Talk:Germaine Greer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

Portal	Germaine Greer is maintained by WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is not assigned to a WikiProject or workgroup. Please help with your suggestions.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

	The Big Brother WikiProject aims to improve articles relating to Big Brother, and Germaine Greer has been identified as one of these articles. Anybody can help the WikiProject by trying to improve existing articles. Please add your name to the list of participants, if you are committed to helping out.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

• Talk:Germaine Greer/Archive1

Contents 1 Lead 2 20th Century? 3 POV 4 Photo? 5 Books, appropriateness thereof 6 Importance of Greer

[edit] Lead

Germaine Greer (born January 29, 1939) is a writer, broadcaster and retired academic, who is widely regarded as one of the most significant feminist voices of the 20th century.

She is the author of several highly acclaimed books. Her ground-breaking The Female Eunuch became an international bestseller when it was published in 1970, turning Greer overnight into a household name, and bringing her both adulation and criticism. I am removing the claims that Greer is "...widely regarded as one of the most significant feminist voices..." and "..several highly acclaimed..." because they are clearly weasel word statements. I am not saying that they the statements are false, merely that they are unreferenced. Please see WP:AWW --Surturz 12:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Surturz, this is not weasel wording at all. Greer is almost certainly the most significant feminist voice of the 20th century, never mind one of them. And her books are indeed highly acclaimed. It seems a little WP:POINT-ish to ask for references for claims that are so obviously correct. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 12:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't keep reverting, please. This is a long-standing intro. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 12:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe it is arguable. More significant than Naomi Wolf? More significant than Simone de Beauvoir? Who says? cites please, it is not too much to ask. I'll revert again in 24 hrs if cites can't be found. --Surturz 12:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

It's hard to take this seriously. You think Naomi Wolf is more significant in the feminist movement than Germaine Greer? They are not even in the same league. Anyway, the text has "one of the most...", so there's space for Greer and Wolf, if you insist. Grace Note 08:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

She only has one acclaimed book. Read her publications as described on Wikipedia. No other book receives acclaim. Indeed it appears the reverse - they are heavily criticised. And there are many more significant feminist voices. But, in any event, do not use absolutes. State is it arguable - but then cite appropriate authorities. 60.226.76.41 13:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

"So obviously correct" - I'm flabergasted - it is so obviously wrong. Just read the article. Chicago8 13:32, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

More to the point - read the Wikipedia article on Feminism. There are some 15-20 references to well known writers and voices on Feminism. There is no mention of Greer. Comment1 13:35, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Slim, you state you believe she is the most significant voice of the 20th century. The weight of opinion and evidence is quite clearly against this. Do not change the fair and balanced approach now taken. How do you answer her absence from the feminist page. Chicago8 22:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

No other book receives acclaim on the Wikipedia page. This article says the following: Second book (9 years later) "was published in 1979" – no other comment. 1984 book describes Greer's theme; the only comment is "The book consequently attracted a great deal of criticism." No acclaim. 1986 book on Shakespeare was "published" no other comment. A collection of newspaper and magazine articles written between 1968 and 1985; no comment there. 1989 book, "a diary and travelogue"; The Guardian said "her writing she was projecting her relationship with him onto all other men"; no acclaim there. 1991 book, New York Times said "brilliant, gutsy, exhilarating, exasperating fury of a book", which seems mixed, and perhaps that is acclaim, but I don't think so. 1995 and 1999 books described. No comment there. 2003, an art history book about the beauty of teenage boys, The Guardian "alleging that Greer had appeared to reinvent herself as a 'middle-aged pederast.'" No acclaim there. Summary: do not state there is acclaim without quoting an authority, and then quote the authority. It should not be a leading statement. 130.102.0.178 00:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

This is undoubtedly a controversial book - I looked up the Publishers review and the use of words such as searing, landmark and shockwaves all seem more appropriate and accurate. Perhaps this quote below plus one full critique is more constructive and will allow readers of the wiki page to draw their own conclusions?

I am not sure if the publisher's review is appropriate, can anyone advise me? If it is OK can someone offer an equivalent critique? (All I found were readers reviews on Amazon)

Synopses & Reviews Publisher Comments:[1] The clarion call to change that galvanized a generation.

"When Germaine Greer's The Female Eunuch was first published it created a shock wave of recognition in women, one that could be felt around the world. It went on to become an international bestseller, translated into more than twelve languages, and a landmark in the history of the women's movement. Positing that sexual liberation is the key to women's liberation, Greer looks at the inherent and unalterable biological differences between men and women as well as at the profound psychological differences that result from social conditioning. Drawing on history, literature, biology, and popular culture, Greer's searing examination of women's oppression is a vital, passionately argued social commentary that is both an important historical record of where we've been and a shockingly relevant treatise on what still remains to be achieved."

Slim - if you are going to claim she has written several acclaimed books, reference the acclaim. This discussion page indicates the opposite. You cannot made such bold claims without backup. The page article itself indicates the level at which her subsequent publications are regarded. See her publicaions section. Comment1 01:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment, will you please stop removing that material from the lead? It is insane to pretend she was not one of the most significant feminist voices of the 20th century, and to counter your WP:POINT, I just added a source. Yet still you remove it! It's very disruptive. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 06:57, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Slim - First the source you provided did not say that. The source regarded her with contempt for defnding female genital mutilation. Second the comments above establish there is no other acclaim. Third, please read the discussion above - I said "More to the point - read the Wikipedia article on Feminism. There are some 15-20 references to well known writers and voices on Feminism. There is no mention of Greer." Comment1 07:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

To be fair, the "source" you use mentions Greer once. Here are the two paragraghs from your source - "Was it before or after September 11 that thinkers of the Left - for feminism was a movement of the Left - decided that racism was a far more serious crime than sexism? When did cultural sensitivity trump women's rights? Was it about the time that Australian feminist Germaine Greer defended the practice of female genital mutilation because, as she pointed out, Western women put studs through their nipples and labia?

