here will be removed.''}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=c|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Anthropology|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Gender studies|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Sociology|importance=Top}}
}}
{{censor}}
{{Press
| subject = article
| author =
| title = Misplaced Pages photo of Man is a Mallu guy. Twitter seems to have found him out too
| org = ]
| url = https://www.indiatoday.in/trending-news/story/wikipedia-photo-of-man-is-a-mallu-guy-twitter-seems-to-have-found-him-out-too-1616182-2019-11-06
| date = 6 November 2019
| accessdate = 7 November 2019
| quote = Chances are very less that you knew that a Misplaced Pages page for the term 'Man' exists on the Internet. But all thanks to a tweet, this information is now viral.


| subject2 = article
Why is does this page use the word "sex" not "gender"? --]] 13:56, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
| author2 =
| title2 = Indian Twitter Has Broken After Finding Out That Misplaced Pages's Photo Of 'Man' Is A Mallu Dude
| org2 = ]
| url2 = https://www.scoopwhoop.com/humor/wikipedia-man-entry-photo-of-malayali-guy-twitter-reacts/
| date2 = 7 November 2019
| accessdate2 = 8 November 2019
| quote2 = Twitter has been going nuts ever since and has been asking her questions why she was on the page anyway and how she could tell he was a Mallu.
}}
{{Annual readership}}
{{Former AFI|date=31 July 2023|page={{PAGENAME}}|oldid2=1168632613|oldid1=1167745353}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 101K
|counter = 10
|minthreadsleft = 5
|algo = old(91d)
|archive = Talk:Man/Archive %(counter)d
}}


== Gender identity distinction ==
According to the Concise Oxford English Dictionary the word Gender means the grammatical classification of nouns into different sexes. Therefore Sex is the correct word to describe particular characteristics of men and women. Gender is often incorrectly used as a euphemism for the word sex. --] 18:35, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
:Errr... you might consider that use "incorrect", however it is definitely common, especially since a distinction between physical ] and ] (identity, role, presentation etc) is definitely needed. The fact that a dictionary (even an Oxford one) does not list a meaning does not mean that meaning of a word does not exist. This is particularly true if it is a "concise" dictionary. Even the OED, not particular up-to-date with words in that field (transgender does not exist there), lists that use, even if it labeles it as "modern" and "especially feminist". Oh well, nothing is perfect. Not even Oxford Dictionaries. -- ] 20:42, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)


Many people use the word "man" not to refer to an adult human male, but to refer to a person whose gender identity is that of a man.
POV: "it is estimated that one in 100,000 people are men who have been born without a typical male physiology (that is, they are transgendered or transsexual men)," This is deceptive and misleading, non-intersex ftm transexuals are not born with any sort of male anatomy, typical or otherwise. It should be enough to say that some females consider themselves men and let the reader decide if they consider that to be valid, not preach transgender identity politics at them in what is supposed to be a neutral article. I'm re-reverting.
<ref>{{cite web |title=Gender Identity |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/gender-identity |website=Encyclopaedia Britannica |access-date=July 26, 2024}}</ref>
:Are you quite sure you do not write from a POV yourself? First, the article does not state that transmen are born with any distinctive male anatomy. Second, to claim that transmen are "females" is not exactly NPOV, either. So try for neutrality yourself, sign your comments, and don't insert some funny "mouseover" bits into other peoples edits here. Revert. -- ] 05:39, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
<ref>{{cite web |title=Understanding Gender, Sex, and Gender Identity |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/gender/understanding-gender-sex-and-gender-identity |website=Psychology Today |access-date=July 26, 2024}}</ref>
:::saying that non-intersex transmen are female is not POV it is biological reality, they (at birth) have ovaries and a vagina, (whether or not a transman who has chosen to have bottom surgery is female is open to interpretation, which is why I said "born with standard female anatomies" in the article) They may not be feminine or self-identify as women but they are female, thats why they are transgendered not cisgendered. The article says they are not born with typical male anatomy, but neglects to mention that they are born with typical female anatomy, thats not giving the reader the whole story. What's a "mouseover"?
<ref>{{cite web |title=Transgender People, Gender Identity and Gender Expression |url=https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbtq/transgender-people-gender-identity-gender-expression |website=American Psychological Association |access-date=July 26, 2024}}</ref>
::::Nope, sorry, but ''female'' includes not just a female body, but also a female gender identity. Claiming that transmen are "female" therefore denies their gender identity and turns them into some sort of freaks or sickos. What you want to express is "female bodied persons" not "females". Also, if you feel that there is information lacking, insert it, but don't insert heteronormative prejudices and then whine about POV.
<ref>{{cite web |title=Gender Identity |url=https://www.identiversity.org/terms/gender-identity/ |website=Identiversity |access-date=July 26, 2024}}</ref> Therefore, I propose we update the first paragraph to the following:
::::As for constantling inserting mouse-overs: Check this . You ought to notice what happens when you edit. Stop it. -- ] 17:44, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
:::::Are you sure about this? If the word "female" is used, without any other modifier (like identity), doesn't it refer to physiology by default, just as with any animal species? In other words, biologists might say male/female refer to sex, and other social behaviors, identities, feelings, etc. involve gender or sexual identity (masculine/feminine behaviors, etc). Perhaps I am wrong, but this is how I understand it. ] 18:14, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
::::::Plus, I specifically said "people born with standard female anatomy" in the article, (though female bodied is just as good I suppose) and YOU are the one saying that a female person who self identifies as a man is a sicko or freak, NOT me, so please stop whining about supposed heteronormative prejudice. Also, I have no idea what happened to that first paragraph but I think I've fixed it.


