Jump to content

Talk:Transgender/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

Annotated Bibliography for Transgender Healthcare

Hi everyone! I have compiled a preliminary annotated bibliography for the proposed article on transgender healthcare. It is available on my sandbox. I would appreciate if you would take a look and give any feedback you may have as well as any additional sources you might recommend! Brookeenglish (talk) 01:59, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Isn't it biased to use preferred pronounces on the wikipedia pages of transgendered people? Is there any solid evidence that preferring to be called a pronoun makes you that pronoun? Is there any reason why a pronoun would be referring to someones gender and not sex? Isn't Wikipedia suppose to be bias and POV free? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.251.79 (talk) 07:06, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

You can take your issue with the matter to the MOS:IDENTITY talk page, but the issue has been discussed to death there. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:18, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

This article violates our Manual of Style

This article contains the ungrammatical expression "and/or" which is prohibited per Wikipedia:Manual of Style, which states that we should use either the expression "and" or the expression "or" but not "and/or". Žikica Milošević (talk) 02:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Fixed. Kaldari (talk) 03:38, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Like I stated elsewhere, Žikica Milošević's use of "prohibited" is too strong. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

entry tone

This is the most biased article I have ever seen in Wikipedia.It assumes an issue is factual and true before expanding upon it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CF99:2080:993E:C20F:4544:373F (talk) 22:22, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, imagine if the homeopathy article did this! 109.149.246.203 (talk) 22:39, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Thoughts on the "coming out" section (11)

Hi everyone,

Currently, the "coming out" section only mentions obstacles. I believe this part of the article has to mention the internet and its contribution to the coming out of trans people. It is important both because it is scientifically correct and morally appropriate. Since this article is semi-protected, Here is my suggested addition:

Recent studies have suggested that the internet plays a significant role in the coming out process of transgender people, who use it as preliminary, complementary, and/or alternative spheres (Marciano, 2014). As a preliminary sphere, the internet provides transgender users an opportunity to virtually go through various experiences before "entering the real world" (p. 830) and experiencing social sanctions.

Would love to get your feedback. Gad 

GadEfron (talk) 08:34, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Addressed below. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 12:56, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2017

Hi everyone, Currently, the "coming out" section mentions only obstacles and difficulties. In the age of the internet, the entry must mention the contribution of the internet to the coming process of transgender people. It is not only scientifically-based, but also morally important for trans people who need hope. Here is my suggested addition: Recent studies have suggested that the internet plays a significant role in the coming out process of transgender people, some of which use the internet as preliminary, complementary, and/or alternative spheres (Marciano, 2014). As a preliminary sphere, the internet provides transgender users an opportunity to virtually go through various experiences before "entering the real world" (p. 830) and experiencing social sanctions. By doing so, transgender people use the internet to negotiate their gender identities and come out more easily and safely.

This is the academic article mentioned above, but similar papers are avaiable. As much as I know, this one has been published in the most prestigious journal (JCMC):

Marciano, A. (2014). Living the VirtuReal: Negotiating transgender identity in cyberspace. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 19(4), 824-838. DOI: 10.1111/jcc4.12081 GadEfron (talk) 08:06, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks GadEfron. To shorten and to avoid psychological jargon, I've implemented your suggested addition as

The internet can play a significant role in the coming out process for transgender people. Some come out in an online identity first, providing an opportunity to go through experiences virtually and safely before risking social sanctions in the real world.

Please let me know if I've changed the intended meaning. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 12:56, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

This is just fine. Thanks for helping! GadEfron (talk) 19:43, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2017

ADD a new section talking specifically about how no matter how many drugs are taken that each cell in the body will remain either XX or XY chromosomes and therefore a "transformation of sex" is actually impossible. While changing the physical apearence these people are not doing much to help their condition and are ending up hurting themselves in the "long run" as the hormones they are putting into their bodies can be extremely harmful as each sex is designed to produce a certain amount of that hormone. Carternelson01 (talk) 20:56, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Not done: Tone of paragraph doesn't conform to WP:NPOV. Will need sources to support the claim that it "can be extremely harmful" as a recurring thing and not just anomalies. — IVORK Discuss 21:58, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2017

Please change the Scientific studies of transexuality sextion to something more accurate. There are thousands more studies than are currently being shown on the page but first I want to start with the studies on the page. It is quite obvious that the person writing about the studies has some form of bias towards the subject as they keep leaving out crucial detail that would be helpful for people like me who are trying to research the subject. For example, the writer states "The failure of an attempt to raise David Reimer from infancy through adolescence as a girl after his genitals were accidentally mutilated is cited as disproving the theory that gender identity is determined by parenting." This is absolutely false. This study not only disproved that one can bring up a child as the opposite sex but also that transgenderism, or gender dysphoria, is a physical choice and not a state of mental deficiency, or, if you prefer to not use that term, which I'm not sure why you wouldn't, "mental adjustment".

There is also no mention of gender dysphoria in the Scientific studies of transexuality section, a mental condition which is not only accepted by the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) but worldwide by researchers. As popular as the transgender page is, you would think there would be some mention of a scientifically proven mental illness linked to transgender people. Alas, I was dissapointed. I will get to the point as this is starting to sound more like a review than a request.

What I am asking for: a more accurate representation of scientific studies, including a section on gender dysphoria in both children and onwards which is void of the obvious biases seen in this poorly written text I have seen so far. Thank you. Overall I rate 2/10 for this page.

