text:
User:Paol~enwiki

This is Paol. he Enjoys AMCAR's and Tuborg beer. When he lose at a racing game he get's mad. REALY MAD! He has been known to brake game controllers and keyboards, in his world class hissy-fits.

title: User:Paol~enwiki


text:
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children

The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) is an individually administered intelligence test for children between the ages of 6 and 16. The Fifth Edition (WISC-V; Wechsler, 2014) is the most recent version.

The WISC-V takes 45 to 65 minutes to administer. It generates a Full Scale IQ (formerly known as an intelligence quotient or IQ score) that represents a child's general intellectual ability. It also provides five primary index scores, namely Verbal Comprehension Index, Visual Spatial Index, Fluid Reasoning Index, Working Memory Index, and Processing Speed Index. These indices represent a child's abilities in discrete cognitive domains. Five ancillary composite scores can be derived from various combinations of primary or primary and secondary subtests.

Five complementary subtests yield three complementary composite scores to measure related cognitive abilities. Technical papers by the publishers support other indices such as VECI, EFI, and GAI (Raiford et al., 2015). Variation in testing procedures and goals resulting in prorated score combinations or single indices can reduce time or increase testing time to three or more hours for an extended battery, including all primary, ancillary, and complementary indices.

History
The original WISC (Wechsler, 1949), developed by the Romanian-American psychologist David Wechsler, Ph.D., was an adaptation of several of the subtests that made up the Wechsler–Bellevue Intelligence Scale (Wechsler, 1939), but also featured several subtests designed specifically for it. The subtests were organized into Verbal and Performance scales and provided scores for Verbal IQ (VIQ), Performance IQ (PIQ), and Full Scale IQ (FSIQ).

Each successive edition has been re-normed to compensate for the Flynn effect, ensuring not only that the norms do not become outdated, which is suggested to result in inflated scores on intelligence measures, but that they are representative of the current population (Flynn, 1984, 1987, 1999; Matarazzo, 1972). Additional updates and refinements include changes to the questions to make them less biased against minorities and females and updated materials to make them more useful in the administration of the test. A revised edition was published in 1974 as the WISC-R (Wechsler, 1974), featuring the same subtests. However, the age range was changed from 5–15 to 6–16.

The third edition was published in 1991 (WISC-III; Wechsler, 1991) and brought with it a new subtest as a measure of processing speed. In addition to VIQ, PIQ, and FSIQ scores, four new index scores were introduced: the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), the Perceptual Organization Index (POI), the Freedom from Distractability Index (FDI), and the Processing Speed Index (PSI).

The WISC-IV was produced in 2003. The WISC-V was published in 2014. The WISC-V has a total of 21 subtests. It yields 15 composite scores.

Test format
The WISC is one test in a suite of Wechsler intelligence scales. Subjects 16 and over are tested with the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), and children ages two and half years to seven years and seven months are tested with the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI). There is some overlap between tests: children aged 6 years 0 months through 7 years 7 months can complete the WPPSI or the WISC; children aged 16 can complete the WISC-V or the WAIS-IV. Different floor effect and ceiling effect can be achieved using the different tests, allowing for a greater understanding of the child's abilities or deficits. This means that a 16-year-old adolescent who has an intellectual disability may be tested using the WISC-V so that the clinician may see the floor of their knowledge (the lowest level).

There are five primary index scores, the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), Visual Spatial Index (VSI), Fluid Reasoning Index (FRI), Working Memory Index (WMI), and Processing Speed Index (PSI). Two subtests must be administered to obtain each of the primary index scores. The Full Scale IQ is derived from 7 of the 10 primary subtests: Both Verbal Comprehension subtests, one Visual Spatial subtest, two Fluid Reasoning subtests, one Working Memory subtest, and one Processing Speed subtest. Verbal Comprehension and Fluid Reasoning are weighted more heavily in the Full Scale IQ to reflect the importance of crystallized and fluid abilities in modern intelligence models (Wechsler, 2014).

The VCI is derived from the Similarities and Vocabulary subtests. The Verbal Comprehension scale subtests are described below:

 * Similarities – (primary, FSIQ) asking how two words are alike/similar.
 * Vocabulary – (primary, FSIQ) examinee is asked to define a provided word
 * Information (secondary) – general knowledge questions.
 * Comprehension – (secondary) questions about social situations or common concepts.

The VCI is an overall measure of verbal concept formation (the child's ability to verbally reason) and is influenced by semantic knowledge.

The VSI is derived from the Block Design and Visual Puzzles subtests. These subtests are as follows:

The VSI is a measure of visual spatial processing.
 * Block Design (primary, FSIQ) – children put together red-and-white blocks in a pattern according to a displayed model. This is timed, and some of the more difficult puzzles award bonuses for speed.
 * Visual Puzzles (primary) – children view a puzzle in a stimulus book and choose from among pieces of which three could construct the puzzle.

The FRI is derived from the Matrix Reasoning and Figure Weights subtests. The Fluid Reasoning scale subtests are described below:
 * Matrix Reasoning (primary, FSIQ) – children are shown an array of pictures with one missing square, and select the picture that fits the array from five options.
 * Figure Weights (primary, FSIQ) – children view a stimulus book that pictures shapes on a scale (or scales) with one empty side and select the choice that keeps the scale balanced.
 * Picture Concepts (secondary) – children are provided with a series of pictures presented in rows (either two or three rows) and asked to determine which pictures go together, one from each row.
 * Arithmetic (secondary) – orally administered arithmetic word problems. Timed.

The FRI is a measure of logical and quantitative reasoning.

The WMI is derived from the Digit Span and Picture Span subtests. The Working Memory scale's subtests are as follows:

The WMI is a measure of working memory ability.
 * Digit Span (primary, FSIQ) – children listen to sequences of numbers orally and to repeat them as heard, in reverse order, and in ascending order.
 * Picture Span (primary) – children view pictures in a stimulus book and select from options to indicate the pictures they saw, in order if possible.
 * Letter-Number Sequencing (secondary) – children are provided a series of numbers and letters and asked to provide them to the examiner in a predetermined order.

The PSI is derived from the Coding and Symbol Search subtests. The Processing Speed subtests are as follows:

The PSI is a measure of processing speed.
 * Coding (primary, FSIQ) – children under 8 mark rows of shapes with different lines according to a code, children over 8 transcribe a digit-symbol code using a key. The task is time-limited.
 * Symbol Search (primary) – children are given rows of symbols and target symbols, and asked to mark whether or not the target symbols appear in each row.
 * Cancellation (secondary) – children scan random and structured arrangements of pictures and marks specific target pictures within a limited amount of time.

The 2014 publication of the WISC-V contained five ancillary index scores that may be derived for special clinical purposes or situations: the Quantitative Reasoning Index (QRI), the Auditory Working Memory Index (AWMI), the Nonverbal Index (NVI), the General Ability Index (GAI), and the Cognitive Proficiency Index (CPI). Three of these ancillary index scores (NVI, GAI, and CPI) can be derived from the 10 primary subtests. The QRI and the AWMI can each be derived by administering one additional subtest from subtests that are within one of the five primary scales (Verbal Comprehension scale, Visual Spatial Index, Fluid Reasoning scale, Working Memory scale, and Processing Speed scale) but are not primary. The set of these subtests is termed secondary subtests (Wechsler, 2014).

Two ancillary index scores termed the expanded index scores were released the year after the 2014 publication, so are not included in the published manuals. These are the Verbal (Expanded Crystallized) Index (VECI) and the Expanded Fluid Index (EFI) (Raiford, Drozdick, Zhang, & Zhou, 2015).

Three complementary index scores are available to measure cognitive processes that are important to achievement and are sensitive to specific learning disabilities. The complementary index scores are the Naming Speed Index (NSI), designed to measure rapid automatized naming, and the Symbol Translation Index, designed to measure visual-verbal associative memory, which is sometimes termed visual-verbal paired associate learning in the published literature (Wechsler, 2014). The Naming Speed scale contains Naming Speed Literacy, which measures rapid automatic naming, and Naming Speed Quantity, which is the only commercially published and normed measure of rapid quantity naming, also known as subitizing. Naming Speed Quantity is uniquely sensitive to math achievement and specific learning disabilities in mathematics (Raiford et al., 2016; Wechsler, Raiford, & Holdnack, 2014).

Psychometric properties
The WISC–V normative sample consisted of 2,200 children between the ages of 6 and 16 years 11 months. In addition to the normative sample, a number of special group samples were collected, including the following: children identified as intellectually gifted, children with mild or moderate intellectual disability, children with specific learning disorders (reading, written expression, and math), children with ADHD, children with disruptive behavior, children who are English Language Learners, children with autism spectrum disorder with language impairment, children with autism spectrum disorder without language impairment, and children with traumatic brain injuries.

The WISC–V is also linked with measures of achievement, adaptive behavior, executive function, and behavior and emotion. Equivalency studies were also conducted within the Wechsler family of tests and with a Kaufman test (the KABC-II) enabling comparisons between various intellectual ability scores over the lifespan. A number of concurrent studies were conducted to examine the scale's reliability and validity. Evidence of the convergent and discriminant validity of the WISC–V is provided by correlational studies with the following instruments: WISC–IV, WPPSI–IV, WAIS–IV, WASI–II, KABC–II, KTEA–3, WIAT–III, NEPSY–II, Vineland–II, and BASC–II. Evidence of construct validity was provided through a series of factor-analytic studies and mean comparisons using matched samples of special group and nonclinical children.

