Talk:Transgender/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

"To Family Members" Subsection of "Coming Out"

This section feels very colloquial and perhaps a bit on the personal side. The sources give examples of the phenomenon discussed, but the style does not feel encyclopedic. In addition, there is a specific section already devoted to Transgender issues involving "Coming Out" in the coming out article. Perhaps the two should be merged to keep all of the information together after some restyling? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.88.20.32 (talk • contribs) 08:18, 16 June 2011

Origin of word transgender...

"Some transsexuals also take issue with the term because Charles "Virginia" Prince, the founder of the cross-dressing organization Tri-Ess and coiner of the term "transgender"

READ THIS: http://www.cristanwilliams.com/b/tracking-transgender-the-historical-truth/

In summary...

The dispute seems to focus on a few points.

• Is the mention in TV guide a significant source and or use of the word / was it widely circulated enough to have cultural impact?
• Princes use is often cited as the coining of the word as "Transgenderal". Is it noteworthy that the word "transgendered" is used to describe a character that had a complete sex change only months after Prince used a similar word "transgenderal" a play on the word "Transsexual" intended to refrence crossdressers only. re: complete sex change -> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066115
• Was the character transsexual or not? Does the dream sequence effect this? (in the movie at the end it turns out the whole movie was a dream. For the whole of the movie prior to the end though Myra Breckinridge was presented to the audience to be a post-op transsexual. The entire sex change surgery and the plot of the movie except for the last few minutes were a dream.. / This should possibly be compared to wizard of OZ does the implied dream state of the story of OZ somehow disqualify any cultural impact of the story and characters?) Quotes from the movie show the character had a complete sex change. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066115/quotes
• Is this indicative that the word may have been used interchangeably as an umbrella term from the start?
• Allegations of OR and Synth have been made.
• The original reversion stated in the reason "deleting references to "Myra Breckinridge" Gore Vidal's bizarro-world satire with hostile depictions of TS - DISCUSS FIRST PLEASE!"
• Subsequent re-reversion stated "Undid revision 465457063 by From Ariel (talk) - please cease these ridiculous Myra Breckinridge edits"
• Is the edit being disallowed due to opinion / dislike on the movie itself not on the merit of the words use and significance of this early use culturally?
• Is the use by TV Guide less significant then the other cited use by Virginia Prince in a far more limited distribution publication? Why would TV Guide a nationally syndicated publication to a wide demographic on the topic of TV and movies be less significant then Princes use?

Sorry to butt in... In the wiki entry, it says "In the 1980s the term was expanded to an umbrella term" - the term was being used as an umbrella term in 1974: http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/02/25/1974-transgender-as-umbrella-term/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.8.34.255 (talk) 06:17, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

From Ariel (talk) 19:13, 18 December 2011 (UTC) ________

I am more then a little upset that my revisions to the section origin of the word transgender were removed and in the comments of such undo I was told to "discuss first". I see nowhere in wikipedia where cited, referenced, provable, facts must be discussed before adding them. Had the person that undid my edits read the references and cites it would be obvious they are valid. Here is all of the discussion you will get. My changes were cited confirmable and referenceable. All of the required references and proofs were provided with the edits and this is a gross abuse to remove my changes. If you wanted discussion you should have requested it and left my edits intact.

I expect I will be asking for a review and an inquiry into my edits being undone and being TOLD, no ORDERED to discuss, factually provable, referenced and cited content before editing.

Further Booze your notes where you labeled The movie Myra Breckinridge as "bizarro" clearly shows your edit does not come from npov. You don't have to like the movie or it's content. When discussing the origin of the word Transgender the fact that TV Guide used the term "transgender" to refer to a transsexual in april 26 of 1970 clearly calls into question it's use and shows that from the very beginning it was an umbrella term. Prince was using a similar term "transgenderal" a play on "Transsexual" in 1969 and TV Guide was using "Transgender" before any written record of prince using the exact word.

Fact: Prince did not use Transgenderal in any confirmable source prior to her writing in 1969. To not clarify that she used Transgenderal not transgender is misleading.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-ekinskingone-6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-princevone-7

Fact: in April 1970 in TV guide a nationally circulated paper. Raquel Welches character "Myra Breckinridge" was referred to as Transgender.

"Raquel Welch (left), moviedom's sex queen soon to be seen as the heroine/hero star of Gore Vidal's transgendered "Myra Breckinridge," will be featured..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Transgender&oldid=463478507#cite_note-TV_guide_april_1970-9

Fact: Myra Breckinridge was a Post-op Transsexual.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Transgender&oldid=463478507#cite_note-IMDB-10

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myra_Breckinridge_%28film%29

From Ariel (talk) 17:44, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you're upset, From Ariel, but please note:

First, having an edit reverted on Wikipedia is not at all unusual, is a normal part of the Wikipedia "BOLD, revert, discuss" cycle - WP:BRD - which many employ, and you're editing an article in a set of topics - trans* related topics - which are hyper-controversial.

The evolution of the term "transgender" is subject to a great deal of controversy among transgendered, transsexual, trans-whatever folk. E.g., please look over Cristan Williams' articles on the history of the term (The Rise of "Transgender") and the controversy (Transsexual not Transgender: A Paroxysm of Histrionics); the application of the term transgender to transsexuals and the implications thereof, in particular, has now become the focus of vociferous disputes in what some would call "the transgender community", from which others subsumed into that category ("separatist" transsexuals) wish to be freed.

The note that Victoria Prince used "transgenderal" is fine by me; referencing a TV Guide article using the term "transgender" in a vague TV-CRITIC style of expression to segue into a statement that the wholly fictional character (and IMO an obscene one, and I'm not hung up about sexual matters) "Myra Breckinridge whom -sic- was clearly a post-op transsexual" is wholly inappropriate, in my view, because it is 1) a citation of a non-notable source in this instance, because it was not historically influential in itself, and is irrelevant to the current use of the term, and 2) the novel and film portrayal of the character "Myra Breckinridge" is a really, really, appalling misrepresentation of the nature of transsexualism and motivations for transitioning (hint: this story is all about sex, sex, sex and revenge on men!). "Myra Breckinridge" is not "a Post-op Transsexual": "Myra Breckinridge" is a purely a product of the frenzied imagination of Gore Vidal - the story is advertised as a "satire", right?

