This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Psychology 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
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 within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to
philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article needs some serious cleaning up. There are multiple problems with grammar and citation but what's more distressing is that nowhere in this rambling pseudo-philosophical gobbledygook is there any meaningful definition (or even description) of Phallocentrism. I am reluctant to edit the article as I am not an expert in this nonsense. Someone please fix this so that it is not a complete waste of space.
Myrkkyhammas (
talk)
22:50, 20 March 2011 (UTC)reply
So what would be fantastic if the
Phallogocentrism page were not also a long series of rambling, empty statements and tautologies. Like I said, I am not an expert in the subject, but I am an academic and I can't for the life of me figure out what on Earth either of these terms actually mean. The majority of the phallogocentrism article appears to be a rather unsophisticated blend of sophistry and handwaving. The only "real" definition I can find is maddeningly vague and lacking any sort example to clarify just what the hell the article is going on about. Ostensibly there are a large number of very intelligent people working on this sort of stuff, so I try not to write it off completely. I'd really like to know what any of this stuff actually means.
Myrkkyhammas (
talk) 17:39, 21 March 2011 (UTC
Relaunch
Have relaunched the article from scratch, sticking close to sources, but have added a link from the old article as well. Hopefully can progress further from here.....
Jacobisq (
talk)
09:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)reply
Reinvigorate 2018
I think this article deserves improvement. Phallocentrism is still a socially important concept, so the article should be expanded well beyond the theorists mentioned here. I fixed some of the grammar, punctuation, and spelling. It's a start at least. Hopefully we can get some other editors to assist with the work.
AnaSoc (
talk)
00:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)reply
We might consider dividing the article into sections, e.g. Psychoanalysis (Freud, Lacan); Philosophy (Irigaray comes to mind); Literature; Medical (Leonore Tiefer); Feminist theory; Pornograph (another word, e.g. popular culture? (Simon Hardy has a chapter in The New Sexuality Studies 3rd edition)... other ideas?
AnaSoc (
talk)
01:49, 13 March 2018 (UTC)reply
An ideology?
For something that is supposedly an ideology, the subject doesn't appear to be described as one. In fact, the article seems to be about speculations concerning the existence of "phallocentrism" as well as speculations describing various views as "phallocentric" including the view that phallocentrism may not exist. To me, based on the article alone, "phallocentrism" appears to be more of an unfalsifyable social theory than anything real and tangible.
46.97.170.40 (
talk)
12:22, 10 March 2022 (UTC)reply