Uses
The WISC is used not only as an intelligence test, but as a clinical tool. Some practitioners use the WISC as part of an assessment to diagnose attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and learning disabilities, for example. This is usually done through a process called pattern analysis, in which the various subtests' scores are compared to one another (ipsative scoring) and clusters of unusually low scores in relation to the others are searched for. David Wechsler himself suggested this in 1958.

However, the research does not show this to be an effective way to diagnose ADHD or learning disabilities. The vast majority of children with ADHD do not display certain subtests substantially below others, and many children who display such patterns do not have ADHD. Other patterns for children with learning disabilities show a similar lack of usefulness of the WISC as a diagnostic tool. Although, when Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory is used to interpret the WISC–V subtests, things tend to make a great deal more sense.

When diagnosing children, best practice suggests that a multi-test battery, i.e., multi-factored evaluation, should be used as learning problems, attention, and emotional difficulties can have similar symptoms, co-occur, or reciprocally influence each other. For example, children with learning difficulties can become emotionally distraught and thus have concentration difficulties, begin to exhibit behavior problems, or both. Children with ADHD may show learning difficulties because of their attentional problems or also have learning disorder or disability (or have nothing else). In short, while diagnosis of any childhood or adult difficulty should never be made based on IQ alone (or interview, physician examination, parent report, other test etc. for that matter) the cognitive ability test can help rule out, in conjunction with other tests and sources of information, other explanations for problems, uncover co-morbid problems, and be a rich source of information when properly analyzed and care is taken to avoid relying simply on the single summary IQ score (Sattler, Dumont, & Coalson, 2016).

The WISC can be used to show discrepancies between a child's intelligence and his/her performance at school (and it is this discrepancy that school psychologists look for when using this test). In a clinical setting, learning disabilities can be diagnosed through a comparison of intelligence scores and scores on an achievement test, such as the Woodcock Johnson III or Wechsler Individual Achievement Test II. If a child's achievement is below what would be expected given their level of intellectual functioning (as derived from an IQ test such as the WISC-IV), then a learning disability may be present. Other psychologists and researchers believe that the WISC can be used to understand the complexities of the human mind by examining each subtest and can, indeed, help in diagnosing learning disabilities.

Subsequently, the WISC can be used as part of an assessment battery to identify intellectual giftedness, learning difficulties, and cognitive strengths and weaknesses. When combined with other measures such as the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System–II (ABAS–II; Harrison & Oakland, 2003) and the Children's Memory Scale (CMS; Cohen, 1997) its clinical utility can be enhanced. Combinations such as these provide information on cognitive and adaptive functioning, both of which are required for the proper diagnosis of learning difficulties and learning and memory functioning resulting in a richer picture of a child's cognitive functioning.

The WISC–V is linked with the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement–Third Edition (KTEA–3; Kaufman & Kaufman, 2014) and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-III (WIAT–III; Pearson, 2009), a measure of academic achievement. This linkage provides information on both cognitive ability and academic achievement in children. Tests of intellectual functioning are used extensively in school settings to evaluate specific cognitive deficits that may contribute to low academic achievement, and to predict future academic achievement. Using the WISC–V in such a manner provides information for educational intervention purposes, such as interventions that address learning difficulties and cognitive deficits.

The WISC–V can also be used to assess a child's cognitive development, with respect to the child's chronological age. Using such comparisons with other sources of data, the WISC can contribute information concerning a child's developmental and psychological well-being. Very high or very low scores may suggest contributing factors for adjustment difficulties in social contexts that present problems in accepting such developmental diversity (or that cannot accommodate more than a certain level of high cognitive functioning).

A FSIQ score of 135 or above is accepted for admission to Intertel, a society for the intellectually gifted.

Translations
WISC has been translated or adapted to many languages, and norms have been established for a number of countries, including Spanish, Portuguese (Brazil and Portugal), Arabic, Icelandic, Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish, Czech, Croatian, French (France and Canada), German (Germany, Austria and Switzerland), English (United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia), Welsh, Dutch, Japanese, Chinese (Hong Kong, Taiwan), Korean (South Korea), Greek, Romanian, Indonesian, Slovenian, Hebrew and Italian. Separate norms are established with each translation. (Norway uses the Swedish norms). India uses the Malin's Intelligence Scale for Indian Children (MISIC), an adaptation of WISC by Arthur J. Malin. However, the norms of MISIC are outdated (have not been updated since 50 years) and many Clinical Psychologists do not use this test in their practice due to possible errors in measured IQs because of Flynn effect. Being from a developing nation, Indian children have undergone numerous changes in their intellectual abilities over the past 5 decades, which makes the application of MISIC redundant, though some psychometricians suggest that such changes are minor, hence the test is still applicable. Instead of MISIC, the fourth edition of WISC that was adapted and standardized for India in 2012, is more commonly accepted and used by clinicians. Being the most widely used test for intelligence assessment in India, MISIC still has its supporters, and will continue to be used by clinicians all over the country, owing to which its norms must be updated. The Japanese version of the WISC-IV was developed by Japanese psychologists Kazuhiko Ueno, Kazuhiro Fujita, Hisao Maekawa, Toshinori Ishikuma, Hitoshi Dairoku, and Osamu Matsuda.

Literature

 * Cohen, M. (1997). Children's memory scale. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
 * Flynn, J. R. (1984). The mean IQ of Americans: Massive gains 1932 to 1978. Psychological Bulletin, 95(1), 29–51.
 * Flynn, J. R. (1987). Massive IQ gains in 14 nations: What IQ tests really measure. Psychological Bulletin, 101(2), 171–191.
 * Flynn, J. R. (1999). Searching for justice: The discovery of IQ gains over time. American Psychologist, 54(1), 5–20.
 * Harrison, P. L., & Oakland, T. (2003). Adaptive behaviour assessment system–second edition). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
 * Kaplan, R.M. & Saccuzzo, D.P. (2005). Psychological Testing: Principles, applications, and issues. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth
 * Kaufman, A. S., Raiford, S. E., & Coalson, D. L. (2016). Intelligent Testing with the WISC-V. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
 * Matarazzo, J. D. (1972). Wechsler's measurement and appraisal of adult intelligence (5th ed.). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
 * Raiford, S. E., Zhang, O., Drozdick, L. W., Getz, K., Wahlstrom, D., Gabel, A., Holdnack, J. A., & Daniel, M. (2016). WISC-V Coding and Symbol Search in digital format: Reliability, validity, special group studies, and interpretation. Retrieved from http://images.pearsonclinical.com/images/Assets/WISC-V/Qi-Processing-Speed-Tech-Report.pdf
 * Raiford, S. E., Drozdick, L. W., Zhang, O., & Xuechun, X. (2015). Expanded index scores (WISC-V technical report 1). Bloomington, MN: Pearson. Retrieved from http://downloads.pearsonclinical.com/images/Assets/WISC-V/WISC-VTechReport1_FNL_v3.pdf
 * The Psychological Corporation. (2001). Wechsler individual achievement test—second edition. San Antonio, TX: Author.
 * Ward, S.B., Ward, T. J., Hatt, C.V., Young, D.L, & Mollner, N.R. (1995). The incidence and utility of the ACID, ACIDS, and SCAD profiles in a referred population. Psychology in the Schools, 32(4), 267–276
 * Watkins, M.W., Kush, J., & Glutting, J.J. (1997). Discriminant and predictive validity of the WISC-III ACID profile among children with learning disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 34(4), 309–319
 * Wechsler, D. (1939). Wechsler-Bellevue intelligence scale. New York: The Psychological Corporation.
 * Wechsler, D. (1949). Wechsler intelligence scale for children. New York: The Psychological Corporation.
 * Wechsler, D. (1974). Wechsler intelligence scale for children—revised. New York: Psychological Corporation.
 * Wechsler, D. (1991). The Wechsler intelligence scale for children—third edition. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
 * Wechsler, D. (2003). The Wechsler intelligence scale for children—fourth edition. London: Pearson.
 * Wechsler, D. (2014). Wechsler intelligence scale for children-fifth edition. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Talk:Postmodern feminism

Context
I could be mistaken, but I thought that someone's sex was a matter of biology, not language. I suspect that something is missing from the article that would explain this seemingly odd statement. -Casito⇝Talk 18:41, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Sex is a matter of biology. However, gender is not. Sarge Baldy 21:57, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Not according to postmodernist feminists, it isn't; that's one of their main distinguishing features. I've edited the article to try and explain their argument. VoluntarySlave 02:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

My apologies. I am familiar with the postmodernist usage of gender, but I just wasn't thinking about it at the time. Of course, gender is often (and imprecisely) used as a euphemism for sex, and I incorrectly assumed you were using it that way. Nevertheless, the article could probably use a bit more background information. I was exposed to the topic of gender vs. sex in a high-level anthropology class taught by a postmodernist professor. She had to take considerable time to explain, since a significant portion of the class was not familiar with it. Anyhow, I'll do my best to reduce ambiguity in the article, but, unfortunately, I know absolutely nothing about postmodern feminism, so I won't be much help in expanding the article. -Casito⇝Talk 01:43, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Gender isn't a matter of biology, but it isn't a matter of language, either. (At least not the meaning of "gender" as used in postmodern feminism, which has nothing to do with grammatical gender.) --Angr/undefined 13:20, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Actually, one of the most fundamental aspects of poststructuralist feminist (an off-shoot of postmodernism) is the concept that sex does not exist. That is to say, sexual identity is not based on fixed biological 'essence', but is in fact fluid and constructed entirely by culture (as controlled by language). There is, therefore, only gender. Judith Butler's brilliant 'Gender Trouble' is the place to start with this - Carla

I think you're getting confused with semantics. Sex does exist. Sex is a biological issue - if an organism has certain reproductive organs, e.g. a penis and gonads, its sex is male.