To underscore this point, I'll quote from the Wikipedia article on Myra Breckinridge: "'It is tempting to argue that Vidal said more to subvert the dominant rules of sex and gender in Myra than is contained in a shelf of queer theory treatises,' wrote Dennis Altman." To my way of thinking, genuine transsexuality is not about "subverting" the dominant rules of gender… it's about a compelling desire to conform to the gender rules which are applied to the opposite sex, and so Vidal is engaging in a full-frontal assault on the very nature of the phenomenon, in my opinion.

Disclaimer: I'm TS, myself, and don't mind being referred to as "transgendered" though I tend to cavil at being labelled "transgender". Picky, no? (Typically picky: yes!) And yes, this is my legal name now: "Bonze Anne Rose Blayk" -- bonze blayk (talk) 19:15, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

______________________________

Again your reasons for disagreeing are completely opinion based and do not fall under NPOV. This is entirely because you do not like the film as was made clear in your reverts which call the film "bizaroo". You say that this film is not significant but even poorly written and executed it was significant because it breached and parodied several concepts that in the 70's were considered taboo. Keep in mind back then it was considered revolutionary that the Brady parents shared the same bed. It was courageous enough to make such a movie we can't expect it to be upto modern standards of understanding.

To quote from a persons comments on IMDB I think he neatly sums up why it was a movie that shook foundations especially because it parodied things often considered taboo at the time..

by HarlowMGM (Sun May 13 2007 21:14:07) "...A woman raping a man via a "strap on" - an old woman with a huge sexual appetite for young beefcake - an attractive transsexual able to seduce whom she pleases - an all-american girl flirting with bisexuality - an old white man who sleeps with black chicks and lusts after his nephew's widow (who turns out to be his nephew!)..."

Again I don't care if you like the movie or not it is a fact the actual word "transgender" was used only months after princes use of a similar word in a nationally syndicated publication read by millions of people. Myra Breckinridge was not CD she was TS. The dramatization of being transsexual may not have been correct or polite or made you happy but it does not change the fact that the word was used in an environ that exposed millions of people to the term in relation to a transsexual.

As far as significant source. We are talking about possibly the first actual use of transgender in a nationally published anything when describing a post-op transsexual. Whether you liked how they portrayed her or not, Myra was a post-op TS not CD hence this is significant showing it was already falling into parlance as a term for transsexuals. You expose millions of people to the word in that use it IS significant. A sideline blurb or not it was in the hands of millions in print. Add to that it was used to describe the picture of a Celebrity whom was on the cover of that issue. That is significant.

Prince didn't use "transgender" till far later (80's?) only sporadically using...

Transgenderal - A play on word - Transsexual - hence the - "al" in 69 through the 70's.

In the 70's black-sploitation movies were common too that does not mean you censor one of those movies from a wikipedia article because you don't like the light it casts people of color in either. If something significant and of note related to the movie happened you present it in a neutral point of view irregardless of your personal dislikes.

From Ariel (talk) 12:28, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

From Ariel - Please take note of the Wikipedia article on the movie Myra Breckinridge (film), rather than the reference to the book Myra Breckinridge that you wikilinked in your recent edits. It makes quite a difference, since it's clear that the passing use in a TV Guide blurb (which you seek to promote as causing some kind of profoundly influential Culture Shift! in the public's perception of "transsexuals" as being "transgender") is for a movie characterized as a "BOMB" (by Leonard Maltin), cited in The Fifty Worst Films of All Time, and which bombed with the public as well as with critics?

Your efforts here to apply WP:OR "Original Research" to claim this blurb is worth noting - because the movie itself is somehow "revolutionary"? (Huh?) - in this context are not at all persuasive.

And, in this movie almost no-one watched, thus revolutionizing… nothing? … ultimately?

"In 2004, Myra Breckinridge was released on DVD with minor changes—to make the film's ending (that Myra never had her sex change) clearer…" (from the Wikipedia article; italics mine).

— So: Myra Breckinridge is… ??? A fictional character… and not a "post-op TS". —

And… "Gore Vidal has disowned the film calling it 'an awful joke'". (FWIW: The book was a hit; also, I think Vidal is a great writer: YMWV.)

AND FINALLY in your edit you claim incorrectly that "in the April 1970 issue of TV guide 'transgender' was used to refer to the character Myra Breckinridge" - the blurb which you linked states: "Raquel Welch… star of Gore Vidal's transgendered 'Myra Breckinridge'". (Seriously: "transgendered", not "transgender": these terms are not the same.)

Anyway, I see no good reason to go into detail in this article on the convoluted history of the term "transgender", which did not evolve in any sense that makes sense, but has been one of those terms that's been used by different people with drastically different definitions. As Cristan Williams' articles show (cited above), this would comprise an entire article in and of itself… if it were actually notable? (And I don't even believe that it is.) - Sincerely, -- bonze blayk (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

bonze blayk your entire argument still comes down to you don't like the movie and disagree with it's quality / content. The quality and content of the movie does not mean that the word being referenced in view of millions of people in TV Guide of a gender variant / transsexual character is not valid. (no matter her personality) Sure the depiction is not accurate or PC but that is not the argument the depiction of the character was consistent with peoples limited exposure and awareness of how transsexuals actually were in 1970. Whats important is a significant source (mass publication to millions) used the term in regards to a transgender / gender varient / transsexual woman.

As far as is the character transsexual / transgendered let myra / myron explain that in dialog...?

Surgeon: You realize, once we cut it off, it won't grow back. I mean, it isn't like hair, or fingernails, or toenails, you know.

Myron: What do you think I am, some kind of idiot? I know that!

Surgeon: [shrugs] Eh - how about circumcision? It'd be cheaper.

Myron: Come on, come on, come on, let's get it over with, Myra's waiting!

Surgeon: [shrugs] We'll have to blow up your tits with silicone.

Myra: I am Myra Breckinridge, whom no man will ever possess. The new woman whose astonishing history started with a surgeon's scalpel, and will end... who-knows-where. Just as Eve was born from Adam's rib, so Myron died to give birth to Myra. Did Myron take his own life, you will ask? Yes, and no, is my answer. Beyond that, my lips are sealed. Let it suffice for me to say that Myron is... with me, and that I am the fulfillment of all his dreams.

The TV guide quote is significant and documented proof of the use of the word in common media and mass media in 1970 that is significant.

Lastly your claim of it not being the same word is the most ridiculous claim of them all and I invite you to goto Transgendered to see why.