PLEASE I BEG YOU FOR MORE RESEARCH! ALL THE OTHER SECTIONS ARE MASSIVE AND THE RESEARCH SECTIONS ARE THIS LONG: -----

I only really have a problem with the Scientific studies of transexuality section. Don't think I'm criticising everything. everything else is okay...sort of. But I'll bug you about that another time! 94.7.136.68 (talk) 21:34, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. —MRD2014 ( T / C ) 22:42, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2017

Between the first and second sentences, add the following sentence: Although the word "gender" is in the word transgender, this is not as to mean a transgendered person as having a special gender outside of male and female.

Do this because a lot of people make this mistake and I want this subject to be understood as I am transgender mmyself. 111JoeI111 (talk) 00:50, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

where's the source for this? Edaham (talk) 01:14, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —MRD2014 02:03, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Transgender. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Group 1

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Reviewer results:

The first article link is dead (tagged it so), and the archive link appears to show the home page of the site, which seems okay.
The second archive link appears to be truncated, and does not represent the content at the live link.

Mathglot (talk) 07:31, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Group 2

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Group 3

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Group 4

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below templates above to fix any issues with the URLs.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:29, 20 May 2017 (UTC) Updated by Mathglot (talk) 02:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposed update to Media Representation

Hello, I'm impressed with the wide range and value of the information on this page. I found the Media Representation section to be sparse though. I propose adding the following to the end of the section to provide more details about the increase in representation and its effects on viewers:

"However, in 2014, the United States reached a "transgender tipping point", according to Time Magazine (Steinmetz, 2014, para. 1). At this time, the media visibility of transgender people reached a level higher than seen before. Since then, the number of transgender portrayals across TV platforms has stayed elevated (Scheller & Love, 2016), which may influence viewers broadly. Research has found that viewing multiple transgender TV characters and stories improves viewers' attitudes toward transgender people and related policies (Gillig et al., 2017)."

The citations used are:

Steinmetz, K. (2015, August 17). Why transgender people are being murdered at a historic rate. Time. Retrieved from http://time.com/ 3999348/transgender-murders-2015/.

Scheller, A., & Love, C. (2016). Transgender people are more visible than ever, but it’s still legal to discriminate against them in most states. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ 2015/06/03/transgender-discrimination-laws_n_7502266.html.

Gillig, T. K., Rosenthal, E. L., Murphy, S. T., & Folb, K. L. (2017). More than a media moment: The influence of televised storylines on viewers’ attitudes toward transgender people and policies. Sex Roles, 1-13.

I hope this helps bolster this important section that is very brief right now. Thank you. Be the change scholar (talk) 15:29, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

@Be the change scholar: First, welcome to Wikipedia!
You're right, that section is rather sparse. The idea behind your proposed addition looks reasonable, and I think it can be used to beef up that section. If that whole paragraph is a quotation, we probably don't want to add it in directly like that, but summarize it in your own words. Also, since topics related to transgender issues can be controversial, it's always good to have a couple of extra references along the same lines, or that provide supplementary information that bolsters the content you wish to add.
You mentioned three references, which is great, but it's not clear how they are related to the content you posted. Do you know how to create footnotes?[1] Please have a look at the tutorial on footnotes, and the policies and guidelines on citations, verifiability, and reliable sources. With that in mind, add a reply below this one, with the content you wish to add to the section with some embedded footnotes included, and we can discuss it further. (Please indent your reply properly using leading colons; see WP:INDENT for details. Don't forget to sign each reply with four tildes (~~~~), as you did above. You can separate your proposed content from your commentary, by including the proposed article content within blockquote tags, like this: <blockquote>Your proposed article content here</blockquote>, and it will set it off nicely for you.)
This is a good start, but a word of advice: as a brand new user, controversial areas like trans* issues can be a difficult area in which to learn the ropes around here. You might want to try a less controversial area to start with. However, since you have done exactly the right thing so far by coming to the talk page first, we could try it here to see how it goes. If it works out, fine; but if you find your additions getting reverted immediately, or changed to unrecognizability, please don't be discouraged; just try another area for a while.
Having said that, if you wish to continue here, please follow the suggestions I made above about citations, and let's see if we can move this section forward, as you're right that it needs improvement. Again, welcome to Wikipedia. Mathglot (talk) 01:44, 13 August 2017 (UTC)


@Mathglot: Thank you for the super-helpful feedback! I can see editing here takes some learning, but this is fun. I've incorporated the three references below with tags and removed the prior in-text citations. If I'm understanding correctly, the reference list should appear at the end where you've added the reflist-talk tag. I also added a second reference to the part about media representation staying elevated (GLAAD). For the first citation, this reference is included just to show that Time used the term "transgender tipping point." Does this call for a second supporting source? For the last sentence about TV viewer attitudes, these findings are in one study (there's a lack of published research about the effects of trans TV portrayals). Here is is the proposed content:

However, in 2014, the United States reached a "transgender tipping point", according to Time Magazine.[2]. At this time, the media visibility of transgender people reached a level higher than seen before. Since then, the number of transgender portrayals across TV platforms has stayed elevated[3] [4], which may influence viewers broadly. Research has found that viewing multiple transgender TV characters and stories improves viewers' attitudes toward transgender people and related policies.[5]