If postmodern feminists are indeed trying to use the word "sex" to refer to the social roles that males and females are supposed to play, instead of the word "gender", then they are doing themselves a disservice by muddying the semantic waters. Language is a matter of convention; in all feminist literature I have read, it is explicitly agreed that "sex" and "gender" denote to the respective interpretations put forward on this page.

So the article should read "... gender is constructed through language".

As an interesting sidenote on the role of language and gender, many African languages do not have gender-specific pronouns (i.e. he/she) and therefore do not suffer from the he/she denotations in western texts (texts = writing, speech etc.). There have been suggestions that gender oppression is a "western" phenomenon because of this (but by implication of any culture that has gender-specific language). [See O. Oyewumi, "Visualising the body", The invention of women: Making an African sense of gender studies pp 1-30, 1997] However, empirical evidence does not seem to bear this out (e.g. there is widespread oppression and abuse of women throughout Africa).

From my understanding, although gender is largely constructed through socialization, there are biological processes in utero related to gender development, mentionably the increase in androgen receptors, and the BST region of the hypothalamus. It is not simply a case that if you were to bring up a biological male child as female through their toys, treatment, exposure to female-typical activites etc that they would grow up feeling female. Amanda

 * I have labeled this page for expert attention since no one seems sure whether or not is gender or sex that recevies a new treatment in postmodern feminism. While I think the statements "the argument gender is itself constructed through language" and "gender is not something natural, nor is it something completely determinate and definable. [...] Gender, like other systems of meaning, is less like a cage, and more like a tool: it constrains but never completely determines what one can do with it." do not really make sense from a prespective of history of ideas since gender was considered simply a social construct since Simone de Beauvoir, a pre-postmodern feminist. --chemica 02:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

People are attempting to write an encyclopedic entry, but don't have a grasp of the fundamentals of the subject matter? Of course postmodern feminism deconstructs both sex and gender via post-structuralists linguistic approaches. A fundamental aspect of postmodernism was to deconstruct linguistic structures of modernity. This doesn't just apply to social constructs within modernity but of course applies to all linguistic endeavors, especially ontologically objective subjects such as sex. This is how equations become bias and privileged, and works of Newton could be labeled a rape manual by Harding: these are entailments of a purely deductive form. The correspondence theory of language is false, within the postmodern framework (it is in fact a cornerstone of the school of thought), so therefore there is no corresponding ontologically objective truth between language and object. Sex, therefore, is also a construct, not just gender. Butler's highly problematic, Gender Trouble, hammers away at these points, while abandoning sex all together and defining gender as a preforming act. This is why she argues that people should engage in bisexual activity and cross dress, it's just another deductive entailment of the philosophy. The concept of sex does not correspond to reality just as equations do not correspond to reality: they're both hierarchal forms that are inherently oppressive and bias since they were constructed by men (note linguistic trap of contradiction). These ideas are precisely WHY Harding and Butler are well known.

POV
This article is extraordinarily POV. The final paragraph needs extensive editing. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the subject to fix it. GenericGabriel 21:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

-- I've added a few quick edits, as this was so scrappy, but don't have time to do anything larger. Will try to come back later and revamp it more fully. Silver Avocado 22:50 BST, 9th June 2006.

Frug & an expert opinion
The question of postmodern feminism is a vexed one. I say this because of the definitions of post-feminism the first being "after feminism" the second being "postmodern, poststructural, postfeminsim". Whether this article should exist seperately from postfeminism is a moot point - IMHO they should be merged. From a Gender studies expert point of view, Frug's work is over emphasized. Frug's conclusions about "sex" are to similar to Judith Butler's to give her work this amount of emphasis.--Cailil 01:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Postmodern feminism. 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/20130701074409/https://sites.google.com/a/umich.edu/lawmjgl/publications/volume-4-issue-1 to https://sites.google.com/a/umich.edu/lawmjgl/publications/volume-4-issue-1

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Bornstein
Can someone explain or expand the 'Bornstein' section; specifically how it relates to 'Origins and theory'. Where are they cited as creating the term or expanding on its theory? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.168.59.54 (talk) 05:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Group Edit for WikiEdu
We are a group of students looking to edit this page for our WikiEdu classroom project. We are not entirely finished but from looking at this article want to change:
 * The lead paragraph to be more specific and sourced
 * Under origins and theories, get rid of unsourced claims in Frug's section
 * Delete Bornstein section due to lack of information, lack of sources, and relevance
 * In French Feminism, get rid of long quotes, unsourced content, format into paragraph form, and add more detail/content
 * add a section about the intersection of postmodern feminism and technology
 * also edit critiques section into paragraph form, adding more critiques with sources, and getting rid of large non-cited/unrelated quotes

This is what we have so far:

"Lead"

Postmodern feminism is a mix of post structuralism, postmodernism, and French feminism. The goal of postmodern feminism is to destabilize the patriarchal norms entrenched in society that have led to gender inequality. Postmodern feminists seek to accomplish this goal through rejecting essentialism, philosophy, and universal truths in favor of embracing the differences that exist amongst women to demonstrate that not all women are the same. These ideologies are rejected by postmodern feminists because they believe if an universal truth is applied to all woman of society, it minimizes individual experience, hence they warn women to be aware of ideas displayed as the norm in society since it may stem from masculine notions of how a women should be portrayed.

Postmodern feminists seek to analyze any notions that have led to gender inequality in society. Postmodern feminists analyze these notions and attempt to promote equality of gender through critiquing logocentrism, supporting multiple discourses, deconstructing texts, and seeking to promote subjectivity. Postmodern feminists are accredited with drawing attention to dichotomies in society and demonstrating how language influences the difference in treatment of genders.

The inclusion of postmodern theory into feminist theory is not readily accepted by all feminists, some believe postmodern thought undermines the attacks that feminist theory attempts to create, while other feminists are in favor of the union. For this reason, postmodernism and feminism have always had an uneasy relationship.

Awhite07 (talk) 03:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Frug

 * (edited section to remove unsourced content/ statements)

 * Mary Joe Frug suggested that one "principle" of postmodernism is that human experience is located "inescapably within language". Power is exercised not only through direct coercion, but also through the way in which language shapes and restricts our reality. She also stated that because language is always open to re-interpretation, it can also be used to resist this shaping and restriction, and so is a potentially fruitful site of political struggle.

 * Frug's second postmodern principle is that sex is not something natural, nor is it something completely determinate and definable. Rather, sex is part of a system of meaning, produced by language. Frug argues that "cultural mechanisms ... encode the female body with meanings", and that these cultural mechanisms then go on explain these meanings "by an appeal to the 'natural' differences between the sexes, differences that the rules themselves help to produce".

French Feminism
 * French feminism as it is known today, is an Anglo-American invention coined by Alice Jardine to be a section in a larger movement of postmodernism in France during the 1980s. This included the theorizing of the failure of the modernist project, along with its departure. More specifically for feminism, it meant returning to the debate of sameness and difference. The term was further defined by Toril Moi, an academic with a focus on feminist theory, in her book Sexual/Textual Politics. In this book she further defined French feminism to only include a few authors such as Hélène Cixous, Luce Irigaray, and Julia Kristeva, while also creating a distinction between French feminism and Anglo-American Feminism. She states that the difference between the two is that Anglo-American feminists want to find a "woman-centered perspective" and a woman identity since they were not given the chance to have one in the past. French Feminists believe there is no identity for a woman but that "the feminine can be identified where difference and otherness are found." Elaine Marks, an academic in the field of Women's Studies, noted another difference between French and American feminists. French feminists, specifically radical feminists, criticized and attacked the systems that benefit men, along with widespread misogyny as a whole, more intensely than their American counterparts. Through American academics contriving their own concept of French feminism, it separated and ignored the already marginalized self-identifying feminists, while focusing on the women theorists associated with Psych et po (Psychanalyse et politique) and other academics who did not always identify as feminists. This division ultimately ended up placing more importance on the theories of the French feminists than the political agenda and goals that groups such as radical feminists and the Mouvement de liberation des femmes (women's liberation movement) had at the time.