I feel you have given zero justification (as I have) and I will restore my edit. The only thing you have convinced me of is you dislike the movie and I'm sorry that is not reason for excluding a citation to a notable (millions of subscribers) early documented use of the actual word in a section labeled "origin of the word..." It may even be the first use of the word in a venue seen by millions.

From Ariel (talk) 13:08, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

From Ariel, you have provided absolutely no evidence that this inclusion of the term "transgender" (sic: "transgendered" ! bonze blayk (talk) 07:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)) in this brief blurb is in any way historically notable. Your WP:OR "ORIGINAL RESEARCH" is not acceptable in a Wikipedia article. I will revert this on every appearance, since you have not responded at all to the problems I have raised, and do not seem to take editing responsibilities seriously… keep this up, and I will report your activities here as abuse. -- bonze blayk (talk) 06:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

… I guess I should note that this is more a case of aggravated WP:SYNTH than pure WP:OR, since there are a couple of sources cited? But to establish that the use of the term "transgendered" here actually had any impact… well, it's just not supported anywhere that I can see (and believe me, I did look!).

So, From Ariel, I shall now quote from your initial post here in Talk:Transgender on this matter? "Here is all of the discussion you will get." -- bonze blayk (talk) 07:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

bonze blayk are you telling me that this was not published in tv guide despite actual confirmed scans of the cover?

Are you telling me that TV Guide is not a publication read by millions of people?

Are you trying to say that it was not describing a character that is a gender non-conformant / transsexual?

The only thing you have confirmed is you do not like the character or the movie.

I will be asking for arbitration on this as opposed to your attempt to settle this by bulling me by making wild claims of fabrication of information. This is a confirmable source (TV guide) and the dialog of the movie confirms the CHARACTER is transsexual and the quote was in reference to the character from the dialog of said movie. This is neither synth nor is it OR it is a confirmable fact..

https://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=en&nomo=1&biw=1001&bih=542&q=april+26+1970+tv+guide+transgender&oq=april+26+1970+tv+guide+transgender&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=90866l94371l0l94704l12l12l0l11l0l0l179l179l0.1l1l0

From Ariel (talk) 08:13, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi guys, I'm here from the 3O board. Sorry it took so long for someone to get here (these delays naturally happen in a place like Wikipedia). My view would be to leave out the TV Guide mention; the usage in the TV Guide blurb seems more like a nonce word than an attempt to coin a word to aid classification a group of people, and it coincidentally is similar to the word that became in use. My reasoning is as follows: first, the mention in TV Guide is relatively minor. It's used once in a caption blurb about an actress (not even about the movie that it involves). Second: it's not used as a noun, but as an adjective, and with a suffix that isn't usually seen today. Third (and most importantly): it's not describing the character, it's describing the movie. So, while the word itself looks similar, its usage is actually pretty different from the modern use of "transgender." So, on those grounds, I'd say leave it out.

Think of it this way: if someone who had never heard of the word "transgender" stumbled across that TV Guide entry, it wouldn't help them understand the word in use today. It's a minor reference, so it likely didn't have an impact on the actual development of the word, and is therefore of little or no historical interest, and the actual usage doesn't reflect the usage of the word now, so it has little or no illustrative benefit. Since it's not really helping the article, it's probably best to leave it out. I don't think it's egregiously OR or SYNTH to leave it in, but I just don't think it has a place in the article.

Finally, some friendly notes on the usual Wikipedia etiquette (none of these are aimed at anyone in particular):

• bold editing is encouraged (within reason), but once a change has been reverted, that's when discussion needs to take place. The addition of the material was fine and needed no discussion, but once it's been reverted or removed, discussion should take place and consensus should be reached before re-adding it.
• Yes, a scholarly article is usually given more weight than a more widely-circulated magazine; this is reflected in Wikipedia's policies on verifiability and reliable sources.
• Care should be taken in using the word "notability" in a content dispute; in a Wikipedia context, notability is only important on deciding whether a subject should have its own article or not; the policy on notability does not apply to what should be included within an article, only whether or not it should exist.
• While OR, SYNTH, and POV editing does (of course) happen, we should be careful in claiming them in a content dispute. It can easily lead to personal attacks.

Thanks (and sorry for the verbosity)! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 06:08, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Writ Keeper Re is it the character or the movie the answer is yes as the title of the film is the main character...

"Raquel Welch moviedom's sex queen soon to be seen as the heroine/hero star of Gore Vidal's transgendered "Myra Breckinridge"

heroine/hero star of Gore Vidal's transgendered "Myra Breckinridge" kinda makes it both refrencing the movie and the character not the actress.

I do also disagree on transgendered as if you saw transgendered and then watched the movie which predominantly spends the entire movie focusing on a character whom apparently to the audience had a sex change until the movie is revealed to be a dream at the end of what might have been but wasn't much like wizard of oz..

lastly regarding "Second: it's not used as a noun, but as an adjective, and with a suffix that isn't usually seen today." "transgendered" is used 41,100,000 times according to google vs "transgender" 37,700,000

Google Ngram viewer also shows that transgendered is quickly becoming popular and common http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=transgender%2Ctransgendered&year_start=1940&year_end=2005&corpus=0&smoothing=0

From Ariel (talk) 03:06, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 December 2011

This: "so that "gender" is used to describe the categorical male/female difference and "sex" is used to describe the physical act of sexual intercourse." is incorrect. It should read, ""gender" is used to describe male/female identities and "sex" is used to describe physical genitalia."

141.161.133.207 (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate your request, but the sentence, as stated, is true: "There is a substantial academic literature on the difference between sex and gender, but in pragmatic English, this distinction is often ignored, so that "gender" is used to describe the categorical male/female difference and "sex" is used to describe the physical act of sexual intercourse."

For example: forms, including forms used by physicians and psychologists (who really ought to know better!) use the word "gender" as a "non-sex(y)" term for "genital" "sex" (which isn't truly a binary to start with!).

As a transgendered person myself, this muddling of sense drove me up the wall for a long, long time: the distinction is obvious! How can you possibly confuse these? … until I eventually came to the conclusion that the reason the terms became conflated is because to a cisgendered person the distinction makes no sense at all. (That's WP:OR there, but I believe that's the cause, and why the distinction must be endlessly explained to average people.)

So, I'm very sorry about this… but unless and until educational efforts on the significance of the distinction have some impact on common usage, it's going to have to remain that way.