_______________________________
:::::::68.117.211.92: You appear to be infected with some sort of ] which automatically inserts URL <a href=>s around certain keywords; see for an example. Please cease editing until you've cleaned your system; I suggest you try running ] (it's free). -- ] 19:19, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)


A '''man''' is an ] ] ].{{efn|''Male'' may refer to ] or ].<ref>{{Cite Merriam-Webster|male}}</ref> The plural ''men'' is sometimes used in certain phrases such as '']'' to denote male humans regardless of age.}}<ref>{{Cite web |title=Meaning of "man" in English |url=https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/man |access-date=18 August 2021 |website=dictionary.cambridge.org |publisher=] |language=en |archive-date=6 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230106000222/https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/man |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Definition of "man" |url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man |access-date=18 August 2021 |website=www.merriam-webster.com |publisher=] |language=en |archive-date=9 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230309135059/https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man |url-status=live }}</ref> Prior to adulthood, a male human is referred to as a ] (a male ] or ]). A man can also refer to any person whose ] is that of a man.
:::::"Female" can be rather often found refering to not just sex. From the OED:
:::::* A. adj. I. Belonging to the sex which bears offspring.
:::::* 1. a. of human beings. In Law: heir, line female. Also predicatively.
:::::* II. Of or pertaining to those of this sex.
:::::* 3. Composed or consisting of women, or of female animals or plants.
:::::* 4. a. Of or pertaining to a woman or women.
:::::* b. Engaged in or exercised by women.
:::::* 5. Peculiar to or characteristic of womankind.
:::::So obviously it does at least not unambigiously refer to physical characteristics only.
:::::@68.x And kindly stop talking so much - sorry - bullshit. I never called transmen freaks or sickos, I was refering to the common prejudice that transmen are "really" females who are either crazy or sick, but in the end, definitely females, not males. A prejudice you tried to put into the article - whether consciously or by mistake - and which I tried to keep out of it -- after all, I happen to know what I am, and I am definitely not female, even if the physical attributes were. You might want to check my user page.
:::::Having said that, the "''without a typical male physiology''" bit is indeed improvable. Your edis however did not just alter this sentence, you also simply deleted information and never gave any reason for that. Obviously, that merrited a revert. -- ] 20:42, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
::::::I don't fully understand the conflict at hand, and don't mean to misunderstand either of you. But the majority of the time male/female seem to be sex. Yes, there are other contexts. If a guy said "I'm a man wearing women's underwear", that doesn't mean he changed identity or sex or anything. Maybe the guy is kinky or just involved in role-playing, and one can take words at face value. I don't know that man/woman or male/female can automatically be cast into "but what if it's a biological man, who wants to be a woman, but dresses like a whatever". That seems like extension by social construct to me, not biological fact which seems to be a slightly more common meaning with more adjectives tacked on to the words "male" and "female". But I guess I am flexible on exact meaning so long as the reader gets the picture accurately and nobody feels excluded somehow. ] 23:24, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
:::::::Your example would be "a male bodied person with a female gender identity and a whatever gender presentation", and "want" has nothing to do with it -- most trans*-people would certainly not mind if they could somehow match their identity to their bodies. The problem here is that these "gender"-meanings are relatively new; some people still refuse to acknowledge that there is any difference between sex and gender at all. (Hence the "sickos and freaks".) However, if one wants to be precise, there is no way of avoiding many of these not so simple expressions. Also, you seem to imply that biology is an undeniable ''fact'', while anything sociological is somehow less of a fact. Both is highly questionable. -- ] 00:29, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)


