Talk:Shiksa

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Shiksa article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 months

This article was nominated for deletion on 3 August 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

Judaism

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles 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.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Parallel of Sheigetz, including consideration for merge (into Goy)

The Sheigetz article Talk page has a section named "This Word Doesn't Need Its Own Page" but also has a section named "merge this article with that of another loathesome racial epithet?" which rejected merging into "N**g*r" but the feedback left open the merger of Sheigetz and Goy. The Male side's article was admittedly much skimpier, but I'd like to complete the Male/Female 2-part merger.

This is not to say that extra work might not be needed, but, as was pointed out, the "N**g*r" article is long. My mergers are just a followup to what someone else proposed in 2016. Pi314m (talk) 22:16, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Humble observation.

WP:NOTFORUM. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 00:17, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

From the article:

"The etymology of the word shiksa is partly derived from the Hebrew term שקץ shekets, meaning "abomination", "impure," or "object of loathing", depending on the translator."

...

"In North American Jewish communities, the use of "shiksa" reflects more social complexities than merely being a mild insult to non-Jewish women. It culturally evokes "the complex and layered notions of sexuality, its containment of both self-righteousness and self-loathing, the embedded yearning for and guilt of assimilation"."

Furthermore,

"In North America, the term is typically considered pejorative but not a severe slur."

That's quite the contrast: to go from 'abomination' to 'not a severe slur'. I don't have anything of substance to add to this article, seeing as I'm not a linguist, nor am I a Jewish woman living in North America grappling with her ethno-religious identity but, well, this verbal quasi-chiaroscuro is, to me anyway, curious and interesting.

SpicyMemes123 (talk) 10:12, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm typing this out on my phone. I am using Google chrome. When I highlight the word 'abomination', Google redirects me to the Wikipedia page on 'Hatred'. 'Hatred' is, to the best of my limited knowledge of the human condition, a strong word. Perhaps someone more qualified than I could qualify the article further?

SpicyMemes123 (talk) 10:18, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying you don't understand how a Biblical word meaning "abomination" ameliorated over a few thousand years to be a bit of a rude insult in a different country nowadays? And that this process of social linguistics is so incomprehensible it needs explanation? Because even over the last two decades (not millennia), and only concerning one language (not a journey through three, at least), words like "queer" have changed from mortally offensive to generally accepted. Is it really at all hard to understand? Kingsif (talk) 10:33, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a crime to admit my bald ignorance about how language works on a Wikipedia talk page? Yeah, it's kind of (to me, perhaps not to you!) a little striking that a word can be mollified in tone from literal hatred to "not a severe slur" -- almost completely adiaphorous in tone and substance. This is an interesting evolution. Instead of patronizing me, perhaps you could educate me by linking me to articles about word evolution of this type? Like the linguistic theory behind what I'm trying to get at. I can't quite articulate what I mean (if I did, I wouldn't be posing this question); but, maybe you can help a brother out by giving me something to gander at so I understand the world I live in (language is a part of this world) or, better yet, you can insult me by calling me an asshat in this comment chain and letting me further wallow in my self-admitted ignorance! Does that sound like a good dichotomy of practicable action to you? Or is there a third option available to you (ignoring me)? SpicyMemes123 (talk) 23:18, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]