Thank you for your comment… Sincerely, -- bonze blayk (talk) 04:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Broken link (ref. 3)

Not broken, per se, but www.usilgbt.org seems to have been taken over by a domain squatter. Not sure what default procedure is in that case; I just thought I'd point it out. --79.218.29.67 (talk) 18:28, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

i'm not sure what the procedure either; hopefully my wayback machine kludge is acceptable. It looks as if the original site owner let their website subscription lapsei the five years since it was put in the article, so it's a case of link rot. Sophie means wisdom (talk) 20:49, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 March 2012

This article is factually wrong about origin claims.

1.) There exists NO EVIDENCE to support the idea that Prince's 1 obscure (and immediate abandonment of) "transgenderal" is where all trans terms come from. If 1 obscure usage is the standard you're going to use without showing actual links between the terms, then you MUST now claim that all trans terms - including transsexual - somehow came from "trans-sexed" - a 1915 term which meant transgenderist... which is a bit absurd. http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/02/10/1915-trans-sexed/

2.) Prince is credited for coining "transgenderist", "transgenderism" and "transperson" in the late 1970s (usually 1978 is cited)... for instance:

“Another term I use throughout the book is transgenderist, coined by pioneer gender researcher and transgenderist Virginia Prince” – (1994:2) Transgender Nation, Gordene Olga MacKenzie)

“Virginia Prince coined the word transgenderism which is a blanket term for both transsexualism and transvestism and authored books like Understanding cross dressing and seventy years in the trenches of the Gender wars.” Indian J Psychiatry. 2009 Jan-Mar; 51(1): 73–75

“She also claims to have “coined the words ‘transgenderism’ and ‘trans­genderist’ as nouns describing people like my­self who have breasts and live full time as a woman but who have no intention of having genital surgery” (Prince, 1997a: 469).” – (2005).Virginia Prince: Transgender Pioneer, R Ekins & D King

“The `Transcendents’ or ‘Trans’ People” (1978a), the final article by Prince included in this volume, is significant for a number of rea­sons. It illustrates, once again, just how far ahead of her time Prince was. Here, Prince uses the term “trans” people to include “people gen­erally called ‘transvestites, transgenderists and transexuals’” (Prince 1978a: 86), anticipating by some twenty years a current popular usage. Moreover, her argument that -trans” people “transcend” the gender “barrier” (p. 86) edges towards some of the “gender outlaw” positions of the 1990s.” – (2005).Virginia Prince: Transgender Pioneer, R Ekins & D King

“The earliest published use of the latter that we are aware of is in Prince (1978a). However, in an interview (with RE, Nashville, 2002), Prince recalled first publicly using the term “transgenderist” at a conference as early as 1974 or 1975″ – (2005).Virginia Prince: Transgender Pioneer, R Ekins & D King

Note that she thinks she used the term in 74 or 75, but about that same time, she said...

“The term transgenderist was first introduced into the English language by trans warrior Virginia Prince. Virginia told me, ‘I coined the noun transgenderist in 1987 or ’88. There had to be some name for people like myself who trans the gender barrier – meaning somebody who lives full time in the gender opposite to their anatomy. I have not transed the sex barrier.’” – Transgender Warriors by Leslie Feinberg, 1996, page X of introduction

What we do know is that the first time she wrote the word in any of her copious writing is 1978. She didn't use "transgenderal" or "transgenderist" in 1977 when she was classifying trans folk:

In 1977, Prince writes of three types of different types of trans experiences: “regular transvestite or femmiphile”; class two—those males who live as women openly and in society; and class three—those who undergo or who “seriously plan” sex change surgery. There’s no mention of “transgenderism,” “transgender,” “transgenderal” or “transgenderist.” She goes on to wrote: “People in class two know the difference (between sexual and genderal identity) and consciously elect to change their gender identity without surgery . . . Since class two people recognize the difference between sex and gender we can make a conscious decision to become a woman—a psycho-social gender creature.” – (2005).Virginia Prince: Transgender Pioneer, R Ekins & D King

HOWEVER... here's others using these terms YEARS before Prince:

1970: Transgendered = Transsexual 1974: Transgender & Transpeople = umbrella terms 1974: Transgender = umbrella term 1974: Transgender ≠ Transvestite 1974: Transgender = transsexual 1975: Transgenderist 1975: Transgender = Adjective 1975: Transgender = Adjective 1975: Transgenderist ≠ transvestite 1976: Transgenderist ≠ transsexual or transvestite 1976: Transgenderism & transgenderist ≠ transsexual or transvestite 1976: Transgenderous 1977: Transpeople = transsexual 1978: Transgenderism & transgenderist ≠ transsexual or transvestite 1979: Transgender = Transsexual 1979: Transgenderist = umbrella term: Claire Raynor refers to "transgenderists, the rather clumsy label that has been devised to cover both transvestites and transsexuals.” - The Radio Times (1979)

There exists NO EVIDENCE to support the idea that Prince created these terms. According to Prince, she claims erroneous authorship originating in BOTH the late 1970s and 1980s. Transgender was being used in both America and England as an umbrella term as early as 1974. There's NO EVIDENCE to support the notion that in the 1970s "transgender" meant "transgenderist"; transgender NEVER only ever equaled crossdresser in the 1970s.

Claiming that transgender originally meant crossdresser and then only began to mean transsexual in the 80s and 90s is as factually wrong as it is to assert (without evidence) that somehow all trans terms come from an obscure 1969 term or a 1915 term.

This line...

"The term transgender (TG) was popularised in the 1970s[6] (but implied in the 1960s[7][8]) describing people who wanted to live cross-gender without sex reassignment surgery.[9]"

... is 100% false.

If your going to keep the implied comment, the date needs to be changed to 1915 (and this needs to be noted on the transsexual entry) and at this point, given the objective evidence, choosing to keep "describing people who wanted to live cross-gender without sex reassignment surgery" is basically a lie.

Ehipassiko (talk) 00:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Hiya, Ehipassiko ... I'd be happy to perform this edit for you, but I would prefer that you to write up some suitable replacement text relying as much as possible on "Reliable Sources" (WP:RS) according to Wikipedia standards - preferably secondary sources published in texts or reference works explicitly discussing (or firmly establishing?) some of the history and evolution of the term. Personally, I find it difficult to sort out which among the numerous sources you provide are best suited to use in a rewrite of the problematic areas of the text here.

