Jump to content

Talk:Transgender

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zentomologist (talk | contribs) at 16:23, 25 June 2019 (convo). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

"Transsexual" sentence at the top of the article is extremely simplistic and contradictory

The definition and history of the word "transsexual" and its relationship to "transgender" is long and convoluted, and the sentence "transgender people are sometimes called transsexual if they desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another" is an absurd oversimplification. It's contradicted multiple times in the article as well as the transsexual article itself. I suggest its deletion.

I added a Citation Needed to it, but I think it should be taken out altogether, as multiple sources can be cited both for it and against it, based on many different definitions.

In my personal experience, I've found that every trans person I've met has understood "transsexual" to simply be an outdated and archaic synonym for "transgender", but obviously that's not relevant to the article's content.

Trebuchette (talk) 05:58, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That transsexual is considered outdated and/or is rejected by many transgender people today is, as you know, covered in the "Transsexual and its relationship to transgender" section. And it's covered in the "Relationship of transsexual to transgender" section in the Transsexual article. Both articles also note that there are transgender people who still use and prefer the term transsexual. In this case, and as noted by medical sources, the term refers to transgender people who have undergone sex reassignment therapy, and (according to some sources) especially those who have undergone sex reassignment surgery as part of that therapy. Per WP:Lead, which notes that the lead is meant to summarize the article, this is something that should be mentioned in the lead, whether we tweak the sentence or not. Both the Transgender and Transsexual articles are also better off with the sections about the terms' relationship to each other. I don't see that noting how the term transsexual is sometimes used is contradictory. And the lead does state "sometimes called." Terms obviously are not always used consistently. Some transgender people embrace the term transvestite, while many or most other transgender people do not. It doesn't negate the fact that transvestite is commonly considered a derogatory and outdated term today. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:10, 13 February 2019 (UTC) Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:19, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Trebuchette:Chiming in to agree with Flyer. Want to add though you may be correct that the sentence "transgender people are sometimes called transsexual if they desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another" is oversimplifying things. The issue is, you are using your own personal experience to explain why it is an oversimplification. Wikipedia editors are mainly supposed to use reliable secondary sources to determine how wikipedia articles should be written. You can read more about what secondary sources are at WP:RS. Hope that's helpful and you enjoy editing wikipedia. Rab V (talk) 07:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
PS you mentioned multiple sources could contradict the statement you were concerned; if they look like reliable secondary sources, maybe link and quote them in this discussion and we could work on it. Rab V (talk) 08:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The sentence currently states, "Some transgender people identify as transsexual if they desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another." And it's sourced. It focuses on identity rather than on transgender people sometimes being called transsexual, which is probably better considering that the term transsexual isn't as widespread today as it used to be. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:57, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Should the sentence be "Some transgender people who desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another identify as transsexual"?  The current sentence sounds like "some transgender people desire medical transition, and those people identify as transsexual." Kolya Butternut (talk) 12:58, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would be an improvement. I'd also suggest a slight tweak. The quotes in the current sources in the lede aren't very helpful with this, so I looked at the transsexual section. In that sourced content, a distinction is being made between sex and gender: "Distinctions between the terms transgender and transsexual are commonly based on distinctions between gender (psychological, social) and sex (physical).[38][39]" The current sentence in the lede reads:

Some transgender people identify as transsexual if they desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another.

I think this might work better:

Some transgender people who desire medical assistance to transition from one gender to another may identify as transsexual.

It's your suggestion, Kolya Butternut, but with "gender" and "may". This would also put it in alignment with the lede of the transsexual article. - CorbieV 23:23, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
CorbieVreccan I would think "sex" would be more appropriate than "gender" in your suggestion. It seems straightforward to me that transsexuals are changing their physical sex; this is my interpretation of the articles. Kolya Butternut (talk) 02:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Should remain as "sex" since the medical assistance is for a change in sexual characteristics. Given that "gender" is often taken as a reference to one's gender identity or gender role, I don't think it should be used for the sentence in question. They are not seeking medical assistance because of a change in gender identity. It's not about that. It's about a change in physical appearance/gender presentation to match their gender identity. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:21, 20 May 2019 (UTC) Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:35, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I like the suggested tweak of Kolya Butternut and CorbieVreccan's suggestion, hence:

Some transgender people who desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another may identify as transsexual.

Funcrunch (talk) 06:31, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is about sex, not gender. Mathglot (talk) 10:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see that "may" is needed; it's why I removed it before. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:16, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I removed "may". I was thinking the same thing but I wasn't sure if it mattered. Kolya Butternut (talk) 15:12, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Now I'm confused why the lead of Transsexual states they desire to permanently transition to the gender with which they identify instead of sex. Kolya Butternut (talk) 15:18, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It states, "Transsexual people experience a gender identity that is inconsistent with, or not culturally associated with, their assigned sex, and desire to permanently transition to the gender with which they identify, usually seeking medical assistance (including hormone replacement therapy and other sex reassignment therapies) to help them align their body with their identified sex or gender."
I don't see an issue with that paragraph since gender transition is about "the process of changing one's gender presentation and/or sex characteristics to accord with one's internal sense of gender identity – the idea of what it means to be a man or a woman." The reason we wanted to focus on "sex" in the lead of the Transgender article is because that aforementioned part is about altering one's sexual characteristics. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 04:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I interpret a transsexual person to be someone who seeks medical assistance to transition, but the lead suggests that transsexual people only "usually" seek medical assistance, and implies that some transsexual people may only transition to a different gender role. I understand that "gender transitioning" doesn't necessarily involve medical assistance. Kolya Butternut (talk) 10:02, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Some transsexual people do not seek medical assistance because, although they still desire it, they are unable to access it for financial or other reasons. Funcrunch (talk) 18:27, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I had seen that.  I understand "seek" to mean "attempt or desire to obtain".  It sounds incorrect to say "transsexual people only 'usually' desire to obtain medical assistance", which is how the wording can be interpreted. Maybe change to:

Transsexual people experience a gender identity that is inconsistent with, or not culturally associated with, their assigned sex, and desire to permanently transition their sex characteristics by obtaining medical assistance (including hormone replacement therapy and other sex reassignment therapies) to help them align their body with their identified sex or gender.

. Kolya Butternut (talk) 20:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Transition[ing] their sex characteristics" isn't how the matter is ever described. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:04, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Right. I was trying to keep the word "transition" in the lead, but that's not necessary, and it is discussed in the body. That clause could be changed to "and have permanently changed - or desire to change - their sex characteristics...."[1] Kolya Butternut (talk) 10:01, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

A discussion on whether Cis and Trans should redirect to Cisgender and Transgender:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Trans#Requested_move_4_May_2019

WanderingWanda (they/them) (t/c) 10:07, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Move: Genderqueer → Non-binary

Hi everyone! Your considered input is requested here:

Talk:Genderqueer#Requested_move_1_May_2019

This is a contentious discussion that could really use more participation. Anyone with expertise in gender identity topics or with good conflict resolution skills are especially encouraged to particpate. Thank you! WanderingWanda (talk)

Nomination of Portal:Transgender for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Transgender is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Transgender until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 23:11, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Revision due to Citation Overkill and cleanup in the lead?

I did a general style and grammar cleanup on the lead today, removing redunancy and unsourced POV claims, syncing the text to actually match the citations, and adding one citation (Leslie Feinberg).

I got a notice the entire thing had been reverted with the notice Citation Overkill and that by moving an unrelated line to a separate paragraph, the heading was now too long.

I'd love some guidance here. The lead as it stands is a hot mess. I've done extensive editing of other pages with the same level of mess, and this time the usual "edit boldly" seems to be an issue?

Zentomologist (talk) 03:13, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Zentomologist, except perhaps for changing "Infrequently, the term transgender is defined very broadly to include cross-dressers.", which I changed with this edit, I don't see that your versions of the lead were an improvement. I reverted you twice now, including here, because, for one, this article is not about the term; it is about the concept. See WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary, especially its WP:ISAWORDFOR and WP:WORDISSUBJECT sections. Yes, we go into the term aspect of "transgender" in the lead, but we don't begin by framing "transgender" as a term. Secondly, what does "In addition to people who are exclusively male or female" mean? Because of the issues with the distinction between sex and gender, and that most of the general public does not recognize "assigned sex," the wording "in addition to including people whose gender identity is the opposite of their assigned sex (trans men and trans women)" is more accurate and clearer. It is also important to mention trans men and trans women since they are who the vast majority of the transgender literature focuses on, despite transgender also being an umbrella term. As for "Some transgender people who desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another identify as transsexual.", it's not just about preferring the term. They also identify as transsexual. So if you want "prefer" there as well, I would word it as "Some transgender people who desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another identify as transsexual and prefer the term transsexual to transgender."
As for no one having objected to your extensive editing at other articles, your contribution history shows that you don't edit much, at least under your Zentomologist account; so maybe that is why. But it is the case that editors' edits won't always be accepted. Surely, you've been reverted before, whether or not you know about it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 10:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As for this lower in the article, "genderqueer" was not needed since "non-binary" is there. And, yes, they mean the same thing in the vast majority of reliable sources. I also pointed to WP:Slash. I'm not sure what you mean by "and that by moving an unrelated line to a separate paragraph, the heading was now too long." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 10:39, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User:Flyer22 Reborn, I'm aware it's about the concept. What I've been attempting to clear up is the writing. "In addition to people who are exclusively male or female" means "men" and "women". The article itself is not solely about "gender identity"; it's about (as multiple sources which are not ones I added state) both gender identity and gender behavior. Using "trans men" and "trans women" works well, but as the definition of them has already been stated, I'd suggest this version "In addition to trans men and trans women" as being even clearer and more concise. The issue with "Some transgender people identity is transsexual" is that the ones that do don't seem to consider themselves transgender. It may be clearer to eliminate that from the lead and leave it to the section that addresses the issue?
Certainly, I've been reverted before, as every editor has. But generally not without explanation or lack of clarity. And in that vein, what is the point of reverting to include unneeded commas and "However" (an editor's nightmare; writers love it, but it should be used with subordinate clauses, not as the start of a sentence.)
Which cites are you looking at that show "genderqueer" as a synonym for "non-binary"? IME that's a non-standard usage (but usage changes and I'm always interested in seeing the shifts). WRT moving an unrelated line: the line about some people preferring transsexual to transgender is an exception to the main explanation of the concept; grammatically, exceptions are generally listed separately. Zentomologist (talk) 11:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your "In addition to people who are exclusively male or female" text meaning "men" and "women" is not clear. I've noted why. Even if readers were to take it to mean "men" and "women," it's not clear on whether it's about cisgender men and women or transgender men and women. The original "in addition to" text is about trans men and trans women. You speak of behavior, but that line is not about cross-dressers or androgynous people, or the like. I don't see anything wrong with the lead making it clear to readers that trans men and trans women are people whose gender identity is the opposite of their assigned sex. And to repeat, the vast majority of the transgender literature is about trans men and trans women. When sources or people state "transgender," they usually are not talking about cross-dressers, androgynous people, or even non-binary people.
As for transsexual people who don't consider themselves transgender, they are still considered transgender in the literature, though, especially with "transsexual" being used less and less these days (except for some medical aspects, including causes of transsexuality material). We could change "Some transgender people who desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another identify as transsexual." to "Some people who desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another identify as transsexual and prefer the term transsexual to transgender." But the original is clearer about these people also being under the transgender umbrella. Per WP:Lead, the transsexual aspect should remain in the lead since it's a significant aspect of the article.
As for which cites I'm looking at that show "non-binary" is a synonym for "genderqueer"? The type of sources currently listed at Talk:Non-binary gender. Yeah, that's a lot of discussion to wade through, but the sources (including ones I provided in the Survey section) are there. The sources are easily found by Googling.
-sche worked on the lead more than I did, and I remember that it was -sche who crafted the "Infrequently, the term transgender is defined very broadly to include cross-dressers." piece. So maybe -sche has something to state about your changes as well.
Mathglot might also have something to state.
As for reverting you without bringing the matter to the talk page, I, as you know, gave an explanation in my edit summary. Not every revert matter is taken to the talk page. You brought the matter to the talk page. I replied. The "however" thing is not something I feel strongly about, but there is disagreement about not beginning a sentence with "however." And I think this has also been discussed at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style.
On a side note: Since this page is on my watchlist, I prefer not to be WP:Pinged to it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'll get back to this when I can; grandkids are arriving later for a visit and no time for the computer for a while, but didn't want to leave this unanswered; bookmarked. Happy Summer! (Unless you're in the SoHes, then Happy Winter!)Zentomologist (talk) 16:22, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]