I hope I got these tags right. Thanks for your patience and the warm welcome! Be the change scholar (talk) 02:40, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
@Be the change scholar: First, well done! I think you're going to be a good editor. (I don't know why the blocknoteblockquote didn't work right; I'll see if I can fix that later.) It's usual to set off the title in some way, usually by quoting it or italicizing it (two single-quotes will italicize: ''this'' generates this) or both.
Since you seem to learn fast, may I throw one more thing at you? Rather than just have the reference in free text of your own devising, which means everybody's references can look different, you can take advantage of templates (tutorial) to standardize and simplify creating a good-looking reference, that has all the information needed to cite the source. There are a series of citation templates including {{citation}}, {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, {{cite web}} and others to help you with this. All four of your citations could be done using {{cite web}}.
So, can I ask you to reply one more time, changing all your previous citations to use {{cite web}} instead? Here's an empty template you can copy/paste if you want; you can delete any parameters you don't need (or just leave them there, blank) and you can find dozens more params at Template:cite web, if you need more:
{{cite web |title= |last1= |first1= |url= |date= |website= |publisher= |accessdate= |archiveurl= |archivedate=}}
No need to fill in the "archive" params for now; "accessdate" is today's date (UTC; so tomorrow, if you live in North America); no need to quote or italicize the title, the template will do the right thing. Here's what the first one should look like:
<ref>{{cite web |title=Why transgender people are being murdered at a historic rate |last1=Steinmetz |first1=K. |url=http://time.com/3999348/transgender-murders-2015/ |date=August 17, 2015 |website=Time |publisher= |accessdate=August 13, 2017 |archiveurl= |archivedate=}}</ref>
The ref can butt right up against the text it follows (and after punctuation, like period or comma) and if you have two refs together, then no blank or anything else between them. Wanna give it a try?
(This will duplicate your references in the boxed References section below, but don't worry about that for now. It may even help, as you can see how the citation template-generated references compare with the earlier ones.) Mathglot (talk) 03:38, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Oh, for that last source that has more than one author, use this: ... |last1= |first1= |last2= |first2= |last3= |first3= ... - Got it? (Also, it's <blockquote> ... </blockquote>; I had it spelled wrong before, which is why it wasn't working. Sorry! You can see now how it's set off your content now, above. Mathglot (talk) 04:50, 13 August 2017 (UTC)


@Mathglot: sure thing! Edits below. Note, I removed one of the citations from the second cited portion because the newer citation I had added there made it basically irrelevant, I realized. The second citation is stronger. Does the Time citation require a publisher? I noticed that was blank, and I typically wouldn't include one here. Same for the journal article (would just do this for a book), but I added it just in case.
<blockquote>However, in 2014, the United States reached a "transgender tipping point", according to Time Magazine.<ref>{{cite web |title=Why transgender people are being murdered at a historic rate |last1=Steinmetz |first1=K. |url=http://time.com/3999348/transgender-murders-2015/ |date=August 17, 2015 |website=Time |publisher= |accessdate=August 13, 2017 |archiveurl= |archivedate=}}</ref> At this time, the media visibility of transgender people reached a level higher than seen before. Since then, the number of transgender portrayals across TV platforms has stayed elevated <ref>{{cite web |title=GLAAD's 'Where We Are on TV' report finds progress in LGBTQ representation on TV, but much work still to be done |last1=Townsend |first1=M.|url=https://www.glaad.org/blog/glaads-where-we-are-tv-report-finds-progress-lgbtq-representation-tv-much-work-still-be-done |date=November 3, 2016 |website=GLAAD |accessdate=August 13, 2017 |archiveurl= |archivedate=}}</ref>, which may influence viewers broadly. Research has found that viewing multiple transgender TV characters and stories improves viewers' attitudes toward transgender people and related policies.<ref>{{cite web |title=More than a media moment: The influence of televised storylines on viewers’ attitudes toward transgender people and policies |last1=Gillig |first1=T.K. |last2=Rosenthal |first2=E.L. |last3=Murphy |first3=S.T. |last4=Folb |first4=K.L. |url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11199-017-0816-1?wt_mc=Internal.Event.1.SEM.ArticleAuthorOnlineFirst |date=2017 |website=Sex Roles |publisher=Springer |accessdate=August 13, 2017 |archiveurl= |archivedate=}}</ref></blockquote>
I believe I caught everything you requested, but please let me know if I missed anything! Be the change scholar (talk) 16:11, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
@Be the change scholar: Just reposting your last entry, without the <nowiki> tags, so it renders as content, and the footnotes get propagated into the box, so we can evaluate it:

However, in 2014, the United States reached a "transgender tipping point", according to Time Magazine.[6] At this time, the media visibility of transgender people reached a level higher than seen before. Since then, the number of transgender portrayals across TV platforms has stayed elevated [7], which may influence viewers broadly. Research has found that viewing multiple transgender TV characters and stories improves viewers' attitudes toward transgender people and related policies.[8]

I think I'd take out "which may influence viewers broadly" which I'm not sure adds anything, and also uses the weasel word "may" without a source that is equally weaselly about it. Other than that, this looks good to me at first glance, but I'll want to check the refs and make sure they support the content. Let's have a think about it for a day or two, and see if anyone else wants to weigh in on this. If there's no objection from anyone, and you are happy with it, we'll add it to the article soon. Mathglot (talk) 00:00, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Foonote 6 does not support the content about "transgender tipping point". I know that there was a Time article that used this phrase, because I remember seeing it on the cover. But I don't see the term "transgender tipping point" anywhere in this article. Can you either add the Time "Tipping point" article, or another article that talks about Time's article? Mathglot (talk) 00:15, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mathglot: All sounds good to me. I removed the "may influence" phrase and updated the Time/Steinmetz citation, plus added a second that references the trans tipping point. Not sure how I grabbed the wrong citation, but I suppose that's a good lesson for being an editor: Check, check, and check again!