It seems to me that a major part of the problem here is that Prince was a tireless self-promoter, and managed to get herself inserted into various narratives as the "inventor" of the term through sheer tenacity and relentless repetition of her assertion of authorship (Milton Diamond supports her claim in the interview referenced here - "A Conversation with Dr. Milton Diamond"! *sigh*)... unfortunately (or not), Wikipedia's standards hold only that WP:RS must triumph, and countervailing arguments proving that these "reliable sources" are full of baloney that are not based on WP:RS are, alas, inadmissible as WP:OR — "Original Research". WP:RS which contradict each other are supposed to be noted and given weight according to their authority (which is assessed either through the reasoned judgment of editors working towards an amicable resolution - or by a colossal clash of verbal armaments in the fields of Wikipedia's Talk pages by contending parties.-)

That said, it doesn't seem as if anyone is likely to spring forth to defend Prince's rather dubious claims.

PS: I loved your interview with Dr. Diamond! -- thanks, bonze blayk (talk) 03:40, 30 March 2012 (UTC) (my email is available from my Wikipedia profile)

I've deactivated the template while we wait for specific text. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 22:38, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Celestra

Thank you for your response! I'm not well versed in using wikipedia's editing style. Here's a write-up on the topic using standard referencing. Would you please make whatever formatting changes to this piece so that it will work for this article? THANK YOU for your assistance!

Here's the entry...

By a matter of months, it seems that Virginia Prince was the first to use the lexical compound trans+genderal in her December 1969 issue of Transvestia.[1] She immediately abandoned this term and as Dr. Richard Elkins writes, "Although the term 'transgenderal' is arguably the original lexical compound of the 'trans- + gend-' type, Prince did not stick with the term. Nor did it catch on."[2] There exists no evidence to suggest that later lexical compounds of "trans- + gend-" were created from or influenced by Prince's rejected "transgenderal" term. Five months later in April 1970, the TV Guide published an article which referenced a post-operative transsexual movie character as being "transgendered."[3] In the 1974 edition of Clinical sexuality: A Manual for the Physician and the Professions, the term transgender was used as an umbrella term[4] and the Conference Report from the 1974 "National TV.TS Conference" held in Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK used "trans-gender" and "trans.people" as umbrella terms.[5] However, the 1974, A Practical Handbook of Psychiatry references "transgender surgery" noting, "The transvestite rarely seeks transgender surgery, since the core of his perversion is an attempt to realize the fantasy of a phallic woman."[6]

By 1975, the term "transgenderist" came into common usage within the trans population as a way to reference a specific type of transgender person: the non-operative transsexual (Type 4 Transsexual or Type 5 True Transsexual on the Harry Benjamin Scale).[7] By 1976, the term "transgenderist" was being abbreviated as "TG" in educational materials.[8] Without noting the term's previous history, Virginia Prince implied authorship of the term in her 1978 paper, "The Transcendents" which was presented to the Western Regional Meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sex. In her paper, Prince describes "three classes of such trans-people, generally called 'transvestites, transgenderists and transsexuals." However, a June 2, 1979 article of the Radio Times states “It is estimated that about one person in 2,000 is a transgenderist – someone who feels an overwhelming need either to dress in the clothes of the opposite gender, or . . . to ‘change sex’ completely.” Days later on June 6th, Claire Raynor, on the BBC 4 radio show Crossing Over explained the term this way: “Transgenderists – the rather clumsy label that has been devised to cover both transvestites and transsexuals.”[8]

By 1979, Christine Jorgensen publicly rejected the term "transsexual" and instead identified herself in newsprint as a "trans-gender" saying, "If you understand trans-genders, then you understand that gender doesn't have to do with bed partners, it has to do with identity.”[9] Jorgensen again rejected "transsexual" and instead asserted herself to be a transgender woman in 1982 at a speech given to Fresno State University students[10] and again in 1985[11].

In 1983, Kim Elizabeth Stuart wrote in her book The Uninvited Dilemma, "The word transsexual is somewhat misleading, because the word sexual is incorporated into the term. Perhaps the word 'transgender' would have been a more suitable term, but I say that in hindsight."[12] By 1984, concepts such a a "transgender community" wherein "transgender" was used as an umbrella term was becoming commonplace.[13] In 1985, Dr. Richard Elkins established the "Trans-Gender Archive" at the University of Ulster.[14] In 1987, Anne Bolin writes in her book, In Search of Eve: Transsexual Rights of Passage, "Transsexuals utilize the concepts of their own culture to construct their own transgender experience."[14] One year later in 1988, Bolin equates "transgender" with "gender-variance" writing, "While cross-cultural transgender roles such as the Berdache have encountered a resurgence of interest, little anthropological attention has been paid to Western gender variance or to the closely related subject of gender identity."[15]

By 1992, the International Conference on Transgender Law and Employment Policy defined transgender as, "... transsexuals, transgenderists, and other crossdressers of both sexes, transitioning in either direction (male to female or female to male), of any sexual orientation, and of all races, creeds, religions, ages, and degrees of physical impediment."[16]

In Leslie Feinberg's 1996 book, Transgender Warriors: Making History from Joan of Arc to Dennis Rodman, Feinberg states, "Today the word transgender has at least two colloquial meanings. It has been used as an umbrella term to include everyone who challenges the boundaries of sex and gender. It is also used to draw a distinction between those who reassign the sex they were labeled at birth, and those of us whose gender expression is considered inappropriate for our sex."[17]

---

References:

[1]: (2005). Virginia Prince: Transgender Pioneer, R Ekins & D King

[2]: (2006). The Transgender Phenomenon, R Ekins & D King, p.13

[3]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1970: Transgendered. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/03/25/1970-transgendered/

[4]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1974: Transgender as Umbrella Term. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/02/25/1974-transgender-as-umbrella-term/

[5]: (2006). The Transgender Phenomenon, R Ekins & D King, p.13

[6]: “[In 1974] some of the terminology used at the conference would take some twenty years to become widespread. As far as we are aware, the first use of the term trans.people (sic) was when Julia Tonner referred to “the two worlds of the trans.people” (ie transsexuals and transvestites). In addition, there was also talk of transsexuals seeking ‘gender alignment’ and of ‘trans-gender’ also used as an umbrella term.” – (2007) Gendys Journal, D King & R Elkins

[7]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1975: Transgenderist. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/03/25/1975-transgenderist/

[8]: The Radio Times (1979: 2 June)

[9]: Williams, C. L. (2012). Christine Jorgensen: Transgender Woman. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2011/08/21/christine-jorgensen-transgender-woman/

[10]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1982: Transgenders = Transsexuals, Christine Jorgensen. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/02/06/1982-transgenders-transsexuals-christine-jorgensen/