_______________________________
== Pictures ==


The current version mentions trans men in the bottom of the overview section, but many use the definition of "man" to encapsulate male men as well as trans men, which is why I think we should add the gender identity sentence to the first paragraph.
Are we going to have ] reflect ] in the scope of illustrations? On ] there's a lively discussion on how best to show a picture of a naked woman. (Many agree that there ''should'' be such a picture, but it's more a matter of ''which''). Unfortunately, it may be a little difficult to get as good a picture for ] -- most nude photos and paintings are of women. I would also like to note that the taboos are a little different in Europe and the U.S.A. on nudity; in Europe it is more acceptable, and male nudity is not as taboo as in the U.S.A. -- ] ] is ] 01:10, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)


Definitely open to revision suggestions for this change so long as the spirit of the change remains intact. Also open to any debate. Just wanted to post on the talk page before making such a significant change since such a high-profile article probably needs to come to unity before doing so.
:There's a nice picture at ] of a male model, not nude (he's in sort of a racing-style swimsuit), that I would like to move here, but I'm not sure how. It would be better than the picture we have with its sarcastic-sounding "Notice that men and women are different" in spite of the fact that the woman in the picture looks like a man with breasts glued on. --] 08:51, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

] (]) 08:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC) ] (]) 08:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

:I don't personally like including two different senses of the word, as it reaffirms the idea that although a trans-inclusive definition of this term exists, the first sentence (and thus the primary topic of this Misplaced Pages article) isn't using it, and is instead explicitly trans-exclusionary.
:We currently solve this by pushing the complexity down the line to ''male'', with a footnote explaining that it {{xt|can refer to ] or ]}}, and then explicitly mentioning trans and intersex men as part of this topic.
:I consider this the most preferable way of handling the fact that most common dictionaries definitions of these terms can be taken as accidentally transphobic, and have been co-opted as an anti-trans dogwhistle. –] (] • ]) 15:41, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
::It's not so much that "man" ever normally refers to being AMAB ''instead of'' male gender identity, but that in various contexts the distinction between the two is lost, as a matter of ignorance or convenience. –] (] • ]) 15:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

{{reflist}}

== We need a photo of bald man ==

Hi, millions of men are bald why is there no a photo of bald man? ] (]) 11:49, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
:There are pics of bald men at ]. ] (]) 13:59, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
:There's an image featuring at least one bald man in the ] section. ] (]) 22:15, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
:IMHO we don't need a photo of every male phenotype to refer to a man*. This also applies to the overweight/plus-sized men (as well as anorexic men, athletic men, men with scars, men with burns, hairy and not-so-hairy men, disabled man, male amputees, etc-etc), which you talk about in a separate question. It would probably be more inclusive to add a photo of each phenotype, but that would make the article excessively long. If you think this fact is important to mention, please bravely tell your arguments; i think, if needed it's be possible to write in text that men can be bald or overweight.
:''*Probably the only exception is trans men, since being transgender (male) is directly related to (male) gender, and it's also a widely debated issue (may transgender people be defined by their gender choice or somehow else).'' <small>''This message was written with ].''</small> ] 12:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

== We need a photo of an overweight man ==

Millions of men are overweight and there is even subculture of men and they are called bears ] (]) 07:43, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

:We could end up with a lot of photos if we try and encompass every way a man can possibly look. ] (]) 10:29, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
:It is mentioned in the ] article. As said above, perhaps it's the best to mention male phenotypes on the pages, dedicated to the phenotypes themself. <small>''This message was written with ].''</small> ] 12:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not overweight but in Polynesian islands it is common for men to be overweight and also overweight men are important part of gay culture --] (]) 13:40, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

== Recent edits by AlmostDeveloper ==

] has made some serious efforts at addressing the criticisms of ] and while there may be a temptation to revert these edits again I would ask that we discuss here first.

True, it might have been better the other way round but being bold in contributing shouldn't be discouraged.

] "Consider carefully before reverting, as it rejects the contributions of another editor, and all others' after the edit in question. Consider what you object to, and what the editor was attempting. Can you improve the edit, bringing progress, rather than reverting it? ] (]) 19:08, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