Critiques
 * Gloria Steinem crop.jpg

There have been many critiques of postmodern feminism since it originated in the 1990s. Most of the criticism has been from modernists and feminists supporting modernist thought. They have put a focus on the themes of relativism and nihilism as defined by postmodernism. Though modernist critics believe more importantly, that through abandoning the values of Enlightenment thought, postmodern feminism "precludes the possibility of liberating political action." This concern can be seen in critics like Meaghan Morris, who have argued that postmodern feminism runs the risk of undercutting the basis of a politics of action based upon gender difference, through its very anti-essentialism. Roberta G. Sands and Kathleen Nuccio also raise concerns about postmodern feminists redefining “women” and the threat it may impose on the “political agenda for feminists”. The belief that the term “woman” does not identify with all women, contradicts the belief of feminists politics, who rely on unity. Feminists cannot “pursue collective political action on women’s issues” if it is argued that women do not share the same interests and concerns. Gloria Steinem has also criticized feminist theory, and especially postmodernist feminist theory, as being overly academic, where discourse that is full of jargon and unaccessible is helpful to no one.

Sophieb905 (talk) 13:31, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Text above is the result of multiple edits to the same content, by two student editors. See the history tab for details. Mathglot (talk) 09:20, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Collapsed several edits by student editors containing proposed article text. Mathglot (talk) 09:20, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Talk page edits by student editors
This Talk page is was in a confused state, due to a large amount of article text pasted into the page, missing signatures or signatures removed and then readded, as well as interleaved edits in the middle of previous edits by the same or other editors. Please read the talk page guidelines at WP:TALK and pay attention to how to respond to previous edits using colons for indentation, and proper threading. Do not interrupt or change the text or comments that anybody else added to the page; leave it as it is, right or wrong. You can add your own comments after their comments, following proper threading technique. It's okay to add some proposed text for the article here for discussion, but consider using a sandbox page or a draft page so the Talk page doesn't get too cluttered or taken over with long stretches of article text, or consider using collapse templates cot and cob to hide long sections of article text by default. Pinging involved editors and Shalor. Mathglot (talk) 09:15, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I've collapsed the proposed section of article text, to improve readability of this talk page. Mathglot (talk) 09:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Post-modern Feminism and Biology
I've removed the section "The link between Post-modern Feminism and Biology (see rev. 894311538 for pevious appearance of page). (Content was added by in three edits on April 17.)  The subsections were removed because there is no demonstrated connection between them, and the topic, which is "Postmodern feminism" or the section, which is about feminism and biology. In detail: Also, please pay attention to recommendations concerning section names, which, among other things, should be in title case (initial cap only, except for nouns normally capitalized in running text). Pinging User:Shalor (Wiki Ed) Mathglot (talk) 09:44, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * lead paragraph – made arbitrary, unsourced claims and assertions like, "a woman's body is more important than ever to her rights as a human".
 * Liberal Feminism – removed this subsection including the three included references. It started off with an okay definition, than veered into some niche assertions about science. But the main objection is, what does this subsection have to do with "the link between Post-modern Feminism and Biology"? Nothing, or at least, nothing is said about it here. Might be appropriate in some other article, or some other section of this article, but not in this "Link between..." section.
 * Radical Feminism – removed. "radical feminism rejects the possibility of science from an objective perspective..." and veers off into too much emphasis on scientific institutions. There might be some truth to this, but it's way out of proportion to what radical feminist theorists write about. But beyond that, what's the link here to the section title? As for the case of the "Liberal feminism" section above it, it hasn't been demonstrated. Doesn't belong in this article, or at least, not here.
 * Racial/African-American Feminism – removed. The description given in this subsection is all well and good, but what is the conntection to biology, or to the topic of the article, Postmodern feminism? There doesn't seem to be any.
 * Thank you so much ! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:40, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Photo of Gloria Steinem in Critiques section
I am questioning the inclusion of a photo of Gloria Steinem in this article. Steinem is a critic of postmodern feminism. To include a photo of a critic but no photo of any of the postmodern feminists themselves seems unbalanced. Carol Goudie (talk) 09:58, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 5 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ksj47.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 January 2021 and 14 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zeyang Han.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 March 2019 and 29 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ddurandisse, Sophieb905, Awhite07.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture
— Preceding unsigned comment added by ACHorwitz (talk • contribs) 18:33, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Roberta G. Sands and Kathleen Nuccio also raise concerns about postmodern feminists redefining “women” and the threat it may impose on the “political agenda for feminists”. The belief that the term “woman” does not identify with all women, contradicts the belief of feminists politics, who rely on unity. Feminists cannot “pursue collective political action on women’s issues” if it is argued that women do not share the same interests and concerns.

Within Frug paragraph
Words speak about sex, and I would add sex between humans, because it seems more complete and acurate. 31.44.144.210 (talk) 09:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Postmodern feminism


text: User talk:82.77.74.136

title: User talk:82.77.74.136


text:
Optacon

The Optacon (OPtical to TActile CONverter) is an electromechanical device that enables blind people to read printed material that has not been transcribed into Braille. The device consists of two parts: a scanner which the user runs over the material to be read, and a finger pad which translates the words into vibrations felt on the finger tips. The Optacon was conceived by John Linvill, a professor of Electrical Engineering at Stanford University, and developed with researchers at Stanford Research Institute (now SRI International). Telesensory Systems manufactured the device from 1971 until it was discontinued in 1996. Although effective once mastered, it was expensive and took many hours of training to reach competency. In 2005, TSI suddenly shut down. Employees were "walked out" of the building and lost accrued vacation time, medical insurance, and all benefits. Customers could not buy new machines or get existing machines fixed. Some work was done by other companies but no device with the versatility of the Optacon had been developed as of 2007. Many blind people continue to use their Optacons to this day. The Optacon offers capabilities that no other device offers including the ability to see a printed page or computer screen as it truly appears including drawings, typefaces, and specialized text layouts.

Description
The Optacon consists of a main electronics unit about the size of a portable tape recorder connected by a thin cable to a camera module about the size of a penknife (See Fig. 1).

The main electronics unit contains a "tactile array" onto which the blind person places their index finger. The Optacon user moves the camera module across a line of print, and an image of an area about the size of a letterspace is transmitted via the connecting cable to the main electronics unit. The tactile array in the main electronics unit contains a 24-by-6 matrix of tiny metal rods, each of which can be independently vibrated by a piezoelectric reed connected to it. Rods are vibrated that correspond to black parts of the image, thus forming a tactile image of the letter being viewed by the camera module. As the user moves the lens module along the print line, tactile images of print letters are felt moving across the array of rods under the user's finger. The Optacon includes a knob to adjust the intensity at which the tactile array rods vibrate, a knob to set the image threshold between white and black needed to turn on the vibration of the rods in the tactile array, and a switch that determines whether images will be interpreted as dark print on a light background or as light print on a dark background.

Lyle Thume, an Optacon user and director of blind rehabilitation services at the Rehabilitation Institute in Detroit summed up the Optacon this way in 1973: "It opens up a whole new world to blind people. They aren't restricted anymore to reading material set in braille."

History
The Optacon was developed by John Linvill, a professor of Electrical Engineering at Stanford University, who later became head of the Electrical Engineering Department. The Optacon was developed with researchers at Stanford Research Institute (now SRI International). Linvill was one of Telesensory's founders and Chairman of the Telesensory Board. The initial stimulus for development of the Optacon was Linvill's daughter, Candy (born 1952, blind since the age of 3). Using the Optacon, Candy graduated from Stanford and received a PhD. She has worked as a clinical psychologist since, so, like her father, she is often referred to in the press as "Dr. Linvill".

In 1962, during a sabbatical year in Switzerland, Linvill visited an IBM laboratory in Germany, where he observed a high speed printer that used a set of small pins—like hammers—to print letters onto strips of paper. He thought, "If you could feel the hammers with your fingertip, you could surely recognize the image." So on our return to Zurich, I told my wife and son and daughter, Candy, who was blind: "Guys, I've got the most magnificent idea.  We'll make something that will let Candy read ordinary printed material." And although his family laughed at this notion, "oh, that'll never work!" the idea for the Optacon was born.

Upon returning to Stanford, Linvill, together with graduate students G.J. Alonzo and John Hill, developed the concept further with the support of the Office of Naval Research. A key aspect of Linvill's concept was to use vibrating piezoelectric reeds, called bimorphs, to move the pins in a two-dimensional array to produce tactile images. The idea of using vibrating bimorphs was critical for several reasons:
 * The high power efficiency of the piezoelectric bimorphs made a battery-powered reading machine possible.
 * The small size and weight of the bimorphs was also essential for portability.
 * Later psychophysical experiments discovered that vibration around the resonance of conveniently sized bimorphs was optimum for the sense of touch.

In 1964 Linvill applied for a patent, and U.S. Patent 3,229,387 was granted in January 1966.

Early history
Amazingly, in 1913 a reading machine for the blind, called the optophone, was built by Edmund Edward Fournier d’Albe in England. It used selenium photosensors to detect black print and convert it into an audible output which could be interpreted by a blind person. A small number were built with reading being exceedingly slow for most people. The concept of a tactile optical scanning device can be traced back to 1915, as mentioned (and dismissed) in Fournier d'Albe's 1924 book, The Moon-Element. Described as a device using iron pins stimulated by electro-magnets to convey dark and light in a tactile manner, questions hung over the feasibility of such a device, and indeed, if it existed at all at that time.