However, in 2014, the United States reached a "transgender tipping point", according to Time Magazine.[9][10] At this time, the media visibility of transgender people reached a level higher than seen before. Since then, the number of transgender portrayals across TV platforms has stayed elevated.[11] Research has found that viewing multiple transgender TV characters and stories improves viewers' attitudes toward transgender people and related policies.[12]

Be the change scholar (talk) 23:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

With one exception, I think it's fine, now. The exception is that the Time ref has a paywall, that is to say, it requires a subscription to see the content (although you can see the headline). Please look up the param |url-access=subscription at Template:Cite web. Since this is a very minor change, I wouldn't bother posting a new version of it at this point. Let's just wait a couple of days and see if there are other comments, and if not, we can add this to the article. You did a great job on this.
P.S. I will be out for a week eclipse-chasing, so if I don't respond, you can ask someone else to do it, or just wait till I get back. Mathglot (talk) 10:19, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

 Done Mathglot (talk) 10:11, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Just add the tags <ref> ... </ref> and place your footnote between them. See WP:CITE and H:FOOT for instructions. (This is more of a note than a reference, because a reference would quote a book, journal article or website, but I just wanted to show you how the <ref> tag works.)
  2. ^ Steinmetz, K. (2015, August 17). Why transgender people are being murdered at a historic rate. Time. Retrieved from http://time.com/3999348/transgender-murders-2015/
  3. ^ Scheller, A., & Love, C. (2016). Transgender people are more visible than ever, but it’s still legal to discriminate against them in most states. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ 2015/06/03/transgender-discrimination-laws_n_7502266.html
  4. ^ Townsend, M. (2016, November 3). GLAAD's 'Where We Are on TV' report finds progress in LGBTQ representation on TV, but much work still to be done. GLAAD. Retrieved from: https://www.glaad.org/blog/glaads-where-we-are-tv-report-finds-progress-lgbtq-representation-tv-much-work-still-be-done
  5. ^ Gillig, T. K., Rosenthal, E. L., Murphy, S. T., & Folb, K. L. (2017). More than a media moment: The influence of televised storylines on viewers’ attitudes toward transgender people and policies. Sex Roles, 1-13. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11199-017-0816-1?wt_mc=Internal.Event.1.SEM.ArticleAuthorOnlineFirst
  6. ^ Steinmetz, K. (August 17, 2015). "Why transgender people are being murdered at a historic rate". Time. Retrieved August 13, 2017.
  7. ^ Townsend, M. (November 3, 2016). "GLAAD's 'Where We Are on TV' report finds progress in LGBTQ representation on TV, but much work still to be done". GLAAD. Retrieved August 13, 2017.
  8. ^ Gillig, T.K.; Rosenthal, E.L.; Murphy, S.T.; Folb, K.L. (2017). "More than a media moment: The influence of televised storylines on viewers' attitudes toward transgender people and policies". Sex Roles. Springer. Retrieved August 13, 2017.
  9. ^ Steinmetz, K. (May 28, 2014). "The transgender tipping point". Time. Retrieved August 13, 2017.
  10. ^ Snow, N. (May 8, 2015). "Laverne Cox: 'Time' magazine's 'transgender tipping point' cover girl". Huffington Post. Retrieved August 13, 2017.
  11. ^ Townsend, M. (November 3, 2016). "GLAAD's 'Where We Are on TV' report finds progress in LGBTQ representation on TV, but much work still to be done". GLAAD. Retrieved August 13, 2017.
  12. ^ Gillig, T.K.; Rosenthal, E.L.; Murphy, S.T.; Folb, K.L. (2017). "More than a media moment: The influence of televised storylines on viewers' attitudes toward transgender people and policies". Sex Roles. Springer. Retrieved August 13, 2017.

Removal of the word Agender

I'd like to request the removal of the term 'Agenda' from the Transgender page.

Agender is the experience of never experiencing/ experiencing no gender, so it cannot be in the same category as people who do experience gender. These are fundamentally different experiences. The following reference puts Agender under the 'Genderqueer umbrella' and acknowledges that discomfort in being called Transgender exists. I have identified as Agender for 3 years now, and for the first time have felt like I have an identity. I do not identify as Transgender at all, and I find it very upsetting to be bundled under the Trans-umbrella. If the definition of trans is: Someone who identifies as a gender other than what they were assigned at birth then technically, I still do not see how someone who experiences no gender can fall under this banner.

Guidelines for psychological practice with transgender and gender nonconforming people. American Psychological Association - American Psychologist, 2015 - 204.14.132.173

Thanks Birdword (talk) 08:49, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Birdword. "Agender" is included because it falls under the broad definition of transgender that includes all non-binary/genderqueer people. The article is clear that transgender is used as an umbrella term. This doesn't mean that everyone agrees with the wide application. Many don't agree with cross-dressers being called transgender, for example. Also, even though many non-binary people state that they have no gender, their identification of having no gender is still termed a gender identity. I don't see that the source you linked to states that agender people shouldn't be included in the transgender umbrella. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:06, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Request: Add to the lead paragraph

The lead paragraph should mention the fact that transgenderism has been criticized per the Wikipedia manual. ThomasCalvin (talk) 23:36, 10 November 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasCalvin (talk • contribs) 21:52, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

ThomasCalvin, per WP:LEAD, not everything goes in the lead. And things typically should not go in the lead unless covered lower in the article first. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:26, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Also, I at first thought you were speaking of the term transgenderism, but it seems you mean that the topic (what some would call "the concept") of being transgender has been criticized. That's a WP:Due issue in addition to being a WP:LEAD issue. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:33, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Evolution of transgender terminology