:@], regarding your comment: "the rights statement is (AFAIK) not seriously contested, and the predominance of misogyny is sufficiently supported by the vast majority of scholarship that a plain statement is better in a section so short; the sub articles do more to explain the minority view, as is appropriate".
:I have cited four '''reviews of studies''' (i.e. they contain even more articles in them) that seriously contest the rights statement. If you believe that most scientists hold a different view, you can add with sources how scientists dispute that data. Although this is a small article, it is about men, and men's rights relate directly to it (unlike, for example, misogyny and anti-feminism, which I would personaly prefer to move into articles dedicated to them, for it is not clear how they relate to ''male gender''). Please defend your edit, or I shall retract it. Also, please kindly start a dialog in ''talk'' before canceling edits.
:@], regarding your comment: "I do not see a staitment that masculism is fully pro-feminist in the sources. Only Men's Liberation Movement is fully pro-feminist"
:While this is a healthy criticism, if you can't find where sources defend the thesis, please kindly ask a question in ''talk'', or on my page, or add a “citation needed” bar instead of canceling the edit. You can find data about the cooperation between feminism and masculism, for example, in Pasi's "Discrimination Against Men" in chapter 5.5.1 (5.5 is overall recommended). <small>''This message was written with ].''</small> ] 18:26, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
::You cited four sources for the statement {{tqd|"others dispute this, arguing that men likewise experience at least as much discrimination"}}. Are you saying those four sources also support that the authors, or some people named by authors, dispute that men have more rights than women in most societies? Part of the problem is that you've cited lengthy sources and not specific pages, and two of your sources are low-quality dissertations. The Stoet article is a relatively brief study, so I can tell that it does not support any statement about rights. Do the others? Are the better sources that do so? ] (] / ]) 18:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
:::Given that ] is the process of making unfair or prejudicial distinctions between people based on particular characteristic (e.g. gender), all four articles addressing the issue of discrimination against men point to the issue of men's rights. For example, mentioned Stoet's article talks about ''“disadvantages for boys and men”'' in the abstract. The other three studies discuss the lack of men's rights in more detail, calling it also in these terms, so you can find quotes using the keywords “rights”, “discrimination”, “abuse”, “prejustice”. I can also provide citations at your request. <small>''This message was written with ].''</small> ] 18:59, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
::::I don't think a source saying "men are discriminated against at least as much as women" is necessarily making any comment on discrepancy in rights. Disadvantages are different from inequitable rights. The expectation here is that sources explicitly support the material. ] (] / ]) 19:04, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::Huh, that sounds right. Thank you for patiently correcting me. How do you feel about me returning these studies reformulated, not as a counterargument to the ''“men have more rights than women”'', but to the ''“misogyny is far more prevalent than misandry”'', because they directly address the subject (Clinical Guide to Discussing Prejudice Against Men talks about misandry on the page 184, eg: ''"Misandristic ideas have become pervasive throughout Western society. The normalization of misandry makes examples hidden and unrecognized, contributing to male gender blindness."''; Pasi talks about misandry in chapter 7.7 and 2.1.6, eg: ''"the SBAM memeplex contains the following memes which are all biased against men: 1) The advancement of women’s status is by far the most important goal of equality policy, 2) the solving of men’s equality problems should be given a low priority in the equality policy (...)"''; Stoet and Benatar don't mention ''misandry''-term, but mention "discrimination" & "disadvantages against men and boys", which in my opinion is the definition of misandry. Still, if you disagree, I shall accept it without further discussion)? <small>''This message was written with ].''</small> ] 20:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
::::::I wouldn't focus on what is or isn't a "counterargument". If you come across quality source, try your best to summarize them neutrally. Avoid using ]s, unless they really are the best sources available and are widely cited. ] (] / ]) 01:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::::True, pardon my poor wording. Thanks for the answers! <small>''This message was written with ].''</small> ] 14:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::::As found out on my talk page, we didn't reach consensus, so pardon me for editing the page. I find the sources mentioned being quality & fresh peer reviews. Could you clarify, why do you see dissertations as poor sources? Benatar's book, as far as I understand, is not a disertation. I see ''disadvantages for boys and men'' as misandry, but if you don't, I am ready to drop the Stoet & Geary study out, it's not worth debating about. How do you feel about "The War Against Boys: How Misguided Policies Are Harming Our Young Men", "Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture" and , books as sources? Thanks for your patience in this discussion! :) <small>''This message was written with ].''</small> ] 19:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
::I read Pasi Malmi. He does not write that masculism is a pro-feminist movement. Actually, he writes that... ''sexist branch of masculism gains support from the general ideas and traditions of best seller sexism, which presents men and women as essentially different from each other (e.g. Pease & Pease 1999).'', that ''masculists may, for example, prioritize men’s interests above women’s interests in the creation of public policy. Through this mechanism, masculists may contribute to the existence of direct and indirect discrimination against women.'' Malmi is clearly not a source to support the claim that masculinism is a pro-feminist ideology. ] (]) 19:04, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
:::Pasi divides masculism into different branches: ''"Masculism and feminism, as all theoretical paradigms, are likely to contain a theoretical core, theoretical branches, selfish core; cooperative periphery and an aggressive periphery"''. Thus, at this point I shall apologize & thank you for pointing my mistake: Pasi indeed does not say, that masculism is fully pro-feminist ideology, but says that it may be pro-feminist (eg. "the cooperative periphery of the paradigm consists of beliefs and interpretations, which are not fully coherent with the theoretical core and branches, but which offer the paradigms a chance to cooperate with rivaling paradigms and interest groups"). Still, Pasi also says that "in recent decades, the relationship of masculism and feminism seems to have changed in such a fashion that the coalition discourses of antisexist masculists and equality feminists have weakened, or disappeared altogether", so I shall agree with you, that Pasi does not prove modern masculism is not necessarily pro-feminist. I will research the theme more carefully and come back with better checked statements! (P.S. note also, that Pasi uses term masculism and never masculinism - the second one is indeed strongly connected to antifeminism) <small>''This message was written with ].''</small> ] 19:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
::::I apologize, I made a typo in the last sentence. ] (]) 01:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
:Sources have improved, but otherwise I still feel the same as I did in ]. Quoting from the lede at ]: {{tqb|Many scholars criticize MRAs for promoting a false equivalence between misandry and misogyny, arguing that modern activism around misandry represents an antifeminist backlash, promoted by marginalized men. The false idea that misandry is commonplace among feminists is so widespread that it has been called the "misandry myth" by 40 topic experts.}} Softening the very mainstream belief that women historically and presently face substantial legal/social/economic discrimination compared to men into a "some say ... others say" is ] and POV-pushing. –] (] • ]) 18:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
::I would confidently agree with you if my links were single articles-opinions, but they all represent systematic reviews, broadly analyzing studies, experts' statements, and the opinions of other scholars, giving strong evidence that at least today's men face at least as much legal/social/economic discrimination in at least majority of countries. Still, I fully agree, that women facing more (substantial) discrimination compaired to men is much more ''mainstream'' belief (which is directly mentioned in sources discussed as well). Do you want that to be mentioned on the page? <small>''This message was written with ].''</small> ] 19:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

