Talk:Sipiniq

A fact from Sipiniq appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 October 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Inuit identity of sipiniq referred to individuals who were believed to have changed their physical sex at the moment of birth, but were socialized as members of their original gender?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sipiniq.

Wikipedia

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

Anthropology

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Indigenous peoples of North America

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America 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.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 22:43, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the Inuit third gender identity sipiniq referred to individuals who were believed to have changed their physical sex from male to female at the moment of birth, but were socially regarded as males? Sources: Daily Life of the Inuit, Sinews of Survival: the Living Legacy of Inuit Clothing

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Terpios hoshinota
Comment: This is kind of an awkward one to word, given that it's very wrapped up in Inuit conceptions of sex and gender which makes it hard to rephrase it into the somewhat more sensitive modern terminology without getting into OR territory (or without getting way, way into the weeds explaining things). I'm happy to try to find another phrasing. ~~QPQ pending.~~ ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:03, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Premeditated Chaos (talk). Self-nominated at 22:01, 7 October 2020 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
Interesting:
Other problems: - The article says that it could also apply to female -> male.

QPQ: - tbd
Overall: Interesting article. (t · c) buidhe 13:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Buidhe, it can go the other way but it's extremely rare. Wording the DYK to include both options gets awkward real fast, because you either have to use phrasing like "the opposite gender", which is...really undesirable when you're talking about a nonbinary gender identity, or you have to use some really tortured over-explanatory language which makes the hook way too long for DYK. Here's some alts, but I don't like them as much as the original: ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:47, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ALT1: ... that the Inuit third gender identity sipiniq referred to individuals who were believed to have changed their physical sex at the moment of birth, generally from male to female, but were socially regarded as their original gender?
ALT2: ... that the Inuit third gender identity sipiniq referred to individuals who were believed to have changed their physical sex at the moment of birth, but were socialized as members of their original gender?

QPQ is done by the way I just forgot to strike my comment about it being pending. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:48, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ALT2 looks best to me, and ALT1 is also approved. (t · c) buidhe 17:20, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What does this sentence mean?

I have to say, I can't figure out what this sentence means: "Sipiniit were regarded socially as being of the designated gender", because I don't know what "designated gender" means in this context. Does "designated" here mean the apparent biological sex at birth? Or does "designated" mean the gender that the infant was believed to have had before the gender change at birth? Skepticalgiraffe (talk) 15:31, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just came on to the talk page to say the same thing as [User:Skepticalgiraffe]. It's not clear whether "designated gender" means the individual's observed sex after birth, or the sex they are believed to have been before birth. A worked example might be useful in clearing it up. Hephae3tion (talk) 18:17, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Skepticalgiraffe and Hephae3tion, I've reworded it with an example. Does it make more sense now? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:24, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, clearer now. It was the "designated" that I didn't understand. Skepticalgiraffe (talk) 22:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah fair enough. I was trying to avoid using cisnormative language that conflates physical sex with gender. It's also a confusing concept to understand at first - the baby is believed to start off as physically male, is perceived to physically "turn into" a female and have a female body/genitals/etc, but is then socially treated as a male until puberty. I used "designated gender" since the sipiniq child's gender is decided for them by their parents rather than the child choosing to identify as another gender. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:29, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's much clearer, thanks. Hephae3tion (talk) 09:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]