Jump to content

Talk:Non-binary gender: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Restored revision 1114147855 by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk): WP:NOTFORUM. Nothing here that could contribute to the improvement of this article.
Line 95: Line 95:


<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by [[User:ACHorwitz|ACHorwitz]] ([[User talk:ACHorwitz|talk]]) 18:27, 4 October 2022 (UTC)</span>
<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by [[User:ACHorwitz|ACHorwitz]] ([[User talk:ACHorwitz|talk]]) 18:27, 4 October 2022 (UTC)</span>

==Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Sexuality in World Civilizations I==
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/University_of_Chicago/Gender_and_Sexuality_in_World_Civilizations_I_(Fall) | assignments = [[User:Delendaaest|Delendaaest]] | start_date = 2022-09-27 | end_date = 2022-12-10 }}

<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by [[User:Delendaaest|Delendaaest]] ([[User talk:Delendaaest|talk]]) 15:00, 18 October 2022 (UTC)</span>

Revision as of 15:00, 18 October 2022

Template:Vital article

    WikiProject iconWiki Loves Pride
    WikiProject iconThis article was created or improved during Wiki Loves Pride, 2015, 2016 and 2017.

    Nonbinary umbrella

    The subsection of this talk page called "Nitpicking terminology" has strayed a lot from its original discussion, and there have been some interesting and very subtle points that I think risk getting buried in the layers of monthslong discussion threads there. There are so many different threads up there that when I want to contribute to the discussion it's actively hard to figure out which one to even respond to. So I'm starting a new section with the idea of focusing narrowly on Brymor's proposals regarding how the lead of this article should describe the relationship between non-binary and transgender identities. Right now the lead says Non-binary identities fall under the transgender umbrella, since non-binary people typically identify with a gender that is different from their assigned sex, though some non-binary individuals do not consider themselves transgender. I think this sentence matches the contents of the page fairly well, but Brymor points out that if some individuals do not consider themselves transgender (and if, to quote the page body, many (not all) references use the term transgender to include genderqueer/non-binary people), then it is neither a really accurate summary of the article body nor a really accurate summary of the references to say without qualification that Non-binary identities fall under the transgender umbrella. Brymor proposes to replace Non-binary identities fall under the transgender umbrella with Many references place non-binary identities under the transgender umbrella. I broadly support a change along those lines, but I have a small (and maybe pedantic/personal/stylistic) issue with it: the lead section shouldn't really be directly pronouncing on what proportions of references espouse different viewpoints, the lead should be summarizing the contents of the article using references as supporting material where necessary. So I would instead suggest replacing Non-binary identities fall under the transgender umbrella with Non-binary identities usually fall under the transgender umbrella. Then the full sentence would read Non-binary identities usually fall under the transgender umbrella, since non-binary people typically identify with a gender that is different from their assigned sex, though some non-binary individuals do not consider themselves transgender. - Astrophobe (talk) 23:09, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    So the proposal is just to add the word "usually"? I don't believe that it is really essential to do this, as I feel that the existing caveat already covers it, but I don't object to it. If others think that this is an improvement then I think that it is acceptable and would be preferable to more drastic