== Diversity in preferred gender expressions ==
I think the article would benefit from some information about how men vary in their preferred gender expressions, i.e. they can be hegemonically masculine, simply masculine, androgynous, feminine. Sources that can be used for the statement include Connell's Masculinities, the article Gender expression in The SAGE Encyclopedia in Trans Studies, the book Male femininities, and Luke Andrew Boso's article Real Men. This is important not only because it is directly related to the topic of the article, but also because it serves as a preventative measure against the popularization of the fringe theory of ], according to which men are supposedly naturally masculine.--] (]) 16:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

== Why doesn't English version of the article man have images of influential men? ==

Why do non English versions of the article man have images of influential men grouped as one and the lead page?

Is it sexist to put the combined images of influential men as the lead image representative of men? since there are influential women but not as much as influential men? ] (]) 08:42, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

:If it's this article you mean, see the 'Important note' at the top of this page. It says truthfully that the lead image here (and on many other articles) is highly controversial, so it's not a good place to edit.
:If it's a general question, it's not relevant here (this is ]), but two things can be said: Misplaced Pages is not censored, and can show any image that is necesssary, copyright permitting; and people differ widely on what 'influential' might mean, and whether it's a good idea to use images of people in the public eye, not least because (as already mentioned) that's bound to be controversial. All the best, ] (]) 15:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::Also, ] (which may not exist on other Wikipedias) shows that here, the consensus is not to illustrate large groups of people with collages. <span style="font-family:Palatino">]</span> <sup>]</sup> 20:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::If I can elaborate: an ideal lead image would be particularly illustrative of what the article (and ideally, the sum of our reliable sources) has to say about the topic. There is no real justification in my mind that particular "influential" men—either one example image, or a gallery—could adequately serve as this illustration. This is because I don't think one can justify that famous people, or whatever comparable metric we could use, are the most ideal examples for people with any given trait. Given how this topic likely harbors so many intuitions for readers, specific examples, especially expressed visually, are among the most liable to create unjustified assumptions in readers we didn't intend. So, it is less possible than in most cases to provide illustrative examples for this topic that illuminate more than they conceal. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 21:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:Speaking on behalf of all mobile users; squashing tiny thumbnails of Einstein and Ghandi into a 4x4 matrix is worthless from both an aesthetic, informational, and usability perspective. –] (] • ]) 08:21, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 08:21, 21 December 2024

Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Man article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
Lead image

Important Note: The most appropriate image to use at the top of this article is a highly controversial issue with many valid viewpoints. Polite discussion and negotiation of the viewpoints is welcome below as we continuously strive to find an image which best matches the current consensus.

A gallery and discussion of potential lead images is available here. Please add new images there rather than on this talk page, although the image discussion is welcome here.

Any image which has not shown support here will be removed.
This  level-3 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconAnthropology Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject iconGender studies Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
To-do list:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconSociology Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Censorship warningMisplaced Pages is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Misplaced Pages's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.
Media mentionThis article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
This article was selected as the article for improvement on 31 July 2023 for a period of one week.

