Category talk:Feminist devil's dictionary

I question the purpose of including the word "devil" in the name of the category. If we go by patriarchal standards, feminists are devils already, and if we don't, why do we need to subvert it by using this religious vocabulary? To mark it an an opposition to the male canon? It's not very subversive when it's an homage to a male author in the first place! And it might cause confusion, by implying feminist angels. If we're going to use a religious term at all, something like "apostates to the patriarchy" might make more sense. Although that's probably too long, so "feminist" should suffice! --Ide Cyan 22:00, 26 February 2007 (PST)

...Hell(!), "dictionary", "lexicon" or "glossary" would all be sufficient names for a category regrouping word definitions within the encyclopedia. --Ide Cyan 22:48, 26 February 2007 (PST)

It is not supposed to suggest opposition to a male canon or imply feminist angels or anything of the sort. It's a reference to a specific famous work, The Devil's Dictionary. That term has been adapted by many political movements (such as, "the nuclear devil's dictionary") for a set of parodic or satirical definitions from "x" perspective (e.g., the anti-nuclear perspective). Lots of movement people put out little pamphlets about this; it's really a particular genre. I'm mostly familiar with it within Movement politics but I imagine it has currency in other political contexts as well. I liked the "feminist devil" construction which I thought had that arch satiric perspective. I thought about going with a Mary Daly wickedary construction ("wickedary") but that is too specific -- since only Mary Daly uses it, I didn't want to confuse anyone with thinking that our definitions were from the MD's wickedary itself. So I went with "feminist devil's dictionary." I didn't want it to just be "dictionary" because I was gathering the definitions that were pointed / satiric / etc. --LQ 05:21, 27 February 2007 (PST)

It may not be "supposed" to imply those things, but it *does* imply them. I don't care one whit that it's been adapted by other movements -- that doesn't mean it's right to adapt it for feminism. Reusing a reference to "a specific famous work" -- by a man -- makes that work more famous still. Which is why it's not subversive at all! Why, Mary Daly's "wickedary" wouldn't be too specific if others had taken it up the way they've taken up those Devil's Dictionaries. You're generalising from a male-defined norm and marginalising a woman's example here. (And Elizabeth Cady Staton's Woman's Bible predates the publication of the Devil's Dictionary in its collected form, too. Have you heard of that?) But even so, I'm not advicating we use hers, either -- making up a new term, or finding another one would work better for me. And anyhow, if your entire mission statement is already playful and political, why do you need to specify that the dictionary is too?? Should making the definitions points / satiric /etc be our norm? I can't get behind this category name at all. --Ide Cyan 10:26, 27 February 2007 (PST)