changes. --DanielRigal (talk) 02:29, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Adding "usually" sounds to me like certain specific identities are outside the umbrella, which isn't sourceable as far as I know. I don't think that the identities as a group falling under transgender umbrella necessarily contradicts that some individuals do not identify as transgender. Crossroads -talk- 23:00, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There's also papers like this: Non-binary refers to transgender people who have a gender identity that does not align with their sex assigned at birth and who identify outside of the traditional female-male gender binary, such as genderqueer, genderfluid, or gender nonconforming.[8] That cited article itself states, non-binary people make up a significant portion of the transgender community. Of course there are exceptions, but as a group, the current article text seems to hold. Crossroads -talk- 23:24, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    In light of a recent a recent and rather dismissive article from Kadji Amin that seems to mark nonbinary politics as bad faith radicalism, I framed our identities this way: "Nonbinary trans identities have historically referred to a range of gender non-normative embodiments and self-making practices that stand on the outside of, or sometimes in direct opposition to, the Western binary classifications of sex/gender (i.e., man or woman, male or female). These identities include but are not limited to androgyny, genderqueer, genderfluid, gender nonconforming, and genderf*ck. Increasingly, nonbinary has become its own free-standing identity, without many of the historical connotations that genderqueer, for instance, might invoke. Nonbinary people identify themselves with gender-neutral pronouns or a fluid mixture of gendered pronouns in social practices. Some transition and take on embodiments that have a particular gendered aesthetic. This may or may not include sexual reassignment surgeries and other procedures that are body confirming. In short, nonbinary people have varied and robust social lives." I feel like it's important to (1) point out that nonbinary hasn't always been deployed as such, (2) make a distinction even within nonbinary communities as to a plurality of identities, (3) mark those identities as emerging from often Western colonial discourse and historical relations, and (4) ensure that readers know there are interfacing and non-identical ways that nonbinary subjects identify, i.e., trans feminine and trans masculine might refer to one's relation to their birth-assigned sex, conscripted gender position, a combination of the two, or neither. We are pretty robust people. And our politics, despite whatever Professor Amin seems to think, is not a priori a radical divestment from the binary. Most of us just want to live without violence, homelessness, and economic insecurity. B Lee-Harrison Aultman, Ph.D. User:Bleeeaultman 21:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    As someone who is transgender, I would like to state that non-binary does not "fall under the transgender umbrella" as the article states, but that non-binary is *related to* transgender.
    Accordingly, I suggest that the sentence:
    "Non-binary identities fall under the transgender umbrella... some non-binary individuals do not consider themselves transgender"
    be changed to:
    Non-binary identities are separate but related to transgender identities, in that non-binary people typically identify with a gender that is different from their assigned sex, though some non-binary individuals do not consider themselves transgender.
    Violet 49.183.24.37 (talk) 19:05, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:NOR. "Transgender" means a person who does not identify with their gender/sex assigned at birth. NB people (such as myself) would fall under that category. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:08, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2022