Gender identity distinction

Many people use the word "man" not to refer to an adult human male, but to refer to a person whose gender identity is that of a man. Therefore, I propose we update the first paragraph to the following:

_______________________________

A man is an adult male human. Prior to adulthood, a male human is referred to as a boy (a male child or adolescent). A man can also refer to any person whose gender identity is that of a man.

_______________________________

The current version mentions trans men in the bottom of the overview section, but many use the definition of "man" to encapsulate male men as well as trans men, which is why I think we should add the gender identity sentence to the first paragraph.

Definitely open to revision suggestions for this change so long as the spirit of the change remains intact. Also open to any debate. Just wanted to post on the talk page before making such a significant change since such a high-profile article probably needs to come to unity before doing so.

Gabetucker2 (talk) 08:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC) Gabetucker2 (talk) 08:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't personally like including two different senses of the word, as it reaffirms the idea that although a trans-inclusive definition of this term exists, the first sentence (and thus the primary topic of this Misplaced Pages article) isn't using it, and is instead explicitly trans-exclusionary.
We currently solve this by pushing the complexity down the line to male, with a footnote explaining that it can refer to sex or gender, and then explicitly mentioning trans and intersex men as part of this topic.
I consider this the most preferable way of handling the fact that most common dictionaries definitions of these terms can be taken as accidentally transphobic, and have been co-opted as an anti-trans dogwhistle. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 15:41, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
It's not so much that "man" ever normally refers to being AMAB instead of male gender identity, but that in various contexts the distinction between the two is lost, as a matter of ignorance or convenience. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 15:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
  1. "Gender Identity". Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved July 26, 2024.
  2. "Understanding Gender, Sex, and Gender Identity". Psychology Today. Retrieved July 26, 2024.
  3. "Transgender People, Gender Identity and Gender Expression". American Psychological Association. Retrieved July 26, 2024.
  4. "Gender Identity". Identiversity. Retrieved July 26, 2024.
  5. "male". Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. Merriam-Webster.
  6. "Meaning of "man" in English". dictionary.cambridge.org. Cambridge Dictionary. Archived from the original on 6 January 2023. Retrieved 18 August 2021.
  7. "Definition of "man"". www.merriam-webster.com. Merriam-Webster. Archived from the original on 9 March 2023. Retrieved 18 August 2021.

We need a photo of bald man

Hi, millions of men are bald why is there no a photo of bald man? POTDL (talk) 11:49, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

There are pics of bald men at Hair loss. Masterhatch (talk) 13:59, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
There's an image featuring at least one bald man in the Man#Relationships section. Some1 (talk) 22:15, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
IMHO we don't need a photo of every male phenotype to refer to a man*. This also applies to the overweight/plus-sized men (as well as anorexic men, athletic men, men with scars, men with burns, hairy and not-so-hairy men, disabled man, male amputees, etc-etc), which you talk about in a separate question. It would probably be more inclusive to add a photo of each phenotype, but that would make the article excessively long. If you think this fact is important to mention, please bravely tell your arguments; i think, if needed it's be possible to write in text that men can be bald or overweight.
*Probably the only exception is trans men, since being transgender (male) is directly related to (male) gender, and it's also a widely debated issue (may transgender people be defined by their gender choice or somehow else). This message was written with sincerely good intentions. AlmostDeveloper 12:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

We need a photo of an overweight man

Millions of men are overweight and there is even subculture of men and they are called bears POTDL (talk) 07:43, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

We could end up with a lot of photos if we try and encompass every way a man can possibly look. Lukewarmbeer (talk) 10:29, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
It is mentioned in the "Bear (gay culture)" article. As said above, perhaps it's the best to mention male phenotypes on the pages, dedicated to the phenotypes themself. This message was written with sincerely good intentions. AlmostDeveloper 12:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not overweight but in Polynesian islands it is common for men to be overweight and also overweight men are important part of gay culture --POTDL (talk) 13:40, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Recent edits by AlmostDeveloper

User:AlmostDeveloper has made some serious efforts at addressing the criticisms of User:RoxySaunders and while there may be a temptation to revert these edits again I would ask that we discuss here first.

True, it might have been better the other way round but being bold in contributing shouldn't be discouraged.