My name is Cristan Williams and you cite some of my research to support the claim that "Psychiatrist John F. Oliven of Columbia University coined the term transgender in his 1965 reference work Sexual Hygiene and Pathology..." I've taken pains in my own research to never use the term, "coin" or "coined" as I can't prove that Oliven was the first person to ever use this term; rather, I can only prove that his is, as of today, the earliest known usage. Prior to my finding of this usage, it was asserted that Virginia Prince "coined" the term and this inspired all sorts of identitarian fights within the trans community. I want to encourage you to use the term "popularize" or "popularized" instead of "coined" because what we know is that, as of today, Oliven's is the earliest known usage and that he, therefore, helped popularize the term. I urge the editors here to reconsider the assertion that we know for a fact that Oliven was the first to use this term, and instead note that his is the earliest known use.

This might be useful as well: http://tsq.dukejournals.org/content/1/1-2/232.full — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehipassiko2 (talk • contribs) 03:38, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Transgender. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:45, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Transgender. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:41, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Transgender people have higher rates of mental illness

http://waltheyer.com/transgenders-4-studies-say-its-mental-disorders/ There plenty more references from many reputable scientific sources.


30% of transgenders suicide! 1 in 3 compared to 1 in 6250 for the average for the world! Do people want to claim this is just a coincidence? Clearly its related.

"Concern because they do not disclose that nearly 90% of the time transgenders suffer serious mental issues"

Can we put this fact in the article or is the article more about being politically correct, aka "transexuals are normal people" "transexuals do not have any higher mental illness"--ArnoldHimmler (talk) 09:06, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Blogs are wp:selfpublished and are not wp:reliable sources. Anyone can write anything on a blog. Jim1138 (talk) 09:08, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Im talking about reputable scientific facts. So no idea why you are talking irrelevant blogs. Is that how you handle facts you dont like? Maybe the list of all the countries that define transgender as mental disorder? Thats basically every country in the world developed or not!

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex-change

--ArnoldHimmler (talk) 09:22, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

CNSNews is a right-wing house organ for conservative propaganda, and is not an acceptable reliable source on Wikipedia. Unless you have constructive contributions to make here, you should move on. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 09:32, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

@NorthBySouthBaranof Great argument (If you ignore the fact theres LOTS of CNN references on wiki! But thanks for distracting from the actual topic! American Psychiatric Association https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/gender-dysphoria--ArnoldHimmler (talk) 09:48, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

@ArnoldHimmler: The above link is a blog, you haven't cited RS. CNSNews fails RS on wp:RSN. The links in that blog discuss mortality and morbidity of transgenders, "mental issues" is not "mental disorder". See wp:synthesis. The mental issues are present in every population, possibly more so in transgender populations. The disparity is likely the transgenders dealing with bigotry. Jim1138 (talk) 09:36, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

https://www.psychiatry.or g/patients-families/gender-dysphoriaWOW keep making excuses, for sites that are used for references on this site!

"mental issues" is not "mental disorder" Thats for your blog there, Dr!

"The mental issues (AKA DISORDERS) are present in every population, possibly more so in transgender populations" WOW now you just said they do suffer more mental illness/disorders. Ignoring the fact the reputable references eg the american psychiatric association says so.

So what now how will you deny the fact since you have agreed with it? Why do you push this agenda, where does your bias come from?--ArnoldHimmler (talk) 09:43, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Unless you're proposing a specific change to the article, you need to move on. Wikipedia talk pages are not forums for general discussion of a topic. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 10:00, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes I did (how could you miss that the whole point of this conversation). I have been asking for a change to the article to add the fact since the start (who was it that changed the title of this section from it? was it you?) Add to the article the fact "Transgender people do have higher rates of mental illness! Heres another ref, theres for this fact https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-truth-about-exercise-addiction/201612/why-transgender-people-experience-more-mental-health

Maybe the one from the transgender pro site https://www.nami.org/Find-Support/LGBTQ Since a person edited it out (who was that?)

So do you think the article should be improved by putting in the fact "Transgender people have higher rates of mental illness"? --ArnoldHimmler (talk) 11:33, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Anyone want to add this fact to the article or is it cover the fact up as its not politically correct time?--ArnoldHimmler (talk) 11:41, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

You'll need a source from a reputable medical journal with a comprehensive track record in scientific peer view. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:16, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict)The claim that transgendered people suffer mental illness at a rate higher than the general population is one which requires medical sourcing. None of the sources presented thus far meet those standards, which can be found at WP:MEDRS. Unless and until a source meeting those standards can be found, we cannot add this claim to the article.
Furthermore, WP:MEDRS was established for an important reason: Many medical claims which are published in the mass media end up being false. In fact, a very high proportion of them do. To this day, I have seen journalists mentioning the Ten percent of the brain myth as if it were a fact, and using it to 'explain' things to the reader when writing stories about neurology. One can easily go through List of common misconceptions#Human body and health with a stack of health, medicine and nutrition popular science works and find examples of each and every one of those, something within an individual work. That is why WP:MEDRS has become our standard for medical claims: because claims which cannot be sourced in that way are very likely untrue. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:26, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Sex assignment

What the hell is sex assignment?? No one assigns your sex, it is determined by your DNA and chromosomes. No one 'decides' your sex. Is this not accepted scientific fact.? If someone assigned me a female, despite having an X and Y chromosome, and I identified as male, would that make me a transgender? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.83.27.100 (talk) 03:47, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