    Change

    Non-binary[a] or genderqueer is an umbrella term for gender identities that are neither male nor female‍

    to

    Non-binary[a] or genderqueer is an umbrella term for gender identities that are neither man nor woman

    because male and female aren't gender identities, they're sexes. Man and woman are gender identities. 2601:204:C784:40A0:8EC0:D0CB:FC32:A424 (talk) 02:47, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    According to the reliable sources on Gender identity, the terms "male" and "female" are also used for gender identities, not only for sexes. Newimpartial (talk) 02:57, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done: ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 03:32, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


    Perhaps we should get the definition right?

    Earlier I pointed out the inconsistencies in the article arising from the second sentence of the lead, and I’m glad to see that Astrophobe came to my support, but let’s move on. There is a much more important error staring us in the face in the first sentence of the lead:
    "Non-binary . . . is an umbrella term for gender identities that are neither male nor female" is simply wrong. The error lies in the word "neither", which is extracted from reference, no 2, whilst ignoring the qualifications which follow it. Reference 2 states: "Some people have a gender which is neither male nor female and may identify as both male and female at one time, as different genders at different times, as no gender at all, or dispute the very idea of only two genders." This is a good definition, and it is quite clear that each of these examples is a separate case. So the statement that some people have a gender which is neither male nor female is true, but so are the statements that some people have a gender that is both male and female at one time, or as different genders at different times. Each of these examples has parity, and our lead has to reflect this..What it should say is ". . . gender identities that are not exclusively male or female".
    Alternatively, we could adopt Stonewall’s definition:
    Non-binary: An umbrella term for people whose gender identity doesn’t sit comfortably with ‘man’ or ‘woman’. Non-binary identities are varied and can include people who identify with some aspects of binary identities, while others reject them entirely.
    Although unfortunately this uses ‘man’ or ‘woman’ when it should say ‘male’ or ‘female’. Brymor (talk) 20:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Brymor - How about "Non-binary . . . is an umbrella term for gender identities that are neither solely male nor solely female" (emphasis added to show change) EvergreenFir (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Tazuco (talk) 22:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thumbs up icon Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:08, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Note that the an old version of the page used "not exclusively masculine or feminine‍" rather than "neither male nor female‍". There has been some discussion about how exactly to phrase this on the talk page, but nothing that I can recall which focused very directly on the possible confusion between "not at all either male or female" and "not exactly male and also not exactly female". - Astrophobe (talk) 22:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems fine to me. Crossroads -talk- 03:27, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, done. Thank you Astrophobe for pointing out the better wording in the old version, which I have restored. Brymor (talk) 19:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Undone. Doesn't match the given source (which happens to use male/female, among other things). Also, these dyadic negative expressions (neither A nor B, not exclusively A or B, not at all either A or B) aren't all equivalent. And in any case, should be a reflection of the body, where this should be worked out first, and then properly summarized. Mathglot (talk) 00:05, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Mathglot, I reread the sources and I think they support EvergreenFir's suggestion, which I prefer to the masculine/feminine version. Can we use that? I'd prefer it not to include the links to male and female, as the articles are specifically about sex. I'd be ok with just having this in the lead, as it's of the "basic facts" type discussed at MOS:LEAD. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:43, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah; until and unless we can improve the lead sections of male and female, those links won't help our readers. But I do prefer "man and woman" over "male and female" over "masculine and feminine", in that order, since the concepts of "exclusively masculine" and "exclusively feminine" gender seem far too restrictive for real world identities as "men" and "women". Newimpartial (talk) 12:57, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Firefangledfeathers: I could live with EvergreenFir's suggestion, but I do find "neither solely" a bit of a mouthful - "not exclusively" is clearer, and is supported both by the old version, and reference 2. Brymor (talk) 17:54, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I do slightly prefer "not exclusively" to "neither solely ... nor solely". I prefer the unlinked male/female to masculine/feminine. I'm undecided on Newimpartial's man/woman, and I'm not sure what the full text would look like if we use those terms. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:17, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    My view on man/woman is that these terms are more biological than male/female, but even if I'm wrong, we can't use man/woman because all the references use male/female (essentially Mathglot's objection to masculine/feminine). So adopting "not exclusively" and "male/female" the full text would read: "Non-binary or genderqueer is an umbrella term for gender identities that are not exclusively male or female —‌ identities that are outside the gender binary." (With the links removed from male and female.) "identities that are outside the gender binary" is a bit odd, but it is a quote from reference 2, so is probably ok.Brymor (talk) 19:36, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I like "solely" more than "exclusively". It's shorter and flows better I think. Crossroads -talk- 03:40, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps you should do the edit, then. Brymor (talk) 18:55, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm fine with solely, as long as we use the shorter construction of Brymor's edit: is an umbrella term for gender identities that are not solely male or female. I plan on making the edit soonish if no one else gets to it or objects. I'm worried this might have dropped off Mathglot's radar so here's a ping. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the ping. Yes, I'd be fine with your version (@19:56). The "why" in Brymor's question below is slightly o/t here imho; however, since you asked, it's basically because this is such a contentious article within a contentious topic area, and people can get intense about a comma or a verb tense; I didn't want to reword, in order not to inflame the situation with even more options. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 20:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Mathglot: My original proposal was to use the words male and female (see above), but I was put off by the links to those pages, which are too biological, as pointed out by Firefangledfeathers. So instead of reverting, why didn't you just change masculine/feminine to male/female? The error in the existing text has to be corrected. Brymor (talk) 17:35, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-01

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

    — Assignment last updated by ACHorwitz (talk) 18:27, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Sexuality in World Civilizations I

    This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 September 2022 and 10 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Delendaaest (article contribs).

    — Assignment last updated by Delendaaest (talk) 15:00, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]