[11]: Williams, C. L. (2012). Christine Jorgensen: Transgender Woman. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2011/08/21/christine-jorgensen-transgender-woman/

[12]: (1983). The Uninvited Dilemma, Kim Elizabeth Stuart, p.25

[13]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1984: Transgender Community = Modern Transgender Community. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/03/08/1984-transgender-community-modern-transgender-community/

[14]: (2006). The Transgender Phenomenon, R Ekins & D King, p.14

[15]: (1987). In Search of Eve: Transsexual Rights of Passage, Anne Bolin, p.100

[16]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1988: Transgender Roles, Gender Variance. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2011/09/08/1988-transgender-roles-gender-variance/

[17]: (1996). Transgender Warriors: Making History from Joan of Arc to Dennis Rodman, Leslie Feinberg, p.X

NOTE: After the last quote by Feinberg, I really wanted to end this article with the following sentence, "It should be noted that Feinberg's assessment of the definition of "transgender" during the mid-1990s reflects the reality of the usage during the 1970s." I didn't include this because to my ears it sounded as if I was belaboring a point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehipassiko (talk • contribs) 03:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 24 April 2012

Celestra

Thank you for your response! I'm not well versed in using wikipedia's editing style. Here's a write-up on the topic using standard referencing. Would you please make whatever formatting changes to this piece so that it will work for this article? THANK YOU for your assistance!

Here's the entry...

By a matter of months, it seems that Virginia Prince was the first to use the lexical compound trans+genderal in her December 1969 issue of Transvestia.[1] She immediately abandoned this term and as Dr. Richard Elkins writes, "Although the term 'transgenderal' is arguably the original lexical compound of the 'trans- + gend-' type, Prince did not stick with the term. Nor did it catch on."[2] There exists no evidence to suggest that later lexical compounds of "trans- + gend-" were created from or influenced by Prince's rejected "transgenderal" term. Five months later in April 1970, the TV Guide published an article which referenced a post-operative transsexual movie character as being "transgendered."[3] In the 1974 edition of Clinical sexuality: A Manual for the Physician and the Professions, the term transgender was used as an umbrella term[4] and the Conference Report from the 1974 "National TV.TS Conference" held in Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK used "trans-gender" and "trans.people" as umbrella terms.[5] However, the 1974, A Practical Handbook of Psychiatry references "transgender surgery" noting, "The transvestite rarely seeks transgender surgery, since the core of his perversion is an attempt to realize the fantasy of a phallic woman."[6]

By 1975, the term "transgenderist" came into common usage within the trans population as a way to reference a specific type of transgender person: the non-operative transsexual (Type 4 Transsexual or Type 5 True Transsexual on the Harry Benjamin Scale).[7] By 1976, the term "transgenderist" was being abbreviated as "TG" in educational materials.[8] Without noting the term's previous history, Virginia Prince implied authorship of the term in her 1978 paper, "The Transcendents" which was presented to the Western Regional Meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sex. In her paper, Prince describes "three classes of such trans-people, generally called 'transvestites, transgenderists and transsexuals." However, a June 2, 1979 article of the Radio Times states “It is estimated that about one person in 2,000 is a transgenderist – someone who feels an overwhelming need either to dress in the clothes of the opposite gender, or . . . to ‘change sex’ completely.” Days later on June 6th, Claire Raynor, on the BBC 4 radio show Crossing Over explained the term this way: “Transgenderists – the rather clumsy label that has been devised to cover both transvestites and transsexuals.”[8]

By 1979, Christine Jorgensen publicly rejected the term "transsexual" and instead identified herself in newsprint as a "trans-gender" saying, "If you understand trans-genders, then you understand that gender doesn't have to do with bed partners, it has to do with identity.”[9] Jorgensen again rejected "transsexual" and instead asserted herself to be a transgender woman in 1982 at a speech given to Fresno State University students[10] and again in 1985[11].

In 1983, Kim Elizabeth Stuart wrote in her book The Uninvited Dilemma, "The word transsexual is somewhat misleading, because the word sexual is incorporated into the term. Perhaps the word 'transgender' would have been a more suitable term, but I say that in hindsight."[12] By 1984, concepts such a a "transgender community" wherein "transgender" was used as an umbrella term was becoming commonplace.[13] In 1985, Dr. Richard Elkins established the "Trans-Gender Archive" at the University of Ulster.[14] In 1987, Anne Bolin writes in her book, In Search of Eve: Transsexual Rights of Passage, "Transsexuals utilize the concepts of their own culture to construct their own transgender experience."[14] One year later in 1988, Bolin equates "transgender" with "gender-variance" writing, "While cross-cultural transgender roles such as the Berdache have encountered a resurgence of interest, little anthropological attention has been paid to Western gender variance or to the closely related subject of gender identity."[15]

By 1992, the International Conference on Transgender Law and Employment Policy defined transgender as, "... transsexuals, transgenderists, and other crossdressers of both sexes, transitioning in either direction (male to female or female to male), of any sexual orientation, and of all races, creeds, religions, ages, and degrees of physical impediment."[16]

In Leslie Feinberg's 1996 book, Transgender Warriors: Making History from Joan of Arc to Dennis Rodman, Feinberg states, "Today the word transgender has at least two colloquial meanings. It has been used as an umbrella term to include everyone who challenges the boundaries of sex and gender. It is also used to draw a distinction between those who reassign the sex they were labeled at birth, and those of us whose gender expression is considered inappropriate for our sex."[17]

---

References:

[1]: (2005). Virginia Prince: Transgender Pioneer, R Ekins & D King

[2]: (2006). The Transgender Phenomenon, R Ekins & D King, p.13

[3]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1970: Transgendered. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/03/25/1970-transgendered/

[4]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1974: Transgender as Umbrella Term. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/02/25/1974-transgender-as-umbrella-term/

[5]: (2006). The Transgender Phenomenon, R Ekins & D King, p.13

[6]: “[In 1974] some of the terminology used at the conference would take some twenty years to become widespread. As far as we are aware, the first use of the term trans.people (sic) was when Julia Tonner referred to “the two worlds of the trans.people” (ie transsexuals and transvestites). In addition, there was also talk of transsexuals seeking ‘gender alignment’ and of ‘trans-gender’ also used as an umbrella term.” – (2007) Gendys Journal, D King & R Elkins

[7]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1975: Transgenderist. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/03/25/1975-transgenderist/

[8]: The Radio Times (1979: 2 June)