Of note, in In 1943, Vannevar Bush and Caryl Haskins of the wartime Office of Scientific Research and Development directed resources toward the development of technologies to assist wounded veterans. The Battelle Institute was provided with funding to develop an improved Optophone and Haskins Laboratories was funded to conduct research toward a synthetic speech reading machine. This group turned “sour” on the Optophone approach after concluding that reading would be too slow.

In 1957 U.S. Veteran's Administration, Prosthetic and Sensory Aids Service (PSAS), under Dr. Eugene Murphy, began funding the development of a reading machine for the blind. The principal investigator on this project was Hans Mauch, a German scientist brought to the U.S. after World War II. (During World War II Mauch worked for the German Air Ministry as part of the German V-1 missile development team.)

Mauch worked on reading machines having an “optophone-like” output, a “speech-like” sound output, and a synthetic speech output. The only one of these that was competitive to the Optacon development was the Stereotoner, basically an improved optophone. The Stereotoner design concept was that the user would move a vertical array of photosensors across a line of text. Each photosensor would send its signal to an audio oscillator set to a different frequency, with the top photosensor driving the highest frequency and the bottom photosensor driving the lowest frequency. The user would then hear tones and chords from which the letters could be identified.

Initially Linvill was unaware that the Optacon was not the only reading machine for blind people under development. However, in 1961 James Bliss had returned to SRI from MIT where he had done a doctoral dissertation in a group working on the application of technology for the problems of blindness. Bliss was interested in basic research on the tactile sense, to better understand how it could be used to substitute for loss of vision. While at MIT, Bliss became aware of the existing research and development on reading machines for the blind, as well as the researchers and funding agencies. At SRI Bliss had obtained funding for his tactile research from the Department of Defense and NASA, who were interested in tactile displays for pilots and astronauts. This had enabled him to obtain a small computer and develop software to drive hundreds of tactile stimulators he had developed for research purposes. These tactile stimulators were small air jets, which were ideal for research because their arrangement and spacing could easily be changed and the contact to the skin was always assured. Bliss was studying how well subjects could recognize dynamic patterns presented on his array of air jet stimulators.

Funding for Optacon research and development
After Linvill and Bliss decided to join forces to work on Linvill's vision of a reading machine, it became apparent that they needed to obtain funding for this objective, rather than the objectives of Department of Defense and NASA which had provided the funding up until that time. As a start, Bliss suggested that they visit Dr. Murphy at the VA, since he was the only then currently active government source of reading machine funding. However, Bliss knew that the research on “Optophone-like” reading machines had created negativity toward this “direct translation” approach because of the slow reading rates obtained. To counter this negativity, Bliss programmed an SRI computer to present text in a moving belt display, similar to that in Times Square New York City, on both his air jet stimulator array and on the Stanford bimorph array. Linvill's blind daughter, Candy, was then the subject who attempted to learn to read the text presented in this fashion. After several hours of training and practice, Candy was reading in excess of 30 words per minute. Bliss and Linvill felt this computer driven test was a valid simulation of the reading machine they proposed to develop. They felt the 30 words per minute reading rate achieved in a short time by Candy proved that if such a reading machine were developed, it would be useful. They didn't know what the upper limit of reading speed would be, but had hopes that 100 words per minute could be achieved, since this was typical Braille reading rate.

Armed with this result, Bliss and Linvill made an appointment to visit Dr. Murphy in Washington, D.C. Initially the meeting was going very well, with Dr. Murphy seeming to be very positive toward the possibility of funding the development. Murphy then mentioned that Linvill would have to assign his patent to the Veterans Administration. Linvill refused and the meeting abruptly ended.

As it turned out, this rejection was fortunate. The Office of Education was directed by a colleague of Linvill's from when he worked at Bell Laboratories. Development of a reading aid for the blind was very relevant to their mission since providing instructional material to blind mainstreamed students was an important problem. Linvill presented the Optacon idea to the Office of Education and it was enthusiastically received. This led to funding at a higher level (over $1.8 million of 1970 dollars over 4 years) than would have been likely from the Veterans Administration.

This higher level of funding was necessary to develop the custom integrated circuits that enabled the Optacon's small size, which was critical to its success. The Optacon project also assisted Stanford in establishing their Integrated Circuits facilities, leading MIT's Dean of Engineering to remark that Stanford got the lead in integrated circuit research because of the Optacon.

Development of the Optacon
With funding established, Bliss joined the Stanford faculty half-time, the other half being at SRI. At SRI tactile reading experiments were conducted to maximize the reading rates achievable with the Optacon, as well as development of the bimorph tactile array and the optics for the camera. At Stanford custom integrated circuits were developed including the silicon retina and the drivers for the bimorphs, since they required a higher voltage than normal for solid state circuits at that time.

The first technical challenge toward developing the reading machine was how to build a "tactile screen" that could create a dynamic tactile image which was perceivable by the user and that had a refresh rate fast enough for useful reading rates. Linvill's initial work with graduate students Alonzo and Hill indicated that a piezoelectric bimorph could be suitable as the transducer to convert an electrical signal into a mechanical motion. The advantages of bimorphs were efficient transduction of electrical to mechanical energy (important for battery operation), small size, fast response, and relatively low cost.

Alonzo determined that at vibration frequencies around 300 Hz, the amplitude needed for detection was much less than for frequencies around 60 Hz. Moreover, for reading rates of 100 words per minute, vibration rates of at least 200 Hz were needed. Linvill calculated the length, width, and thickness of a bimorph reed necessary for a resonance frequency of 200 Hz that could produce enough mechanical energy to stimulate a fingertip above the threshold of the sense of touch.

Based on these calculations, an array of bimorphs was constructed for reading rate tests with the computer simulation at SRI. The computer simulation presented tactile images of perfectly formed and aligned letters in a stream that moved across the bimorph array. Candy Linvill and other blind subjects learned to read text presented in this fashion with encouraging results. However, this simulation differed from the conditions that the user would encounter with an Optacon in the real world. There would be a wide range of type fonts and print qualities, plus the user would have to move the camera across the text rather than the computer moving the text across the tactile screen at a fixed rate. It wasn't known how much the mental load of controlling the camera would reduce the reading rate.

In considering the transition from the text being presented by the computer to the user moving a camera across a printed page, Bliss realized that there was a critical flaw in the design of the Veteran Administration Stereotoner. Since English alphabetic characters can be adequately displayed with 12 vertical pixels, the Stereotoner designer had assumed that only 12 photocells would be needed in the camera. However, this assumes perfect alignment between the camera and the printed text, which is never the case with a hand held camera. When the alignment is random, as with a hand held camera, a well known engineering theorem states that twice as many pixels are needed. Therefore, the Optacon was designed with 24 vertical pixels instead of 12. This theorem isn't applicable in the horizontal dimension, so the columns in a two dimensional array can be twice as far apart as the rows.

When a single column of 24 pixels is scanned across a line of text, all of the information is acquired. However, with the sense of touch, people are capable of perceiving two dimensional images. Bliss wondered if the reading rate would be higher if more than one column of 24 pixels were used, and if so, how many columns would be appropriate? Experiments with the computer simulation determined that reading rate increased dramatically up to 6 columns, which was a window width of about one letter space and this was about the maximum number of columns that could be placed on one finger. Jon Taenzer, one of Bliss’ Stanford graduate students, ran visual reading experiments on the same computer simulation and determined that for visual reading, reading rates continued to increase up to a window width of up to about 6 letter spaces. This led to a number of experiments toward trying to increase the tactile reading rate by increasing the number of columns in the tactile screen so more than one letter would be in view at a time. Instead of moving the text across only the index fingertip, tests were run with a screen wide enough for both the index finger and the middle finger to be used so two letters could be simultaneously tactually sensed. In another experiment the moving belt of text was run down the length of the fingers, rather than across them. The only approach that showed any promise of increasing the reading rate was when both index fingers were used, rather than the index finger and the adjacent middle finger. However, the use of both index fingers was incompatible with the design concept of using one hand to control the camera while the other hand sensed the tactile screen. The Optacon design was therefore based on an array of 24-by-6 pixels in both the camera retina and bimorph array.

Other questions had to do with the spacing between the tactile pins in the bimorph array and their frequency of vibration. It was well known from experiments reported in the literature that people could distinguish two points from one with their index finger when they were a millimeter apart. However these previous experiments had not been done with vibrating pins. What effect would the vibration have and was there an optimum vibration frequency? These questions were answered by experiments conducted by Charles Rogers, a Stanford graduate student working with Bliss.

While the neurophysiological data suggested that the smallest two point thresholds would be at vibration frequencies less than 60 Hertz, Roger's experiments showed that the two point thresholds around 200 Hertz were actually smaller. Bliss hosted a conference at SRI, including some leading neurophysiologists and psychophysicists, to try to resolve this discrepancy, but no one had an explanation. From a practical standpoint, Roger's result was very fortunate because the higher frequencies were required for refresh rates fast enough for reading up to 100 words per minute and for use of bimorphs small enough to construct a 24-by-6 array that fit on a fingertip.

