Talk:Transgender

Template:FAOL

Collected references

If you cite something. Place the main citation here and then a reference tag in the above. Keep this section the bottom. This way any references that are used can be easily found.

Cross-dresser, Transvestite, Drag kings and queens

I'd like to recommend that these three sections (Cross-dresser, Transvestite, Drag kings and queens, all under the "Transgender identities" section) might be out of place, and/or might need some clarification. The APA (among others) state that being transgender includes some element of gender identity, and most definitions of those three words specifically do not include gender identity. Here's the APA answer on their website to "What does transgender mean?":

Transgender is an umbrella term used to describe people whose gender identity (sense of themselves as male or female) or gender expression differs from that usually associated with their birth sex. Many transgender people live part-time or full-time as members of the other gender. Broadly speaking, anyone whose identity, appearance, or behavior falls outside of conventional gender norms can be described as transgender. However, not everyone whose appearance or behavior is gender-atypical will identify as a transgender person.

They do include a "broadly speaking" definition that *might* include a transvestite, but doesn't necessarily. Since those three labels are not necessarily transgender (though a person who uses one of the labels might identify as transgender), I believe they need to be combined, placed at the end of the "Transgender identities" section, and they need to be clarified with a ref. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

You seem to be interpreting the word transgender in a way I haven't seen it interpreted in a long time. A long time ago, in the early to mid 90's it was in vogue for transsexuals to refer to ourselves as transgender. Because it emphasized the gender instead of the sex. (i.e. use yahoo to find transsexual back then all one would get is porn, use transgender and one could find useful information for transition. It is not that way anymore.) Basically you are holding that transgender is another word for transsexual.

The common understanding of the word now is that it is an umbrella for any and all non standard gender presentations. Where "standard" is that males act as typical men, and females act as typical women. Whatever that means for a given society and culture. This takes in many many self expressions which would not have anything to do with the notion of "gender identity" as it is philosophized by most current western transacademics.

i.e. The term drag queen. Has been used to refer to males, usually gay, who would perform onstage dressed as women and dress as women no where else. It has also been used by some full time transwomen to refer to themselves though this is a dated usage the term "full time drag queen" has been used and is still used by some. (In many ways this and simmilar terms has been superseded by "non-op transsexual".) Basically I don't think that there is any reason to erase from this article those who embrace their gender while accepting their biological sex. --Hfarmer (talk) 10:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

We agree with the foregoing author. The majority of our customers are heterosexual males who identify with their feminine side. They are not interested in changing their biological sex, but like to dress like women. Who has the right to say what is "normal". What works for one may not for another. It's our differences that make the world a spectacular place to live and we are proud helping those celebrate their true beauty within.Crossdresser Closet

Help me out here - the definition I'm referring to comes from the APA website. They may be out of date, too, and I was unaware that the definition has changed so much. Could you provide refs for this and/or some reading to help me out, because this isn't matching my understanding.

The other definition I'm working with is Cromwell, Jason (1999), Transmen and FTMs, University of Illinois Press, p. 23, ISBN 0252068254:

First, it designates individuals who do not fit into the categories of transvestite and transsexual. ... Transgender is viewed as a "viable option between crossdresser [transvestite] and transsexual". (Holly, 1991:31)

Second, "transgender is used as an encompassing term for transvestites and transsexuals as well as for those who do not fit neatly into either category.

So I see that the second definition is the one you are referring to, whereas the first is the one I'm more familiar with. The one I'm familiar with includes gender identity, and I totally don't understand how the definition can include gender presentation without taking into account gender identity? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd argue not for clarification -- although that would be good, I think the confusion over terminology derives from the subject, not the article -- but combination. According to any sensible system, these are one subsection, and should be combined. The subsection on transvestite, for example, clearly states it is a synonym for the previous subsection, then adds 6 citations!

I would combine myself, but other comments have convinced me that the sensitivity to the use of certain terms is a sensitive matter, and the rules are not often clear to newcomers.JakartaDean (talk) 13:01, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Difference between ⚥ and ⚧

In my studies I have come across these two characters. Out of my curiosity, does anyone know the difference (in terms of meaning, not obvious looks)? -PatPeter 04:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I found it, the first one refers to transgender individuals, the other hermaphrodites. -PatPeter 23:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

i just gotta say, i don't think there really is any sort of formal definition/distinction between the two. ⚧ seems far more common among the trans community (to denote transgender, intersexed, and all other individuals that might not fit the standard gender binary). I rarely see ⚥ used much of anywhere, frankly.Rootneg2 (talk) 06:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Criticism section

Per WP:STRUCTURE and all the other pages mentioned in the tag at the top of the section, I think the Criticism section should be eliminated, and its content distributed to the appopriate portions of the article. Specifically:

• The unsourced initial portion of the Criticism section can just be deleted.
• "Gender tied to sex" is mostly a criticism of the medical aspects of transitioning. That content can be moved to the "Physical healthcare" section. The opinion that "chromosomes exclusively determine gender and anything else is wrong" should be sourced, and then - not sure. Any ideas? If it's religiously based, it obviously goes in the religion section. If some notable anti-trans feminist said it, it could go in the currently-nonexistent section on feminism and trans people...
• "Autogynephilia" can go in the "mental healthcare" section since it's about the opinions of some psychologists.

If there are no objections in the next day or so, I'm going to be bold and start on this. --Alynna (talk) 14:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, done. Here's where it all went in the end:

• The unsourced initial portion was deleted.
• The criticism of medically transitioning was tagged 'citation needed' and moved to the "Physical healthcare" section.
• The "conservative view" that sex determines gender and so on was attributed to Janice Raymond (per the ref at the end of the paragraph) and placed in a new "Transgender people and feminism" section.
• The quote at the end of "Gender tied to sex" was attributed to Jerry Leach (per the ref), replaced with a description of his views, and moved to the "Transgender people and religion" section.
• The first half of the "autogynephilia" section, which was about that theory, was moved to the "Transgender people and science" section.
• The second half of the "autogynephilia" section, which was about Zucker and the DSM, was moved to the "Mental healthcare" section next to the GID discussion.

Some cleanup will be necessary now, and it's possible it will be determined that some of this stuff is actually too specific (or undue weight) for this article. --Alynna (talk) 14:10, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Photo

I noticed that the transgender article uses the same main photo as the transexual article. I suggest using a different one, maybe the one of Billy Tipton or the Civil War soldier photo. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:36, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Red link are created based on the following...

• http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=transgender+psychology&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en

--222.64.29.80 (talk) 14:18, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

• http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=allintitle%3A+transgender+policy&btnG=Search

--222.64.29.80 (talk) 14:26, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

• http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&newwindow=1&q=allintitle%3Atransgender+biology&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

--222.64.29.80 (talk) 14:40, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

My gut feeling has been that the topic is closely associated with religious practices and feudalism

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=transgender+religious&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en --222.64.29.80 (talk) 14:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)