[9]: Williams, C. L. (2012). Christine Jorgensen: Transgender Woman. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2011/08/21/christine-jorgensen-transgender-woman/

[10]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1982: Transgenders = Transsexuals, Christine Jorgensen. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/02/06/1982-transgenders-transsexuals-christine-jorgensen/

[11]: Williams, C. L. (2012). Christine Jorgensen: Transgender Woman. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2011/08/21/christine-jorgensen-transgender-woman/

[12]: (1983). The Uninvited Dilemma, Kim Elizabeth Stuart, p.25

[13]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1984: Transgender Community = Modern Transgender Community. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2012/03/08/1984-transgender-community-modern-transgender-community/

[14]: (2006). The Transgender Phenomenon, R Ekins & D King, p.14

[15]: (1987). In Search of Eve: Transsexual Rights of Passage, Anne Bolin, p.100

[16]: Williams, C. L. (2012). 1988: Transgender Roles, Gender Variance. Retrieved April 21, 2012 http://research.cristanwilliams.com/2011/09/08/1988-transgender-roles-gender-variance/

[17]: (1996). Transgender Warriors: Making History from Joan of Arc to Dennis Rodman, Leslie Feinberg, p.X

NOTE: After the last quote by Feinberg, I really wanted to end this article with the following sentence, "It should be noted that Feinberg's assessment of the definition of "transgender" during the mid-1990s reflects the reality of the usage during the 1970s." I didn't include this because to my ears it sounded as if I was belaboring a point.

Ehipassiko (talk) 09:06, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Please make it easier to insert by using the following "References" section.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 12:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Mdann52 (talk) 15:23, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

As an newcomer to this thread I suggest you consider that currently we have four, fairly easy-to-consume sentences giving an overview. Even if that overview needs to be more accurate I'm not sure an entire essay needs to be inserted. Perhaps only the most important points need to be made and much of it can be condensed as "other terms used but that have not caught on include ..." In this way it can still be easy to read the whole section and understand your point.Insomesia (talk) 20:00, 26 May 2012 (UTC)#

What I meant was it need to be clearer what needs to be changed. At the moment, I'm one of the few people processing these, therefore it needs to be clear what needs to be done Mdann52 (talk) 15:34, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I was trying to aim that comment towards Ehipassiko, who I think is trying to replace or add to the whole section. If it would help I'm willing to look at merging everything. Insomesia (talk) 18:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I've looked this issue over (see above), and Ehipassiko is absolutely correct that as it stands, it gives undue weight to Virginia Prince's (dubious) claim to have originated the term "transgender".

However, the suggested edit is 1) far too long, going into a detailed discussion of etymology, which isn't really appropriate for a Wikipedia article, and moreover relies in many cases on WP:SPS links to Ehipassiko's blog... the sources ultimately cited are "reliable" (if not all really weighty); however, they should be cited from the original sources on which those blog entries are based, and not the entries themselves (those blog posts could be used as an indirect reference in my opinion, for what little that's worth).

I just haven't had the time to figure out what's really critical in this mass of references and condense it into a brief one or two paragraph summary, and I'm not likely to soon (it takes me forever to write in an encyclopedic style - I'm ... what would be the adjectival complement to "verbose"?-) - and moreover I also obsess unduly over the "accuracy" of any additions.

thanks! - bonze blayk (talk) 19:11, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Would anyone mind if I take a try at it then? I like explorations of this kind!Insomesia (talk) 20:37, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Post it here first though; you need to get other editors opinions on subjects like this Mdann52 (talk) 10:10, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

References

---

• Already done As I understand it, the requested edits have been built upon and made effective in a lower section. If such is not the case, then consider this request not completed due to a lack of clarity as to what content exactly needs to be changed and/or lack of consensus for major changes. Salvidrim! 02:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Initial draft to replace the first two paragraphs under 'Evolution of the term'

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

bonze blayk (talk) 20:49, 6 June 2012 (UTC) - The draft, as it stands, written primarily by Insomesia, follows:

Writing for health professionals in the second edition of his reference work Sexual Hygiene and Pathology in 1965, psychiatrist John F. Oliven of Columbia University used the lexical compound trans+gender in the Transexualism section of “Primary Transvestism,” noting "'transgenderism' is what is meant, because sexuality is not a major factor in primary transvestism." Crossdressing pioneer Virginia Charles Prince used the compound in the December 1969 issue of Transvestia, a national magazine for cross dressers founded by Prince. In the mid-1970s both trans-gender and trans people were in use as umbrella terms. In part it was describing people who wanted to live cross-gender without sex reassignment surgery. By 1976, transgenderist was abbreviated as TG in educational materials.

In 1979, Christine Jorgensen publicly rejected transsexual and instead identified herself in newsprint as a trans-gender saying, "gender doesn't have to do with bed partners, it has to do with identity.” By 1984, the concept of a "transgender community" had developed, in which transgender was used an an umbrella term. In 1985, Richard Elkins established the "Trans-Gender Archive" at the University of Ulster. By 1992, the International Conference on Transgender Law and Employment Policy defined transgender as an expansive umbrella term including "transsexuals, transgenderists, cross dressers" and anyone transitioning.

Notes

References

I used mostly what had been posted above with a sentence or two from what we currently have. I was able to confirm, I believe, almost everything, I certainly didn't see any misquotes, etc. although one link went to the wrong page and I had to search for it on the site. This would increase the volume of that section by about 50%, however I think that may be worth it.22:19, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Insomesia - I think this looks pretty good?

I think adding a paragraph break somewhere at (or near) "By 1992, the International Conference on Transgender" would enhance readability a bit...

"By 1984, a "transgender community" concept wherein transgender was the umbrella term was becoming commonplace." might better be phrased as "By 1984, the concept of a "transgender community" had developed, in which transgender was used an an umbrella term."

So, thanks again... I think this will definitely improve this section while staying within reasonable bounds of concision. - bonze blayk (talk) 23:03, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

 both done I think we owe thanks to the research of Ehipassiko! Great job!Insomesia (talk) 23:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll wait a few more days to see if there are any other concerns, then proceed with posting the replacement.Insomesia (talk) 00:52, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

STOP! The term was in use in 1965 - years BEFORE Prince came up with her December, 1969 "transgenderal": [1] Ehipassiko (talk) 19:41, 3 June 2012‎ (UTC)

 please see if i got that all correct I moved your comment in order with the others. I'm unable to view the pages on my own so I'm trusting the research as noted.Insomesia (talk) 00:24, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I just modified the proposed first sentence a bit so it reads more fluidly... - thanks! - bonze blayk (talk) 00:08, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks fine to me, thank you!

I would suggest that you also note that the 1965 usage was referencing transsexuals; in this book transsexualism is presented as an extreme case of "Primary Transvestism" (an idea in line with the Hirschfield usage of the term transvestite). The 1965 usage occurs under the "transsexualism" section of the chapter on Primary Transvestism. Presenting the 1965 usage in the way you have makes it seem as if the author was talking about what we currently think of as a transvestite instead of the reality that he was using the term to reference to transsexualism. Readers will not understand that prior to Benjamin's 1966 The Transsexual Phenomena, transsexualism was seen as extreme transvestism. If you don't make that understood, what people will get from the way it's currently written was that transgender came from a word meaning what we today think of as transvestite. This book has 3 editions: 1955, 1965 and 1974. Transgender does not show up in the 1955 edition. It shows up in the 1965 edition referencing transsexuals and in the 1974 edition, the term is extensively used to reference the transsexual experience (transgender surgery, etc). This is the 1965 edition, This is the 1974 edition. The reason this is important is that it gives a small, yet very explicit timeline of usage and context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehipassiko (talk • contribs) 14:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

 This facet is gone into in the very next paragraph and I think we're already getting too wordy. I suggest looking towards adding a phrase or reworking what is in that section to make the point more clear if it needs to further clarified. If anyone disagrees I'm open to suggestion. Insomesia (talk) 16:49, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Also, you note transgenderist as being from 76, please review this 1975 2-page newspaper article on transgenderists: This article makes it clear that this term originated from the community and not any one specific person.

Then please note that the SECTION the 1965 usage occurs under is "Transexualism." This can be done with just 3 words:

Writing for health professionals in the second edition of his reference work Sexual Hygiene and Pathology in 1965, psychiatrist John F. Oliven of Columbia University used the lexical compound trans+gender in the "Transexualism" section of “Primary Transvestism,” noting "'transgenderism' is what is meant, because sexuality is not a major factor in primary transvestism."

Choosing to not note that this usage occurred in direct reference to "transexualism" (with one s) as a facet of “Primary Transvestism" does not report the correct usage. The correct 1965 context is that the term was used to reference Primary Transvestites who are transsexuals because sexuality is not a major cause of Primary Transvestism. Those early views and nuances are very to communicate. Ehipassiko

 Amended as requested, thank you for making that clear. Insomesia (talk) 06:17, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Please see notes at the end of this on the 1965 transgenderism and a 1975 article on "transgenderists" which does used "TG" as an abbreviation for transgenderist. Thank you so much for working on this rewrite. I very much appreciate the work that's been done here! -(Ehipassiko - unsigned comment)

Hi, Ehipassiko ... I'm moving the comment you added at the top here to the bottom of this section; the practice in editing Wikipedia is, generally, to add all comments at the bottom...

Also, it's best to use the recommendation in Wikipedia:Signatures to have the WP software add your signature to each comment you post by adding four tildes at its end, so your username is noted, along with the date and time your comment is entered... see:

How to sign your posts

thanks! - bonze blayk (talk) 20:49, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I've been rl busy but will look over the suggestions and research to update this working draft. Hopefully within a day or so unless someone beats me to it. Insomesia (talk) 00:44, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

 We state "transgenderist was abbreviated as TG in educational materials", we don't attribute it to any one person although the underlying source might. If your point is that TG was used earlier then I'm not clear what needs to be replaced. Insomesia (talk) 16:54, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

The quote from Leslie Feinberg is misleading. The quote is from page X of the book and in context, the meaning is that Prince coined the term transgenderist in the late 1980s as a means to differentiate between transsexuals and non-transsexuals and that the umbrella concept was born from Prince's term. On this page, Feinberg is reconciling the (false) history Prince asserted to Feinberg with the testable reality found within the community, which was that by the time the book was being written, the trans community self-reported that the term was being used as an umbrella term that included lots of types of trans folk. Feinberg based the historical view found on page X (transgender comes from Prince's 1980s transgenderist) from the (false) information Prince reported. We know Prince didn't coin the term in 1978 or (as she told Feinberg) the late 1980s. We know that transgenderist is a younger term that transgender (used as an umbrella term in 1974), transgendered (used in reference to transsexuals in 1970) or transgenderism (used in reference to transsexuals in 1965). The historical framework Feinberg is working from for the genesis of the trans+gender lexical compound is incorrect and thus, the assertion made in the quote is irrelevant to the actual historical record (unless one wants to use this quote as an example of how the Prince fountainhead myth Prince promoted worked to obscure the actual history of the term).

The context of the quote can be found here.

I suggest removing the Feinberg reference all together. Ehipassiko —Preceding undated comment added 05:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm basically in agreement with Ehipassiko here; I don't see how excluding Feinberg's "Faith-based claim" (which is something I believe has been demonstrated through Ehipassiko's documentation), however WP:SYNTH the grounds for omitting it may be, is objectionable? I'm not sure how those more expert in the interpretation of the rules here would view this, or other potential editors on this article, but I can't really see how omitting Feinberg's quotation leads to a problem with a lack of balance (WP:NPOV)... I think the most relevant point is that the current usage is of "transgender" "is what it is", as an umbrella term, and it has been used predominantly that way for some time.

Also: I added a paragraph break, and changed "By 1979" to "In 1979" to improve the flow a bit, and restored the minor wording revision I suggested which Insomesia had done... but somehow got deleted?-)

I'm also thinking, that for the sake of brevity and readibility, the phrase "In 1985, Richard Elkins established the "Trans-Gender Archive" at the University of Ulster." should be omitted, and the citation left in place as a reference provided for the previous sentence.

thanks! - bonze blayk (talk) 16:47, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

 Feinberg quote essentially redundant to a point already made. I think we should retain the archive blurb though, that seems relevant and a bit of a milestone setting up the conference in the next sentence.Insomesia (talk) 22:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate all the work that's been done here. I think these two paragraphs do a good job of giving a succinct evidence-based review of the evolution of the term. Thank you! Ehipassiko —Preceding undated comment added 20:15, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for all your digging and work to get this done! Insomesia (talk) 18:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

History of the term, archived past discussions

I started Archive 3 to hold all the past discussions of the etymology, once the above section is cleared it can be added there as well.Insomesia (talk) 01:01, 1 June 2012 (UTC)