The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Charlotte Clymer article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
This article should adhere to the gender identity guideline because it contains material about one or more trans women. Precedence should be given to self-designation as reported in the most up-to-date reliable sources, anywhere in article space, even when it doesn't match what's most common in reliable sources. Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to by the pronouns, possessive adjectives, and gendered nouns (for example "man/woman", "waiter/waitress", "chairman/chairwoman") that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. Some people go by singular they pronouns, which are acceptable for use in articles. This applies in references to any phase of that person's life, unless the subject has indicated a preference otherwise. Former, pre-transition names may only be included if the person was notable while using the name; outside of the main biographical article, such names should only appear once, in a footnote or parentheses.If material violating this guideline is repeatedly inserted, or if there are other related issues, please report the issue to the LGBTQ+ WikiProject, or, in the case of living people, to the BLP noticeboard.
Pre-transition, Clymer was a prominent figure in feminist journalism / activism / social media, and was the target of intense criticism for alleged misogyny (including hundreds of signatures on a change.org petition to fire Clymer from Huffington Post):
Those are shaky sources for negative statements about a BLP. Regarding The Cut, "There is no consensus on whether it is generally reliable for contentious statements" (WP:RSP#New York). Regarding Salon, "There is no consensus on the reliability of Salon" (WP:RSP#Salon). And of course Twitter is unusable. GorillaWarfare(talk)16:29, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Huffpost wrote an article quoting Clymer and she appeared to have participated in the creation of the article:
Stephanie, I'm going to let you in on a little secret that, apparently, no one has had the guts to tell you up to this point in your life: having a vagina does not grant you magical powers of perception and nuance anymore than my penis magically blinds me from the horrors of the world.
You have to earn respect for your opinion. I'm not going to hand it to you because you're a woman talking women's rights.
And yes, I am the leader of this page. These are my moderators, who I have selected for the page that I created and into which I have poured money for advertising, and make no mistake: I do hold executive privilege (your favorite word, apparently), and I do have the final say on decisions. However, I trust my mods, and instead of being a dictator, we work as a team of equals. They let me know when something's off, and I listen to them and heed their advice.
I run this page, a feminist blog, write a column for another feminist blog (under a woman editor-in-chief who respects my writing and invited me to contribute articles), and on top of all that, I volunteer 30-40 hours a week at a feminist lobbying firm.
Here's a good question: what the fuck have you done for women's rights, lately, other than troll the page I created?
You want to talk about privilege? Fine, we'll talk about privilege. What about your idiot privilege? It would seem you're so used to people not calling you out for being an absolute fucking moron that you've become blind to how your asshat actions affect others.
So no, after us reaching out to you, you decided to insult me, and, more importantly, my moderators with your bullshit, half-hearted, tongue-in-cheek apology.
Supposedly, you're an outstanding feminist but have no problem telling my women moderators how they're supposed to think and feel.
Please accept my invitation of hide-and-go-fuck-yourself.
And one more thing: If I ever see your name on my page again, I will report you for harassment and block you.
Feel free to relay this message to the 1% of women feminists out there who foam at the mouth and put their bullshit on everyone else who disagrees with them.
Charles
I think a reference to this criticism should be mentioned somewhere in the article, because she is a public figure and her words have been documented by a reliable source. Let me know your thoughts!
It should definitely be included in the article, otherwise it is biased and not an accurate BLP. Clymer has been active for a while and it should be covered too. Journalist Darlena Cunha wrote a HuffPost article criticizng Clymer's role in various feminist organizations in 2013.[1] Feminist media group Bitch removed an article by Clymer and Editor Sarah Mirk wrote that this happened "after readers brought to our attention the author’s history of lashing out against feminist critics" then called this "an extremely rare and significant decision."[2] I will say, as a trans person, misgendering and deadnaming should be avoided when writing about her pre-transition work. Stanloona2020 (talk) 8:45, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia is completely and utterly lost to troons. Give it up as a lost cause. This grotesque misogynistic freak gets to have a glowing profile on here because of it, including a heavily filtered and edited photo, when this is what he actually looks like: -
.jpg){kind=small}
