This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Phallocentrism is not synonymous to phallogocentrism, and this article doesn't have any content so it should be deleted 136.160.160.166 15:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Phallocentrism is not synonymous to phallogocentrism, and this article doesn't have any content so it should be deleted 136.160.160.166 15:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)