Talk:Gender roles in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica

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): Annie yang. Peer reviewers: Lmz8.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

I want information on Aztec midwives and/or healers. Where is the best source to get some "over the top" information. Most text seem to all be so general. I want to learn about the woman during and after her midwifery training.

Copied

This entire article is copied from here & violates copy rights. Someone needs to fix this. Xuchilbara 03:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

No, that allexperts.com site is just another mirror of wikipedia content, so there's no copyright vio. The article originated here in wikipedia, and allexperts.com subsequently copied it over to their setup - see the smallprint there noting the text available under the GDFL.

Their acknowledgement that wikipedia was the source is admittedly hard to find- a conscious decision, most likely, on their part.--cjllw | TALK 00:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• • Updated: A Rebuttal**

The article is not a very good summary of studies in gender roles in Mesoamerica. First of all it talks about gender roles in MEsoamerica as if there is a single form of gender roles that has been existed in all mesoamerican cultures at all times. That is clearly false, it would need to nuance its statements to apply only to the specific cultures and time periods that the sources it uses are about. Secondly it has to do a much better job at surveying and including the large body of literature about gender roles in indigenous communities in Mesoamerica in both ancient, colonial and modern times. As it is the article is misleading because it makes unnuance generalizing statements about a very large and complex topic based on very few sources that are not the best possible sources on the topic. For example the first statement is directly false since many mesoamerican societies operate and have operated with third gender roles such as the Zapotec Muxe gender, such genders were viously not given from birth. (It is also incorrect to say that a role is given from birth it is the status that is given - the role has to be learned).·Maunus·ƛ· 22:58, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

A REBUTTAL: To the person above, no. The whole Muxe thing is merely an embodiment of the two genders, a mere amalgmation of the two genders, which, were each viewed as necessary whilst in a sort of agonistic unity (James Maffie, 2014). The supposed third gender is but an amalgamation of the two genders. To say otherwise is to Northernize (or Westernize) the nuances these Pre-Hispanic people assigned to concepts like gender. Arguably, gender was something they held as being metaphysically prior to the individual and the community at-large. The only way one could possibly read it in a more or less, say, "nuanced" manner is to pay attention to what the Mexica (or Aztec) for example, thought on these matters. Goodness inhered in gender insofar as it was held as being essential for a well-ordered society (Rhianna Rogers, 2007). Perhaps, once the body aged, maybe just maybe, so too did the one's gender once his/her fecundity and youth faded. This is analogous to the absolute value of the moral standard or tlamanitiliztli (Leon-Portilla, 1963) that inheres in a food source, for example, but which can and does cease to be possessed by the source upon its having gone bad; that is, perhaps there is nuance (of the kind you're thinking) in analogizing organic bodies such as ripe fruit or a fecund body in its prime in light of loss of vitality with regard to sustenance or fertility respectively. Perhaps then, we can allege (ala Caroline Dodd Pennock) this Western notion of "fluidity" or whatever. Otherwise, no.

Rebuttal 2: Okay. No one has the right to label any contribution misleading WITHOUT offering a sound rebuttal to what was said. Simply disagreeing does not make what others say "misleading". Until then, what is stated above is fact! Take it or leave it. This is, after all, the discussion section, not the actual article. No one is forcing the above contribution or opinion; you should not either! I'm taking screenshots for references.

Um... what about men?

Yeah, so, I don't know what the person who described this article as misleading was specifically thinking, but one thing they might've thought is that there's a bit of a discrepancy in the amount the article focuses on women versus the amount the article focuses on men.

For example, as of time of posting, the words "girl" and "women" are used a total of 27 times, whereas the words "boy(s)" "men" and "masculine" are used a total of 10 times. Exactly three facts are given relating to male gender roles (they are given "masculine" toys, they're given a machete at birth, and they're allowed to do all parts of agriculture.) In counting the "facts" given here about women's gender roles, I lost interest at a dozen; 400% fact discrepancy seems enough to prove my point that this article is imbalanced and therefore in need of rebalancing.

(Then again, one has to use the word "fact" loosely if one wants to count as factual the notion that Mesoamerican men won't let women plow fields because plows look and operate vaguely like penises.)

Frankly, this article reads less like an encyclopedia and more like a leaflet by militant feminists. Thoughts for the future: this article needs a little less implication of reverse penis envy, and a little more fair and neutral description of a world culture.

(Plows = penises... talk about misleading...)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gender roles in Mesoamerica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101119233308/http://etd.lib.fsu.edu/theses/available/etd-07182004-012228/ to http://etd.lib.fsu.edu/theses/available/etd-07182004-012228/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:17, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Article quality

This article is written really badly. What is mascpresenting? The flow is also not good. It should not define Mesoamerica in the first paragraph in that specific location like it does. Also why is it written in the present tense? It sounds like it was translated quickly and angrily by somebody with an agenda.

118.160.95.118 (talk) 14:49, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-01

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mramiramos02 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: WGST0825.

— Assignment last updated by Marimend (talk) 21:41, 17 October 2022 (UTC)