The question of whether 144 tactile stimulators on a fingertip could be independently distinguished led to a confrontation at a scientific conference between Bliss and Frank Geldard, a University of Virginia professor. Geldard had written a major book on the human senses and was a leading researcher on using the sense of touch to communicate information. When asked how many tactile stimulators should be used in a tactile display, he maintained that no more than 8 tactile stimulators could be independently distinguished, and these should be on widely separated parts of the body. Bliss’ data showing useful reading with 144 stimulators on a fingertip appeared to be in conflict with Geldard's research. The difference was between communicating using two dimensional tactile images versus an 8-point code. Both Bliss and Geldard were reporting similar reading rates, but in the days before high accuracy optical character recognition, the Optacon approach was much more practical.

These experiments determined the design parameters for Optacon's man-machine interface: a 24-by-6 array of tactile stimulators, vibrating between 250 and 300 Hz, and with the rows spaced at 1 mm and the columns spaced at 2 mm (See Fig. 2).

In parallel with this human factors research was a pioneering effort to realize this design in a convenient portable unit, which would be critical for its success. In July 1972, Harry Garland suggested a new design for the Optacon that incorporated the sensor, tactile array, and electronics in a single hand-held unit. Roger Melen and Max Maginness developed a prototype of the unit, called the "one-hand" Optacon, at Stanford University.

Optacon integrated circuit development
In the 1960s, when the Optacon was being developed, integrated circuitry was in its infancy, and no suitable integrated solid state arrays of photo detectors was available. The earliest complete Optacon-like reading aids were built at Stanford and SRI with a lens system that focused the images from the printed page on a fiber optic bundle with individual fibers connected to discrete phototransistors. Not only was this system large and bulky, it was expensive and difficult to assemble. An effort was launched to develop a monolithic silicon retina with an array of 24-by-6 phototransistors about the size of one letter space so simple optics with no magnification could be used. Basic research in integrated circuit technology available at that time had to be conducted, resulting in Ph.D. theses by several Stanford graduate students, including J. S. Brugler, J. D Plummer, R. D. Melen, and P. Salsbury. The phototransistors had to be sufficiently sensitive, fast enough for the required refresh rate, have a spectral response appropriate for detecting ink on paper, in a closely packed matrix without blind spots, and interconnected so only connections to the rows and columns were needed.

The successful fabrication of such a silicon retina was a major milestone toward a practical Optacon.

Optacon electronics, optics, and packaging
The first Optacon prototype using this retina was completed on September 1, 1969. It was portable and completely self-contained in that it combined the stimulator array, electronics, batteries, and camera in a single package measuring 13.5″ by 8″ by 2.25″. The total weight was 9 pounds. The low power electronics design in this unit was a joint effort by J. S. Brugler and W. T. Young which made possible about 12 hours of sustained operation from the rechargeable batteries. This unit included an improved optical system and camera plus a tactile bimorph driven screen, both developed by James Baer and John Gill at SRI.

As integrated circuit technology progressed, another custom integrated circuit was developed in the Stanford laboratories. This integrated circuit contained 12 bimorph drivers and interfaced between the 5 Volt circuitry and the 45 Volts required to drive the bimorphs. The incorporation of this circuit and the use of lower power components enabled the size to be reduced to 8″ by 6″ by 2″ and the weight to be reduced to four pounds. Again the team of Brugler, Young, Baer, and Gill were responsible for the design of electronics, optics, and packaging. The first Optacon incorporating these advances, Model S-15, was a significant milestone. It won an IR-100 Award as one of 100 best designed products in 1971 and was the prototype of the Telesensory Optacon. It is now at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California.

Optacon training
With a number of operational prototype Optacons available, an effort was made to get them in daily use by blind people in the community. The engineers were anxious to know how well the Optacon components held up in a real life environment, what uses were made of the Optacon, how much was it used, and how important was it in educational, vocational, and daily living. Several blind people in the Palo Alto community volunteered to participate, and Carolyn Weil was hired to coordinate, teach, and document this part of the project.

The first issue was how should a blind person be taught to read with and Optacon? Some blind people were unaware of letter shapes, and most were not familiar with the various type fonts. In addition spelling was usually not a strong point, since the education of blind students had often been in Braille, which has about 180 contractions. Of course, none were familiar with recognizing vibratory tactile images of letters moving across their index finger.

Weil developed lessons to teach recognition of letters presented in this fashion using both the computer simulation and the Optacon prototypes. It soon became apparent that while letter recognition could be taught in a few days, building reading speed was much more time-consuming. However, there were soon a number of blind people effectively using an Optacon prototype in their daily lives. These people contributed greatly to the project not only in providing important information for the design of future models, but also for motivating the Optacon development team toward making the Optacon widespread. Among this group of pioneering Optacon users were:
 * Candy Linvill – John Linvill's daughter who was a Stanford undergraduate at this time. She used the Optacon in her studies. Once when her Optacon needed a repair, Bliss went to her dorm room to pick it up. She wasn't there so Bliss wanted to leave a message with her roommate. Her roommate told him “You can leave her a note if you print it like a typewriter and she can read it herself.” This was unheard of for a completely blind person.
 * Sue Melrose – Another blind Stanford undergraduate who was taught to read with an Optacon by Candy Linvill. Both Sue and Candy participated in many Optacon presentations at conferences and meetings.
 * Bob Stearns – A blind computer programmer working at SRI. Bob used the Optacon in his work writing and de-bugging computer programs.
 * Loren Schoff – Another blind Stanford student who initially used the Optacon in his studies. In his mathematics textbooks he would have Braille transcribers put the text in Braille but he would read the equations and graphs with the Optacon. After graduation he was hired by SRI as a data analyst on the project. He did an important statistical analysis showing the relation between age and the Optacon reading speed achieved after a certain amount of time. Hewlett-Packard had just announced their pioneering HP-35 hand held calculator. He did this analysis using the Optacon to read the screen of the HP-35 calculator.

From commercialization to discontinuance
The Optacon was manufactured and marketed from 1971 to 1996 by Telesensory Systems Inc. of Silicon Valley, California. Throughout the 1970s and into the 1980s, the Optacon underwent upgrades, including the development of a new model, known as the Optacon II, which featured improved capabilities to interface to a computer.

As the Optacon project progressed and more obstacles and unknowns were overcome, the importance of making the Optacon generally available was apparent. TeleSensory's initial sales were to provide Optacons for test evaluations for the U.S. Office of Education, St. Dunstan's for blinded veterans in London, England, the Berufsbildungswerk in Heidelberg, Germany, and Sweden. The success of these evaluations led to larger dissemination programs funded by the U.S. Department of Education, private U.S. foundations such as Melen and Pew, state Departments of Rehabilitation, and various programs in many countries around the world such as Japan, Italy, Germany, France, and Scandinavia. The number of Optacons purchased privately by individuals was small. Approximately 15,000 Optacons were eventually sold.

Throughout the 1970s and into the 1980s, the Optacon underwent upgrades, and various accessories were added, including different lens modules to be used with the camera for reading text in a typewriter and on computer and calculator screens. In 1985 Canon Inc. and Telesensory cooperated in the development of the Optacon II, which featured improved packaging and capabilities to interface to a computer (See Fig. 3).

The design decision to reduce the number of image pixels from 144 to 100 to lower cost resulted in Optacon II not being successful.

In the 1990s Telesensory increasingly shifted its emphasis toward the low-vision market and became less devoted to the Optacon. Page scanners with optical character recognition had come to be the tool of choice for blind people wanting access to print. Page scanners were less expensive and had a much shallower learning curve than the Optacon. In addition, blind people could generally read through material more quickly with a page scanner than with an Optacon.

In 1996 Telesensory announced that it would no longer manufacture the Optacon and that it would cease to service the device in 2000. Many users purchased used machines and cannibalized them for parts, presumably with much help from sighted, electromechanically-talented friends. In March 2005, TSI suddenly shut down. Employees were "walked out" of the building and lost accrued vacation time, medical insurance, and all benefits. Customers could not buy new machines or get existing machines fixed. Some work was done by other companies to develop an updated version of the Optacon to reduce the cost of the device and take advantage of newer technology, but no device with the versatility of the Optacon had been developed as of 2007.

Many blind people continue to use their Optacons to this day. The Optacon offers capabilities that no other device offers including the ability to see a printed page or computer screen as it truly appears including drawings, typefaces, and specialized text layouts.

title: Optacon


text:
Talk:Twisted Sister

Shock Rock?
Was'nt TS considered shock rock for a long time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfinator-x (talk • contribs) 01:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

genres
I took out speed metal. If anyone actually things Twisted Sister are speed metal they're retarded. They're barely heavy metal, more like influence of heavy metal. I think Glam should be added because they did have a glam appearence and they helped influenced glam and were popular when glam was becoming popular. Sure they have their own distinct sand but there are a lot of bands labeled glam metal that only loosely fit and have their own sound aswell.