If a doctor looked at your genitals at birth and said "it's a girl" and you grew up and said "actually no I'm a boy", that would make you transgender. See the article on sex assignment for more information. If your chromosomes were XY and you were born with genitals which appeared female, you would be intersex. I hope that clears things up. --ChiveFungi (talk) 12:44, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
So if a doctor arbitrarily decided I was a female despite having a penis and XY chromosome and I grew up to 'identify' as a male, I'm a transgender? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.83.27.100 (talk • contribs)
A doctor is unlikely to know your chromosomes at the time of your birth. But otherwise, yeah. That's pretty much how it works. In future though, as MPants at work said, please use the reference desk for questions like these as talk pages are for discussing how to improve the article. --ChiveFungi (talk) 13:07, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
While you're correct that biological sex is determined by DNA and chromosomes, the actual assignment of a person's sex (for things like birth certificates) is typically done with the (less accurate) method of genital examination. Kaldari (talk) 19:13, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Transgender. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Merge transsexual into transgender

Clearly the merge does not enjoy consensus support. Opposition to the merge approaches having consensus support, but while the majority of !voters opposed the merge, I don't think oppositions has quite reached the level required for consensus. Both positions have been well-argued. This is principally a content/editorial dispute, not a dispute over the application of other policies or guidelines, and there is therefore no basis to override the expressed community majority sentiment. Well-sourced content reflecting the proponents' concerns could certainly be added to the existing article texts through ordinary editorial processes. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 13:24, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

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.

Transsexual is starting to be considered outdated, inaccurate, or offensive[1]. Also, many people who meet the "criteria" for being transsexual still self-identify as transgender.

Having these topics be separate articles is confusing. The transsexual page says that "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 to help them align their body with their identified sex or gender." The transgender page says that "transgender people have a gender identity or gender expression that differs from their assigned sex... Many transgender people experience gender dysphoria, and some seek medical treatments such as hormone replacement therapy, sex reassignment surgery, or psychotherapy."

There really isn't a major difference here. People who self-identify as transgender or transsexual want to transition to the gender with which they identify. Transgender or transsexual people may or may not seek medical treatment to transition. Any differences can be elaborated on the transsexual section of the transgender page, as well as information about people who specifically id as transsexual.

As the word becomes outdated, and the definition merges with transgender, so should the article. Even the transsexual page acknowledges the shift. "The term transgender is now more common, and many transgender people prefer the designation transgender and reject transsexual."

In the previous discussion of this merger, many people mentioned how "transgender" is an umbrella term, so transsexual should have its own page. A term being a subset of an umbrella term does not justify the term to have its own article. Agender merely redirects to the definitions section of the Genderqueer page.

Other comments claimed that the two ideas are "too distinct," but as I said earlier this isn't clear, especially with today's terminologies.

It's time start another discussion on this issue. Mell0nite (talk) 18:19, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