We say "Consider carefully before reverting, as it rejects the contributions of another editor, and all others' after the edit in question. Consider what you object to, and what the editor was attempting. Can you improve the edit, bringing progress, rather than reverting it? Lukewarmbeer (talk) 19:08, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers, regarding your comment: "the rights statement is (AFAIK) not seriously contested, and the predominance of misogyny is sufficiently supported by the vast majority of scholarship that a plain statement is better in a section so short; the sub articles do more to explain the minority view, as is appropriate".
I have cited four reviews of studies (i.e. they contain even more articles in them) that seriously contest the rights statement. If you believe that most scientists hold a different view, you can add with sources how scientists dispute that data. Although this is a small article, it is about men, and men's rights relate directly to it (unlike, for example, misogyny and anti-feminism, which I would personaly prefer to move into articles dedicated to them, for it is not clear how they relate to male gender). Please defend your edit, or I shall retract it. Also, please kindly start a dialog in talk before canceling edits.
@Reprarina, regarding your comment: "I do not see a staitment that masculism is fully pro-feminist in the sources. Only Men's Liberation Movement is fully pro-feminist"
While this is a healthy criticism, if you can't find where sources defend the thesis, please kindly ask a question in talk, or on my page, or add a “citation needed” bar instead of canceling the edit. You can find data about the cooperation between feminism and masculism, for example, in Pasi's "Discrimination Against Men" in chapter 5.5.1 (5.5 is overall recommended). This message was written with sincerely good intentions. AlmostDeveloper 18:26, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
You cited four sources for the statement "others dispute this, arguing that men likewise experience at least as much discrimination". Are you saying those four sources also support that the authors, or some people named by authors, dispute that men have more rights than women in most societies? Part of the problem is that you've cited lengthy sources and not specific pages, and two of your sources are low-quality dissertations. The Stoet article is a relatively brief study, so I can tell that it does not support any statement about rights. Do the others? Are the better sources that do so? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Given that discrimination is the process of making unfair or prejudicial distinctions between people based on particular characteristic (e.g. gender), all four articles addressing the issue of discrimination against men point to the issue of men's rights. For example, mentioned Stoet's article talks about “disadvantages for boys and men” in the abstract. The other three studies discuss the lack of men's rights in more detail, calling it also in these terms, so you can find quotes using the keywords “rights”, “discrimination”, “abuse”, “prejustice”. I can also provide citations at your request. This message was written with sincerely good intentions. AlmostDeveloper 18:59, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
I don't think a source saying "men are discriminated against at least as much as women" is necessarily making any comment on discrepancy in rights. Disadvantages are different from inequitable rights. The expectation here is that sources explicitly support the material. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:04, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Huh, that sounds right. Thank you for patiently correcting me. How do you feel about me returning these studies reformulated, not as a counterargument to the “men have more rights than women”, but to the “misogyny is far more prevalent than misandry”, because they directly address the subject (Clinical Guide to Discussing Prejudice Against Men talks about misandry on the page 184, eg: "Misandristic ideas have become pervasive throughout Western society. The normalization of misandry makes examples hidden and unrecognized, contributing to male gender blindness."; Pasi talks about misandry in chapter 7.7 and 2.1.6, eg: "the SBAM memeplex contains the following memes which are all biased against men: 1) The advancement of women’s status is by far the most important goal of equality policy, 2) the solving of men’s equality problems should be given a low priority in the equality policy (...)"; Stoet and Benatar don't mention misandry-term, but mention "discrimination" & "disadvantages against men and boys", which in my opinion is the definition of misandry. Still, if you disagree, I shall accept it without further discussion)? This message was written with sincerely good intentions. AlmostDeveloper 20:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
I wouldn't focus on what is or isn't a "counterargument". If you come across quality source, try your best to summarize them neutrally. Avoid using WP:DISSERTATIONs, unless they really are the best sources available and are widely cited. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
True, pardon my poor wording. Thanks for the answers! This message was written with sincerely good intentions. AlmostDeveloper 14:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
As found out on my talk page, we didn't reach consensus, so pardon me for editing the page. I find the sources mentioned being quality & fresh peer reviews. Could you clarify, why do you see dissertations as poor sources? Benatar's book, as far as I understand, is not a disertation. I see disadvantages for boys and men as misandry, but if you don't, I am ready to drop the Stoet & Geary study out, it's not worth debating about. How do you feel about "The War Against Boys: How Misguided Policies Are Harming Our Young Men", "Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture" and this APA analysis, books as sources? Thanks for your patience in this discussion! :) This message was written with sincerely good intentions. AlmostDeveloper 19:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
I read Pasi Malmi. He does not write that masculism is a pro-feminist movement. Actually, he writes that... sexist branch of masculism gains support from the general ideas and traditions of best seller sexism, which presents men and women as essentially different from each other (e.g. Pease & Pease 1999)., that masculists may, for example, prioritize men’s interests above women’s interests in the creation of public policy. Through this mechanism, masculists may contribute to the existence of direct and indirect discrimination against women. Malmi is clearly not a source to support the claim that masculinism is a pro-feminist ideology. Reprarina (talk) 19:04, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Pasi divides masculism into different branches: "Masculism and feminism, as all theoretical paradigms, are likely to contain a theoretical core, theoretical branches, selfish core; cooperative periphery and an aggressive periphery". Thus, at this point I shall apologize & thank you for pointing my mistake: Pasi indeed does not say, that masculism is fully pro-feminist ideology, but says that it may be pro-feminist (eg. "the cooperative periphery of the paradigm consists of beliefs and interpretations, which are not fully coherent with the theoretical core and branches, but which offer the paradigms a chance to cooperate with rivaling paradigms and interest groups"). Still, Pasi also says that "in recent decades, the relationship of masculism and feminism seems to have changed in such a fashion that the coalition discourses of antisexist masculists and equality feminists have weakened, or disappeared altogether", so I shall agree with you, that Pasi does not prove modern masculism is not necessarily pro-feminist. I will research the theme more carefully and come back with better checked statements! (P.S. note also, that Pasi uses term masculism and never masculinism - the second one is indeed strongly connected to antifeminism) This message was written with sincerely good intentions. AlmostDeveloper 19:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
I apologize, I made a typo in the last sentence. Reprarina (talk) 01:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Sources have improved, but otherwise I still feel the same as I did in my original rationale. Quoting from the lede at misandry:

Many scholars criticize MRAs for promoting a false equivalence between misandry and misogyny, arguing that modern activism around misandry represents an antifeminist backlash, promoted by marginalized men. The false idea that misandry is commonplace among feminists is so widespread that it has been called the "misandry myth" by 40 topic experts.

Softening the very mainstream belief that women historically and presently face substantial legal/social/economic discrimination compared to men into a "some say ... others say" is WP:FALSEBALANCE and POV-pushing. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 18:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
I would confidently agree with you if my links were single articles-opinions, but they all represent systematic reviews, broadly analyzing studies, experts' statements, and the opinions of other scholars, giving strong evidence that at least today's men face at least as much legal/social/economic discrimination in at least majority of countries. Still, I fully agree, that women facing more (substantial) discrimination compaired to men is much more mainstream belief (which is directly mentioned in sources discussed as well). Do you want that to be mentioned on the page? This message was written with sincerely good intentions. AlmostDeveloper 19:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Diversity in preferred gender expressions

I think the article would benefit from some information about how men vary in their preferred gender expressions, i.e. they can be hegemonically masculine, simply masculine, androgynous, feminine. Sources that can be used for the statement include Connell's Masculinities, the article Gender expression in The SAGE Encyclopedia in Trans Studies, the book Male femininities, and Luke Andrew Boso's article Real Men. This is important not only because it is directly related to the topic of the article, but also because it serves as a preventative measure against the popularization of the fringe theory of gender essentialism, according to which men are supposedly naturally masculine.--Reprarina (talk) 16:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Why doesn't English version of the article man have images of influential men?

Why do non English versions of the article man have images of influential men grouped as one and the lead page?

Is it sexist to put the combined images of influential men as the lead image representative of men? since there are influential women but not as much as influential men? Beneutral100 (talk) 08:42, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

If it's this article you mean, see the 'Important note' at the top of this page. It says truthfully that the lead image here (and on many other articles) is highly controversial, so it's not a good place to edit.
If it's a general question, it's not relevant here (this is not a forum), but two things can be said: Misplaced Pages is not censored, and can show any image that is necesssary, copyright permitting; and people differ widely on what 'influential' might mean, and whether it's a good idea to use images of people in the public eye, not least because (as already mentioned) that's bound to be controversial. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Also, MOS:PEOPLEGALLERY (which may not exist on other Wikipedias) shows that here, the consensus is not to illustrate large groups of people with collages. Crossroads 20:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
If I can elaborate: an ideal lead image would be particularly illustrative of what the article (and ideally, the sum of our reliable sources) has to say about the topic. There is no real justification in my mind that particular "influential" men—either one example image, or a gallery—could adequately serve as this illustration. This is because I don't think one can justify that famous people, or whatever comparable metric we could use, are the most ideal examples for people with any given trait. Given how this topic likely harbors so many intuitions for readers, specific examples, especially expressed visually, are among the most liable to create unjustified assumptions in readers we didn't intend. So, it is less possible than in most cases to provide illustrative examples for this topic that illuminate more than they conceal. Remsense ‥ 论 21:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Speaking on behalf of all mobile users; squashing tiny thumbnails of Einstein and Ghandi into a 4x4 matrix is worthless from both an aesthetic, informational, and usability perspective. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (talk • stalk) 08:21, 21 December 2024 (UTC)


Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).

Categories: