This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
This 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 Wikipedia. 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the
importance scale.
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Sam11612.
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Tcwgswiki,
AbigailBuckingham.
Note that the HuffPo piece is just a reprint of the original NY Mag piece already cited in the article, the Slate piece merely provides a link to the article, and the Hindu Business Line piece uses the term but does not discuss it. Obviously the term is used a lot, but it's not discussed anywhere I can find outside of Quart's original article.—
alf laylah wa laylah (
talk)
12:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC)reply
Speedy Deletion
Blatantly doesn't satisfy wikipedia's
Notability requirements. One mention in a New York Post opinion piece a year ago doesn't cut it. This article is also victim of WP:NOR in the 'Examples' section. If 'hipster sexism' is a notable concept, which from my research it doesn't seem to be, then this article needs to be rewritten. Otherwise it needs to be deleted or transwikied to Geek Feminism Wiki (which, despite its rich treasures of articles, doesn't have an article on hipster sexism, further supporting the irrelevance of the topic).
Darkcraft (
talk)
09:14, 21 December 2013 (UTC)reply
This is regarding
this edit, which I reverted. The addition was this:
Although many feminists argue that "hipster sexism" is just true sexism in disguise, those who engage in it do so with a mindset that
sexism is an outdated and archaic institution in which only ignorant and backwards people still engage, thereby making the demonstration of "hipster sexism" seem satirical and ironic, and a way of spotlighting the fact that it is ridiculous to actually have sexist beliefs and actions in the modern age, rather than it being an actual subjugation of women.
Although I agree that the article needs expansion, the edit introduced a few "
weasel words", and failed to clearly indicate where each perspective was coming from. Starting the sentence with "although many feminists..." and then later contradicting that statement is strongly implying in Wikipedia's voice (without saying directly) that the perspective of some feminists is wrong. This doesn't seem neutral to me, since it's not Wikipedia's call. The relatively few sources the article has about the phrase are not really strong enough to make definitive statements about what the mindset of "hipster sexists" is. The lead could benefit from being rewritten, but any value judgements need to be clearly attributed, and not given in Wikipedia's voice. On a related note, I'm not sure The Frisky is a
reliable source, and I don't think it should be cited without indicating in the article that it's an opinion piece.
Grayfell (
talk)
07:50, 24 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Notability
A
WP:NEOLOGISM that, despite a flurry of enthusiasm in 2012 (reflected in the AFD) does not seem to have caught on. A JSTOR search came up blank,, despite the fact that parsing sexism is a florishing academic field. Google
[1] is not much better. And a g-News search establishes just how little use this NEO gets. Perhaps someone can propose a Merge target?
E.M.Gregory (
talk)
15:02, 24 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Sources found by Erik and those the I can find may indicate sufficient usage to make merge into a broader discussion of contemporary sexism plausible. 66 g-News hits
[2] does not establish widespread use. More significantly: "No results found for "hipster sexism" site:jstor.org.". Any suggestions for a Merge target?
E.M.Gregory (
talk)
16:48, 24 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose merging as detrimental. There is no need for this sweep-under-the-rug style of clean-up here. Topic has established notability through significant coverage from reliable sources. Editors please ping me if this detrimental behavior persists.
Erik (
talk |
contrib) (
ping me)21:12, 24 January 2017 (UTC)reply
User:Erik I have made good faith searches, and I remain skeptical about notability. It is very common for
WP:NEO terms to be brought to AFD and kept during the wave of enthusiasm for a concept or term shortly after it is coined. Making assertions cannot establish notability. Only sources can. Please read
WP:NEO or, if this is a topic you are familiar with, you might think about a topic for redirect. After a redirect, the page to which info is moved comes up on a search, and may indeed be more widely read in the context of a broader topic.
E.M.Gregory (
talk)
12:00, 25 January 2017 (UTC)reply
It is, in fact, amazing how many articles we have on topics that fail
WP:GNG. In particular, we have quite a number of
WP:NEO, written in a burst of enthusiasm about a term that, like hipster sexism, fail to gain traction, or could be far more efficiently discussed as a subhead in some broader article.
User:Erik, I'm guessing that you know something about hipster sexism, it would be really useful if you could suggest an aritcle into which this could be redirected and merged.
E.M.Gregory (
talk)
17:26, 25 January 2017 (UTC)reply
I repeat, since you attempt to sidestep what I said, you tagged for notability multiple articles within the space of minutes on 1/23. Please take a little longer to research each topic. For example, please see the link to the 2016 book that shows plenty of retrospective coverage about the term. Again, I oppose merging because of the false claim that there is no post-2012 coverage of the term.
Erik (
talk |
contrib) (
ping me)17:44, 25 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose merging as detrimental. There is no need for this sweep-under-the-rug style of clean-up here. This topic and
hipster racism have established notability through significant coverage from reliable sources. Editors please ping me if this detrimental behavior persists.
Erik (
talk |
contrib) (
ping me)21:12, 24 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Did you not see my link to the 2016 book, which is one of the most comprehensive about the term? It is (judging from the index) a seven-page section, so that is quite detailed (not to mention retrospective). There is also
this (and both actually seem to make the case for using "ironic sexism" more than "hipster sexism". I don't really have time to contribute to this article just because of your passerby tagging.
Erik (
talk |
contrib) (
ping me)12:24, 26 January 2017 (UTC)reply
@
E.M.Gregory: I don't think
Hipster (contemporary subculture) makes sense as a merge target. Hipster sexism actually has little to do with hipsters other than both make strong use of irony. I think
sexism would be a much more appropriate merge target (although there could be
WP:WEIGHT issues there since sexism is pretty huge subject). Note that I'm not endorsing such a merge, just suggesting the most appropriate target for a merge proposal.
Kaldari (
talk)
16:08, 20 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Hipster Sexism Peer Review by Abigail
Overall I think you have a great start to this topic, you come out with a good statement of what hipster sexism is and how it is played out. One comment I will make is that a couple times in your article you mention that hipster sexism is applied to women, can hipster sexism be applied to men as well? Also I think yo could benefit from adding heading and subheadings throughout. You did a great job on the sources and carrying over the definition and relating it to your main points. I do think you could expand slightly on how hipster sexism is related to the company Thinx, maybe added some quantity data to make your point stronger, but all in all it is looking to be a very good article!
"Hipster sexism can often be found in an entire company and not just a singular person. A company by the name of Thinx is one prime example of this in that its one product is menstruation underwear, a product meant solely for women, yet according to "reports across female focused media," employees that worked for this company were underpaid and offered only two weeks of maternity leave.[8]"
How does this relate to hipster sexism? Seems to me like this company is not making maternity leave/salary decisions in an ironic/self-aware sense at all. And poor benefits and compensation hardly amount to objectification/sexism against women, especially when the sentence doesn't clarify whether employees are women or not (a quick search revealed that the CEO is a woman). The sentence needs to be clarified or removed. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
98.26.105.140 (
talk)
16:45, 8 May 2020 (UTC)reply
I removed this paragraph. If I am misunderstanding it, please let me know here and explain how it relates to the topic.