The merged article isn't a bad idea, since the concepts are similar, but there is still some difference in connotation that shouldn't be lost. -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 01:19, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
These differences in connotation can and should absolutely be retained if the two articles are merged. Mell0nite (talk) 16:32, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose since the term transgender can be so broad and there really is a difference when it comes to transsexualsim studies vs. studying transgender people as a whole. The Causes of transsexuality article shows this. And given how big both the Transgender and Transsexual articles are, the merge would be a substantial undertaking. I don't think that the editor who does the merge will do due diligence and cut what needs to be cut and retain what needs to be retained. That stated, if we are to continue to have both articles, any unnecessary redundancy between the two pages can be remedied. Also, I've definitely argued that transgender is significantly more preferable to transsexual, but there are still people who prefer to identify as transsexual, as noted in both articles. You might also want to leave a message at WP:Med and WP:LGBT about this merge proposal. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:37, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
There are genderqueer people who prefer to identify as nonbinary, yet Genderqueer and Nonbinary are the same article. There's also the fact to consider that there are people with similar experiences, behaviors, medical treatments, and identities who will use either transgender or transsexual based merely on personal preference rather than pedantics. This means that there is information in the transsexual article that applies to people who choose the label "transgender," and there is information in the transgender article that applies to peoople who choose the label "transsexual." Honestly, I'm not sure how the Causes of Transsexuality article shows the difference between transsexual and transgender, the definition that article is using for transsexual people is the same as for transgender people.Mell0nite (talk) 16:32, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
See Talk:Genderqueer/Archive 4#Requested move 1 August 2017 (especially the sources I used there to make my case). Regardless of how people identify, there is no valid way to distinguish genderqueer from nonbinary when it comes to sources on the topic (well, other than superficial stuff like stating that non-binary is the less politicized term). Even when using nonbinary to refer to third gender people, there literally is no solid way to distinguish the term third gender from the term non-binary gender. Many sources do distinguish transgender from transsexual by making it clear that the latter is a subset of the former and is about those who have undergone means to alter their bodies to match their identified sex. As for the Causes of transsexuality article, I am referring to the sources and studies, which mainly concern those who have undergone methods to alter their bodies. It does not concern everyone who falls under the transgender umbrella. It's why the lead of that article currently states, "especially those who are transsexual." I don't see it as strictly defining what "transsexual" is when stating, "Transsexual people have a gender identity that does not match their assigned sex, often resulting in gender dysphoria." It can be argued that it's simply stating a fact. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:10, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
I understand that there was a point in time when "transgender" and "transsexual" were considered much more separate ideas. I have observed this to be changing. People are starting to consider this term to be deprecated [2][3][4]. There are "transsexual" people who prefer the label transgender. There are definitions of transsexual that say that transsexual people may not seek medical transition. Absolute distinction between these words is fading, so the line here is very blurred. I will also add that in my personal experience transgender young adults especially consider "transsexual" an offensive word, and will hastily correct people who try to use it to describe transgender people. This as anecdotal evidence and the sources I provided earlier support that the word is getting pushed out of the lexicon. If the word transsexual were absolute I would be inclined to agree that these articles may not need to be merged. But the words transgender and transsexual are not absolute. Transgender people seek medical treatment. Transsexual people may not. These labels are becoming a matter of preference rather than pedantics, and this trend won't stop anytime soon.
Perhaps this issue is bigger than this article and should be a wider discussion in WP:LGBT about the terms that should be used to describe transgender people across wikipedia. If transsexual may not mean someone who medically transitions, and if transgender people who medically transition may be against the label transsexual, what does that mean for articles attempting to describe the experiences of transgender people? Mell0nite (talk) 18:22, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
I've also found a survey of transgender people that states that 78% of respondents wanted hormone therapy, 49% received hormone therapy, 25% of respondents have undergone transition-related surgery, and only 18% identified as transsexual. I offer this as additional evidence in the blurring of these definitions and the shift in language. Mell0nite (talk) 18:33, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Again, I understand what you are stating about the term transsexual falling out of use. But it still has a ways to go before it has completely fallen out of use. That it is often considered an outdated term these days does not negate that it is still used, as numerous reliable sources show. Many reliable sources still state "transgender and transsexual." Transsexual still usually refers to those who have altered their bodies. It's still the case that transsexualism studies are specific (also see homosexual transsexual). The term has a usual meaning and history all of its own, as noted below by James Cantor, who has been extensively involved in some of these studies. As for what terms to use for transgender people on Wikipedia, this has been discussed at WP:LGBT. We stick to what the sources state. If the person identifies as transsexual, like Julia Serano does, then we identify them as transsexual, but there are some editors (including random IPs) who will change "transsexual" to "transgender" because they find the former outdated and offensive. Julia Serano's Wikipedia article currently doesn't use the term except for when noting her Whipping Girl book. She is currently identified as transsexual in the Whipping Girl article, but someone might change that to "trans" or "transgender." You might also be interested in reading this and this discussion involving Chocolate vittles, who vehemently objected to being called transgender and argued against transsexual being an outdated and offensive term. Chocolate vittles hasn't edited Wikipedia since 2015, however. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:04, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
I guess what I'm having a hard time understanding is how transsexual studies are exclusive of transgender people? It seems that these studies focus on the phenomenon of a person identifying with a gender other than the one they were assigned at birth. People in these studies could very well identify themselves as transgender rather than transsexual. So then, the studies are inclusive of transgender people. I still want to know how exactly the general concepts of transsexual and transgender are different, as in modern usage. Mell0nite (talk) 21:43, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
@Mell0nite: hormone therapy does not make someone transexual. Many non-binary people get hormone therapy, but do not consider themselves transmen or transwomen. For example, a person who is MTX (male to non-binary) may take anti-androgens to suppress production of testosterone, but they may not take estrogen instead (as a MTF person would). Or they may just take opposite-sex hormones in low dosages. Kaldari (talk) 19:43, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
@Kaldari:, I myself am non-binary so I am very familiar with this. The point I was making is that defining transsexuals as people who seek medical assistance to transition falls apart quickly. There are people who meet the criteria for transsexual (according to the current wikipedia definiton, MTX people would qualify), but who do not identify as transsexual, and people who identify as transsexual who do not seek medical transition. So how do we define it? Why is there a separate page for an alternate label? Throughout all this discussion I still haven't seen a definition of transsexual that justifies it to have its own page. It seems to just be another label for the same concept. Mell0nite (talk) 21:00, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