Should have a seperate section for discography listing albums and singles. ViolentGreen 18:44, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

There ya' go.Someoneinmyheadbutit'snotme 03:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

218.141.224.61 22:43, 24 November 2005 (UTC) Cleaned up the second and last paragraphs. Added information about "House of Hair" radio program to last paragraph. 25 November 2005

you should add the lawsuit they filed against six flags kentucky kingdom for their dueling roller coasters "twisted sisters". they won, and the park renamed the coasters "twisted twins"

I wrote a more detailed band history. I tried to include any information from the old version. I removed the clean-up tag. But the article may need a grammar/spelling check by a native english speaker. All informations are from the official TS site or from Jay Jay French via deesnider.com forums.Cyco130 08:10, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

The group had a glam-like image but musically they were closer to classic heavy metal bands such as Judas Priest and Motörhead than the other glam metal/pop metal bands of the era, for example Mötley Crüe, Poison and Ratt.

What is this sentance? Twisted Sister was most of the time not significantly heavier than Ratt or Mötley Crüe. It seems to me this was written by someone that likes Twisted Sister but is ashemed of a prospect of liking a Glam Metal band so he rushes to distance them from their rightful musical relatives.

To anonymous user: I added the sentence because Twisted Sister is cited under Classic metal and not under Glam metal in Wikipedia. It's not my POV. By the way, I do like Twisted Sister but I like also Mötley Crüe, Poison and Ratt :) Cyco130 18:22, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

There's no mention of Twisted sister being "special guests" on Alice Cooper's massive 2005-2006 "Dirty Diamonds" tour! there should be, its not as if they were just a support band or something... :D. I missed my chance to go see that cos of bloody train problems. --KX36 23:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that twistedsister.com recommends this article as "a really good place to get a capsule history". It proves that we did a good job here. I hope some native english speaker will soon copy-edit the article so that we can get rid of that annoying remark :). Cyco130 03:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

It's true. Twisted Sister was never ever Glam Metal. They were just straight Heavy Metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.141.173 (talk) 09:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I know its very old but that last comment was stupid. Glam isnt a sound, its an image. If these guys arent glam, glam doesnt exist. Thats like when Lemmy says Motorhead isnt heavy metal, which we all know is not the case--95.146.129.71 (talk) 01:26, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Copy edit proposal
Hello Cyco130 and other Twisted Sister editors. I will undertake the copy edit for this article, if you don't object. I have just reworked the "Pre-MTV period" section as an example. I do not see a need to change the structure of this article--just a few sentence movements or combinations here and there. I will begin in a few days, unless you indicate that you'd rather I did not. --The Phantom Blot 20:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Seeing no objections, I've started the copy edit on this article. I just cleaned the "Pre-Dee" section. I will continue working downward, at the rate of one section per day or so. I'll finish with the Introduction. The Phantom Blot 13:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the late answer. No objections at all, it's very good! Cyco130 07:07, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I have completed the copy edit on this article and removed the tag. Back to you... The Phantom Blot 18:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

That's great, thanks a lot! Now we have an almost complete article until the details of the new album become available... Cyco130 16:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Glam Metal
Twisted Sister is not glam metal they are straight foward heavy metal like Motorhead and Judas Priest, and Dee Snider even said they are not glam. So I think we should stop putting it on the infobox.--Cory pratt 18:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

-No band will admit they're glam nowadays, DUH. Glam metal is something the media and people constantly make fun of so of course no glam metal bands will really admit they're glam but a few.
 * No, I'm sorry, they're glam metal. Just because it offends you to call them that doesn't mean they're not in the genre.

I mean hell, if they're not glam metal, then who is? Poison? Cinderella? Ratt? You could make the same exact arguments you're making right now for why Twisted Sister isn't glam metal for those bands. Sorry, but glam metal is a recognized sub-genre of heavy metal and if Twisted Sister can't meet the standards of being classified in it, then I don't know what band can and why the sub-genre even exists. Glam metal musically IS straight forward heavy metal. It's just with the addition of the whole 80s glam image and lyric. --Hippie Metalhead (talk) 00:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Glam Metal was primarily directed toward a young female audience, TS almost looked Glam, but did not sound Glam nor direct their music and style toward young girls, Poison, Cinderella, and Ratt did. If you want to compare TS to any other band try KISS or The New York Dolls. IMO Genre(s) should be Heavy Metal, Hard Rock, Shock Rock. -- Just a Proud S.M.F. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.210.52.51 (talk) 12:56, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

heavy metal shouldn't be the only genre, that would be like metallicas only genre being hard rock, its completely misleading — Preceding unsigned comment added by I call the big one bitey (talk • contribs) 05:07, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

We're Not Gonna Take It/Oh Come All Ye Faithful
I was listening to a radio station in Toronto a few weeks ago, and one member of Twisted Sister was on, discussing the Christmas album.

Candidly, he admitted that the chorus of 'We're Not Gonna Take It' is inadvertantly a ripoff of 'Oh Come All Yee Faithful'. As you can see...

 * "Oh Come Let us Adore him! Oh Come Let us Adore him! Oh Come Let us Adore him, Christ, the Lord!"
 * "We're Not Gonna Take It! No, we Aint Gonna Take It! We're Not Gonna Take It, Anymore!"

Not only do the schemes of the line match up pretty good, but the melody is the same.

Anyway, I think the wikipedia line about performing 'Oh Come All Ye Faithful' in the style of 'We're Not Gonna Take It' was pretty funny. JimmmyThePiep 23:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Reunion
The infobox says the band have been active from 1997 to date, but the prose itself (which is pretty dreadful) doesn't mention what happaned in 1997. Indeed, the "Reunion" section starts with the one line paragraph "In 1998, the band recorded a song for the soundtrack of Snider's movie Strangeland.". You really ought to be making a little more of the reunion and telling folks about how it came about (especially folks like me who know nothing about the band; we are supposed to be your target audience.) --kingboyk 00:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC) PS If they split up in Oct 87, how can Joey "Seven" Franco have been the drummer 1987-1988?

A further contradiction: This article says A. J. Pero was with the band from 1997; A. J. Pero] says he rejoined in 2002. --kingboyk 13:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I could have sworn that A.J. Pero was the drummer when I used to see TS at Speaks in Island Park, Long Island in the late 70's. I also could have sworn that Kenny was Ken Neill-Harrison, not Harrison-Neill. Maybe my elderly gray cells getting grayer...Ten of Swords 23:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Music Videos
The only TS's offical music vidoes I know are

"You Can't Stop Rock'n'Roll" "We're Not Gonna Take It" "I Wanna Rock" "The Price" "Leader Of The Pack" "Be Chrool To Your Scuel" "Hot Love"

Others mentioned on a main page seem absolutely unknown to me.

No answer. Deleted other videos. (Nitrofest 09:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC))

What does "ran almost constantly" mean? Every other video, every five mins or just a lot? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.246.229 (talk) 21:38, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Band Template
In case anyone's interested, I've made a template for the band and added it to all people/albums. Midx1004 19:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

External sources and reference links cited.
I have added several external reference links and was thereby able to find support for some of the article's content.--Libertyguy 18:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ill never grow up.jpg
Image:Ill never grow up.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:02, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:LoveIsForSuckersAlbumCover.jpg
Image:LoveIsForSuckersAlbumCover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

missing information on band shows/members
Just thought that I would point out that there is no imformation present about Twisted Sisters appearance at the Rock and Blues festival in Pentrich, Derbyshire, England in the summer of 2005, and no mention of Eddie Ojeda touring with the rock musical 'Vampires Rock' in England throughout 2007. 144.124.16.33 (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC) The full Twister Sister band appeared April 26, 2011, on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon. They played the full rendition of "We're Not Gonna Take It." Fallon introduced the band by saying that ever since Late Night started he had been trying to get the band on the show.173.174.227.236 (talk) 15:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

First section
"Twisted Sister was formed in December 1972 by guitarist Jay Jay French, and completed its line-up on February 14, 1973, when guitarist Jay Jay French joined a band called Silverstar."

This first line doesn't make sense in light of the rest of the section. It seems Silverstar was formed in 1972, and every other band member left either just before or just after the name change to "Twisted Sister".Ten of Swords (talk) 18:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Better Picture?
Can anyone get a better picture, back from the 1980's when they were big? Maybe one of their many promotional pictures because the one at the top now doesn't look too good and doesn't show the whole band. Logger2010 (talk) 02:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Most '70s & '80s glam rock bands have gone to sell 40 to 50 million?
"Although most '70s and '80s glam rock bands have gone to sell 40 to 50 million CDs and records, Twisted Sister has only sold a little over 11 million."

This is a very strange and vague factoid. "Most" glam rock bands?? Which ones are we talking about? It is my guess that --as in every other genre of music at every time in history-- MOST of the (possibly hundreds of) glam rock bands of this era achieved only local successes, local recognition at best, made no significant money, got no recording contracts, and faded even in the memories of their audiences. It is only a VERY small handful of bands that ever have that level of success. So....which glam bands sold that much? David Bowie? T Rex? Gary Glitter? Maybe the sentence should read "most famous 70's and 80's glam bands," but even that seems odd and insufficient.

There is also an almost POV quality to the structuring of this, as if the author is demeaning Twister Sister's achievement by setting it against the achievements of unnamed others. Furthermore, there seems to be debate as to whether Twister Sister is even a "glam band."

Understand, I am not trying to defend Twisted Sister. Actually, I don't care about the band or know if any of the statements on this page are true. (I don't even know how many records they have sold, and the source of this statistic should be cited.) Nonetheless, this sentence seems odd....I am going to change it.

