Talk:Pinkwashing (LGBTQ)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pinkwashing (LGBTQ) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 180 days

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

LGBTQ+ studies

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

Marketing & Advertising Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing 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.Marketing & AdvertisingWikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingTemplate:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingMarketing & Advertising articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Recent removals

Buidhe, before deleting so much content so fast, could you please tag them "better source needed" for a little while before deleting? thanks. -Daveout(talk) 03:21, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The content is still in the page history in case a reliable source could be found to support it. (t · c) buidhe 19:05, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit:

Critics of the concept, such as James Kirchick and Hen Mazzig, have pointed out that pinkwashing allegations against Israel constitute a straw man argument. To them, the fact that Israel is generally tolerant towards LGBT individuals and groups on both state and individual levels is a factual contrast to the discriminatory and often-brutal treatment given to LGBT people by Arab and Muslim groups.

The issues are still there: it's only verifiable that apparently Kirchick and Mazzig believe this, "pointed out" and "straw man" portrays their opinion as fact. No reliable sources are cited (opinion pieces are not RS), so it would be UNDUE. The WP:ONUS for inclusion also hasn't been met. (t · c) buidhe 20:44, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of reliable sources already listed, so if the only coverage is from primary opinion pieces it doesn't seem wp:due. (t · c) buidhe 03:07, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daveout you've violated 1RR here[1][2] The main definition used in RS is the one used by Ghosh, and the lead should reflect this more clearly. (t · c) buidhe 19:29, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think that, above all, the lede should be easy to understand. I don't think anything is being downplayed or emphasized between the two versions, the main difference is the wordflow. Look, the lede now starts with a simple definition, the previous one with an overcomplicated technical direct quotation. It was really bad. I'm sure will agree. Sorry for breaking 1rr, it was unintentional. -Daveout(talk) 19:36, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the lead needs improvement, but it should start with the main definition used in RS rather than a less common version. Accuracy is more important than understandability, although I'm confident that it's possible to include both. (t · c) buidhe 19:42, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of pinkwashing

The original definition proposed by Schulman is "a deliberate strategy [on the part of the Israeli state and its supporters] to conceal the continuing violations of Palestinians' human rights behind an image of modernity signified by Israeli gay life" Ritchie 2014

"Pinkwashing refers to the inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people (LGBT) into the nation, painting the state as liberal and democratic while legitimizing violent policies towards countries and communities portrayed as less tolerant of LGBTs" (Hartal 2020)
Pinkwashing is "drawing attention to a purportedly advanced LGBTQ rights record in Israel in order to detract attention from Israel’s violations of Palestinian human rights. As I see it, pinkwashing relies on a logic based on four pillars: (1) nam-ing queer Israeli agency and eliding Israeli homophobia; (2) naming Palestin-ian homophobia and eliding queer Palestinian agency; (3) juxtaposing these contrasting queer experiences in Israeli and Palestinian societies as a civiliza-tional discourse aimed at highlighting the superior humanity of the former and the subhumanity of the latter, who deserve to be dominated; and (4) rep-resenting Israel as a gay haven for Israelis, Palestinians, and internationals in order to attract tourism and other forms of solidarity and support." )Atshan 2020(
"Pinkwashing refers to processes whereby states congratulate and promote themselves on the global stage as champions of human rights because they have granted select rights to LGBT people, while continuing to engage in various kinds of systemic violence and dispossession" Lubheid 2016
"the practice of covering over or distracting from a nation’s policies of discrimination of some populations through a noisy touting of its gay rights for a limited few" (Puar 2013)
"the deployment of superficially sympathetic messages for [ends] having little or nothing to do with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) equality or inclusion" but also "a strategy frequently used to reframe debate and shift attention away from acts of overt discrimination, exclusion or violence under the veneer of a putatively inclusive, modernist rhetoric" Russel 2019 (t · c) buidhe 04:35, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very slow edit war re intersex section

September 2016: added by Trankuility
December 2021: removed by Buidhe for lack of independent sources
February 2022: restored by BenM with accusation of an act of pinkwashing & intersex erasure
May 2022: removed by Buidhe for same reason
Today: restored by BenM for same reason

Please discuss here rather than edit-warring. In particular, Ben, please don't restore content without addressing the reason it was removed for, and definitely don't accuse people of things like "pinkwashing & intersex erasure". Comment on content, not contributors. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 15:19, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I feel an edit war by definition probably isn't happening if its 6 edits over the span of 7+ years. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 20:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request: update on asylum policy

I don't have enough edits to update this page, however I noticed that the page says that Israel has taken the position that LGBT Palestinians do not face systemic persecution, and as a result aren't entitled asylum. The citation was from 2020. It appears that in fact, at least some LGBT Palestinians were able to obtain asylum as early as 2016.[3]. They nevertheless often were unable to work until 2022[4], and asylum appears to be granted on only a temporary basis. This latter source is discussed in the related wikipedia article LGBT rights in the State of Palestine.

Without seeing the original 2020 source (which is a book) I don't have specific recommendations on how to edit this - I'm not sure if the 2020 source is discussing a policy from before the 2016 case, or a policy of granting temporary asylum but not permanent asylum. But I would ask that it be clarified as it's currently misleading.

Thanks! Sammka (talk) 21:20, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]