Consider this: a struggling, screaming little girl is held down by several people (usually women) while another woman cuts through her clitoris and inner labia, with the intention of ensuring this girl will never experience sexual pleasure; and the world's most famous feminist, to whom much is owed, I don't deny, can compare this practice to adult women choosing, for whatever silly reason, to decorate their sexual parts with metal. The UN estimates that three million girls are mutilated every year. It has lately been warning against the medicalisation of the practice: as societies develop, it is being carried out by health professionals, which doesn't make it less of an abuse." Comment1 07:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I've replaced the source with one that's less ambiguous. I don't share Greer's views on female "circumcision", nor do I rate her as an intellectual, but that doesn't mean that she is not a front-rank feminist, a household name. Please quit this ridiculous POV pushing. Grace Note 08:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Whether you call her significant or notable is merely a matter of semantics. I was really only conerned with the acclaimed books part, and thanks to you for changing that part. However, the source prior to your change was completely bogus. Well done in changing it. I agree it had been completely wrong. Comment1 12:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 20th Century?

"feminist of the 20th century" - should "of the 20th century" be removed? She's still active in the 21st, and her date of birth makes it pretty clear she wasn't around before the 20th.

Disagree - she is hardly an important feminist in the 21st century. The zenith of her influence as a feminist was in the 1970s. --Surturz 14:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV

The recent edits (8 March) whilst POV were very accurate. But note that to be included, they should be properly referenced. 130.102.0.178 08:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

OK so I may have been a bit POV in my recent edit. But the article does lack any sort of cohesive commentary on her influence, either in the 1960s and 70's, where she is largely agreed to have been very influential, or in the 21st century, where she is largely agreed to be irrelevant and antagonistic. I stand by the accuracy of what I wrote. She's defended female genital mutilation and football gang-rapists for god's sake, how on earth is that feminist?! I recall reading commentary to that effect, I think it was in the Australian in the days after Steve Irwin's death, and another by Janet Albrechsten on how her recent comments and actions have been massively anti-feminist. I'll look for the article when I can be bothered. ABVS 09:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Just remember Wikipedia:Attribution and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.--cj | talk 10:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

ABVS - I agree with you 100%. But you simply need to reference them, such as quoting the article from the Australian. The problem is there will be a range of Greer supporters who will censor statements unless it can be truly backed up. 130.102.0.178 23:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

My apologies. You did cite the Australian newspaper as authority. Perhaps it would be better to cite the actual book that it refers to. But, I think you comments are absolutely correct and this article completely supports it. I would support the reinstatement of the comments. Greer has shown by the demonstrated acts and behaviour in the Wikipedia article that after the 1970s she is (to use your words) "antogonistic" and "anti-feminist". I will reinstate part of it - but I think elsewhere. Well researched.

130.102.0.178 02:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Someone removed the reference part so I put it back. Before this person removes it again; explain why. Both the biography within the article and the Australian newspaper support the statements. They state referenced facts, 203.45.228.42 13:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photo?

Anyone have a link to a usable photo of Greer? --Surturz 01:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

No, we've tried to get one from her agents, but with no luck so far. The only one they've sent us belonged to someone else. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Books, appropriateness thereof

What is so special about "The Untamed Shrew" that means it gets its own sub-heading for a single paragraph? Also, forgive me for indulging in a bit of shameless POV, but could it be seen as inappropriate to have a picture of "The beautiful boy" on the page, especially seeing as the boy in question has since voiced his unease over the use of the photo? I mean, if someone were to write a book about how sexually attractive teenage girls are, and that men should go after these sweet young things more often and with more enthusiasm, you'd be lucky to avoid a hefty jail term. ABVS 10:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored.--cj | talk 10:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Importance of Greer

Things to consider:

• Betty Friedan wrote The Feminine Mystique in 1963, The Female Eunuch was published in 1970; Friedan also founded National Organization for Women.
• Since Encyclopadia Britannica has been cited, and I don't own a copy, here are word counts from their website:
  • Greer 147 words
  • Simone de Beauvoir 533
  • Betty Friedan 596
  • Gloria Steinem 389
  • Naomi Wolf 0

Assuming word count in Britannica is roughly equal to importance, Greer doesn't rate so highly. --Surturz 14:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

We don't say she was the only or the most important feminist. We say she's regarded as one of the most significant feminist voices of the 20th century. And she is. You've just shown it yourself by the fact she has an entry at the EB, and we have sources who say it too, one of which you removed for some bizarre reason.

Also, please watch the writing. The current lead flows better than the one you wanted to replace it with. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I really don't understand why you keep reinstating the Bone article reference in the lead, it says nothing about Greer except that she is an Australian feminist and that Greer tolerates female circumcision. --Surturz 14:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It calls her something like the world's most important feminist, something that was being disputed which is why I added it. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:28, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The article does no such thing, you should re-read it. Could you also please quote the part of her Encyclopedia Britannica article that rates her as one of the most important feminists? --Surturz 06:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

"... and the world's most famous feminist, to whom much is owed I won't deny, can compare this to western women who, for whatever silly reason, choose to decorate their private parts with metal". Famous, not important. Bone seems to be saying Greer was once an important feminist, but boy has she lost her relevance. It is an inappropriate source for the lead line.--ABVS 21:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)