Sentence seems to have been added on this revision:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Twisted_Sister&diff=265968178&oldid=265694735

Sojambi Pinola (talk) 20:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

25th Anniversary of STAY HUNGRY
A couple of years ago, while playing to 80,000 fans in Quebec after not playing there since 1984, it struck me just how important our album Stay Hungry had become. It broke sales records in 8 countries and the videos made us international stars. Canada especially had gone crazy for the album and bought it at a much greater proportional rate against US sales then any album in recent memory.

We had just released our re-recorded version of it called Still Hungry. While talking to our fans in Canada, it struck me how many still preferred the original Stay Hungry. Maybe, as band members, we were just too close to the whole thing. Maybe we just weren’t seeing it and, more importantly, hearing it through the eyes of the fans who had spent the last 23 years with their ears tuned in to the sound of the original record. I knew that in two years a milestone was approaching. In May of 2009 The 25th anniversary of Stay Hungry would arrive. I started to think of a way to recognize and celebrate the music and the times which had become so important to the lives of not only our millions of fans around the world, but also to acknowledge the importance and relevance of all of the music created by the hard rock bands of that period. What became obvious to me was that just re-mastering the original record was not a reason to re-release it. The only way this could be ‘special’ was to locate any material that was recorded by us at the time and never released so as to make a truly great 2 disc package.

Much to the band's surprise, Atlantic/Rhino discovered a series of cassettes that comprised almost a whole extra albums worth of material. This original music was part of the ‘demo’ process used in making Stay Hungry. These tapes were recorded in December 1983 at Nino’s studios in Baldwin, LI along with all the songs that wound up on the finished album. I completely forgot that these tapes ever existed. The band barely remembered these songs ever being recorded. Most of the songs, upon fresh listening are shockingly good. Remember, these are demo’s which means that they are unfinished versions of songs. Maybe some day we will actually fully finish and record some of them if you, the fans, yell loudly enough. Don’t ask me why some didn’t make the record, the politics of that question are too deep to get into. Suffice it to say, we are proud of this material and, to make the re-release really special, we also recorded our first new song in 10 years - a song called 30.

Lastly, I want to thank Donna (the Mayor), SMF Cyndi and Pat Egan. They are long time fans well known to the Slamboard. They came to my house and spent an evening listening to and sifting through a lot of material. Their help, advice and enthusiasm were crucial in giving me the insight as to how to proceed with this project. THANKS GUYS!!

A Re-Mastered Stay Hungry 10 Never Heard Before Songs Originally Demo’d For Stay Hungry 5 Early Demos Of Songs From Stay Hungry 1 Brand New Song 1 Rare Radio Spot Using 'SMF' As The Music Bed

That is a reason to celebrate an important milestone.

The release date is Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009.

We hope you love this package as much as we do.

-Jay Jay French —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.215.26.215 (talk) 23:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

"This"
This is true, that the name was supposed to be "this". However, two problems. One is that it is in the lead and not in the article at all. The lead is supposed to be an introduction. The second problem is that there is not a reference to this. I know this sucks and even I know Twisted Sister was originally proposed to be called "This" but you and I are not considered reliable sources. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:01, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

One-hit Wonder?
Twisted Sister's "We're Not Gonna Take It" ranked #21 on VH1's "100 Greatest One-Hit Wonders of the 80's", but my dad says they can't be a one-hit wonder because "I Wanna Rock" was big. So please explain whether they were a one-hit wonder or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.191.194 (talk) 22:47, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, they weren't a one-hit wonder because they indeed had two notable hits. But most folks only remember the one, so they kinda WERE a 1HW. You decide!Vonbontee (talk) 09:37, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Errors/missing albums
Club Daze Volume I The Studio Sessions says live in brackets after it which it clearly is not live, and the lastest album Live At The Astoria is missing from the albums section it is a CD/DVD combo. I refuse to edit wiki pages as it will undoubtedly be reverted by a wiki-nazi, so I leave the editing up to them. -- Just a proud S.M.F. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.210.50.123 (talk) 05:34, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

AC/DC tribute
Earlier, I had changed a reference to an AC/DC tribute. The original revision said that they covered "Sin City". Not sure which tribute album this is talking about, but as seen on this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt:_A_Tribute_to_AC/DC, Dee did a cover of "Walk All Over You" not "Sin City". Lately, my revision has been changed back to "Sin City". Can someone back their claim up otherwise change it back to mine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BRoc91 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Never Let the Bastards Wear You Down
Never Let the Bastards Wear You Down is not a Twisted Sister album but a Dee Snider solo album, consisting of old Twisted Sister songs that didn't make it onto the albums. Encyclopaedia Metallum: http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Dee_Snider/17682#band_tab_discography — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thyglakk (talk • contribs) 11:44, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.91.88.128 (talk) 16:16, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

TWISTED SISTER IS NOT GLAM METAL!!! HERE IS THE PROOF AND THEIR REAL GENRE!
How is Twisted Sister glam metal? Sure they look glam. Well at least in the 80s, cause Dee Snider doesn't have that blue makeup and blushes anymore. But that has NOTHING to do with the music. Besides, being catchy doesn't make you glam cause then you're saying that Enter Sandman by Metallica is glam. Same applies to Bottoms Up by Nickelback, which is considered heavy metal, even though they're mostly hard rock or alternative/post-grunge. Glam is all about having you know, pop rock vocals, catchy pop influenced choruses and often has catchy riffs or solos. But catchy pop influences and vocals and choruses are MOST IMPORTANT in glam metal! Besides, they said in an interview with Dee Snider leading it that they ARE NOT glam metal, they said they only have seen themselves as a heavy metal band. Besides, even glam metal has to have a friendly audience to lots of women who act like 80s women. Twisted Sister mostly has a fanbase of people who dress like 70s metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.214.78 (talk) 00:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

A few songs of them are Glam Metal: "Bad Boys of Rock'N'Roll" "I Am (I'm Me)" "You're Not Alone (Suzette's Song)" "The Price" "I Believe in You" "King of the Fools" "Heroes Are Hard to Find" And the whole "Love Is For Suckers" - Album (That's all that I have in mind) --Zorono Ornitorrico (talk) 23:48, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Sources?
I'm taking off hard rock, there aren't any sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMetallican (talk • contribs) 01:03, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Not glam metal
Look at the stuff above, they aren't glam. They're heavy metal.

And there ain't sources for glam metal.

Source for metal?
http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Twisted_Sister/4975 — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMetallican (talk • contribs) 01:16, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Glam metal?
They ain't glam metal. They're heavy metal. Glam metal was a subgenre with glamorously heavy metal vocals, distorted electric guitars, friendly tone, glamorous/friendly lyrics and features shredding solos and can be very catchy. Eg: Poison, Ratt, Quiet Riot, Motley Crue, etc. How are Twisted Sister even glam metal? They have stronger vocals, and their lyrics and themes are rebellious and sometimes violent, that's not glamorous. They also sound angry in some songs. Glam is short for Glamorous. Besides, even Ronnie James Dio, Metallica and Rob Halford reject that label for the band. The band even rejects the label. Big hair doesn't make you glam. It ain't no fashion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.28.140.11 (talk) 19:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Logo
Who designed their logo? AmericanLeMans (talk) 18:57, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Weird sentence in first paragraph of "History of Twisted Sister (1972–1976)"
The last sentence of that paragraph doesn't seem right:

"Micheal Valentine took over the lead singer role, guitarist Billy Diamond, drummer Mell Star, bass player Kenneth Harrison Neill, and Johnny Heartbreaker (soon to change his name to Jay Jay French)."

Especially because it doesn't explain where "Johnny Heartbreaker" comes from.

Sjmsteffann (talk) 22:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

 * My confusion as well. Jay Jay French says his birth name was John Segall, and there is no "heartbreaker" on that page. 50.203.248.82 (talk) 10:52, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Twisted Sister. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927190014/http://www.virginradio.co.uk/music/artists/twisted_sister/ to http://www.virginradio.co.uk/music/artists/twisted_sister/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130215065629/http://twistedsister.com:80/40-years.php to http://www.twistedsister.com/40-years.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:59, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

They are Glam Metal
Twisted Sister made glam metal music for example: Bad Boys (Of Rock'n'Roll) I Am (I'm Me) The Price I Belive in You The whole Love Is For Suckers record — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:238:F014:85B:4491:F7E6:E1CE:1B6B (talk) 21:19, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

This article doesn't actually say what TS's image is!
I am ROFL at all the argument about whether or not TS are glam or not! Well compared to a 'classic' glam rock band like The Sweet they aren't very glamorous (let's face it, if Dee Dee fired a gun like he wields a lipstick he couldn't hit a barn door...) But isn't it a little bit mad that this page is one long argument about their image when the actual article skirts around the subject and doesn't even detail what their image is! Stub Mandrel (talk) 22:48, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Twisted Sister. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=164612
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chartstats.com/artistinfo.php?id=3768
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060208084513/http://www.ajpero.com/ to http://www.ajpero.com/
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6Fl2mKTaX?url=http://www.sleazeroxx.com/interviews/deesnider.shtml to http://www.sleazeroxx.com/interviews/deesnider.shtml

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:43, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Twisted Sister