@Mell0nite: The sources are pretty clear on the distinction: "...transsexual is used to imply that a person has or desires to have some sort of gender affirmative surgery, while transgender is sometimes used as an umbrella term..."[1] "Transsexuals are people who transition from one sex to another... Transgender, unlike transsexual, is a term for people whose identity, expression, behavior, or general sense of self does not conform to what is usually associated with the sex they were born in the place they were born. It is often said sex is a matter of the body, while gender occurs in the mind."[2] "Transgender: An umbrella term for people whose gender identity and/or gender expression differs from what is typically associated with the sex they were assigned at birth. Transexual: An older term that originated in the medical and psychological communities. Still preferred by some people who have permanently changed - or seek to change - their bodies through medical interventions, including but not limited to hormones and/or surgeries. Unlike transgender, transsexual is not an umbrella term."[3] I agree though, that our current transexual article doesn't make this clear at all. Kaldari (talk) 22:05, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
@Kaldari: Thank you for answering my question. I would disagree that sources, in general, are clear on the distinction (this is most likely why the current article doesn't make the distinction clear). These sources state that transsexual people may or may not seek medical transition. The ISSM supports the definitions you provided, but clarifies that "These definitions are not strict, however. Some feel that the word transsexual should not always refer to physical changes."[5] The Merriam-Webster dictionary states that "Transsexual people may or may not undergo surgery and hormone therapy to obtain a physical appearance typical of the gender they identify as." [6] Mell0nite (talk) 22:44, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
I don't necessarily think these definitions are at odds with each other. The basic gist is that transexual involves some sort of physical transition (or planned transition) to one of the two binary genders, whether that's surgery, hormones, make-up and clothes, etc. Whereas transgender isn't restricted to the two binary genders and doesn't necessarily involve any physical changes or transition (but often does). Kaldari (talk) 08:13, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
@Kaldari: I see what you're saying, but there are other sources that don't acknowledge non-binary identities, stating that the difference was medical transition (such as the ISSM page). Also, none of the definitions you quoted reference the binary. The transsexual wiki article itself states "Some may not identify strongly with another binary gender role." But let's assume that "transsexual" is defined by associating with a binary gender, and that the transsexual article is cleaned up to reflect that. What are your thoughts on the fact that, in a 2015 survey of >27,000 transgender participants, 62% identified themselves with a binary gender, but only 18% identified with the word "transsexual"?[7] Moving away from opinions of the word itself, I believe this is sufficient evidence for WP:OVERLAP Mell0nite (talk) 14:09, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Kaldari, I feel that the Transsexual article does make clear the terminology differences; it has a "Relationship of transsexual to transgender" section for that. When that section was being crafted, we didn't want it to be completely redundant to the similar section in the Transgender article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:20, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
The article you linked to says that the word transsexual is "deprecated" and "pejorative," and that transsexual people do no always seek hormonal/surgical transition. What about this article led you to oppose?Mell0nite (talk) 17:45, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
rest of the quote "Unlike transgender/trans, transsexual is not an umbrella term, as many transgender people do not identify as transsexual. When speaking/writing about trans people, please avoid the word transsexual unless asked to use it by a transsexual person."--Moxy (talk) 18:53, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
To clarify, the proposed merger is to include transsexual as a section of the transgender article. Mell0nite (talk) 20:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
To clarify, two different things.....not a subset of another .....lets start with the basics......M. Lee Manning; Leroy G. Baruth; G. Lea Lee (2017). Multicultural Education of Children and Adolescents. Taylor & Francis. p. 53. ISBN 978-1-351-73741-8..--Moxy (talk) 21:23, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
According to the link you sent me, transsexual is a term that may be used by people under the transgender umbrella to describe themselves. Please elaborate your point. Mell0nite (talk) 21:48, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Ianmcxa, I have to state this, but do see WP:Sock. If I see more brand spanking new accounts popping up to vote on this matter, I might will seek action. And as for your argument, we go by what WP:Reliable sources state. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:50, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
And Moxy's source is also clear that "Transsexual often – though not always – implicates hormonal/surgical transition from one binary gender (male or female) to the other." That it is often considered an outdated term these days does not negate that it is still used, as numerous reliable sources show. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:04, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
I see a lot of people saying that these terms refer to different concepts, without any clarifications. Could you elaborate? As I understand it, someone may identify transgender and seek medical transition but not identify as transsexual. Someone may identify as transsexual but not seek medical transition. Both of these people were assigned the incorrect gender at birth. Mell0nite (talk) 21:06, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose, transgender ~= transexual + non-binary. In other words, non-binary people are not (generally speaking) transexual, but they are (generally speaking) transgender, so you can't say that transexual and transgender are basically the same thing. While you are correct that "transexual" is no longer commonly used as a term of public group identity, it still has a distinct meaning. Just as you would not call an androgynous-looking person "intersex" (as it presumes a familiarity with their genitalia), it's considered rude and presumptuous to call a transgender person "transsexual". But a transexual person might be perfectly comfortable telling their friend or doctor that they are transexual, and no one would think that was weird or "outdated". Kaldari (talk) 19:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Support for the reasons the OP outlines; in particular, the topics/groups and the studies of them are so overlapping/indistinct that I think it would be most sensible to handle them in one article. (If they are kept separate we should double-check the studies in the transsexual article to be sure they pertain specifically to transsexual people, as that article defines them, and not to transgender people.) -sche (talk) 19:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Take heart, OP, that this discussion shows a shift from a few years ago, when a proposed merger was opposed unanimously (except by the proposer). Wikipedia sometimes takes years or even decades to catch up when understandings of topics have changed. -sche (talk) 17:55, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Understandings of these topics have not significantly changed since a few years ago, though. It's certainly still the case that the term transgender is the much broader term. The term transsexual is still used to refer to a specific subset of the transgender community and is as hated now by many transgender people as it was back then. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:43, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose because Wikipedia is not a leading indicator. I was really on the fence about this one, and have been going back and forth on it, waiting, and reading the comments. I think what finally tipped me, was this comment by the OP:"I understand that there was a point in time when "transgender" and "transsexual" were considered much more separate ideas. I have observed this to be changing. People are starting to consider this term to be deprecated." Yes. Exactly. It is changing. People are starting to consider it deprecated. But that's not the point at which Wikipedia lends its voice to a change, we wait for the preponderance of reliable sources to have a consensus, and then we follow. If the proposal is not upheld, then I would support an expansion of the #Transsexual and its relationship to transgender section to better describe the changing scene wrt to the two terms. Mathglot (talk) 05:35, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Mathglot, I meant to comment on the fact Wikipedia follows and does not lead when I gave the following "19:04, 20 January 2018 (UTC)" line above: "But it still has a ways to go before it has completely fallen out of use." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:05, 22 January 2018 (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.


References

  1. ^ https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/sexual-orientation-gender/trans-and-gender-nonconforming-identities/transgender-identity-terms-and-labels
  2. ^ http://www.transstudent.org/definitions
  3. ^ http://www.revelandriot.com/resources/lgbtq-and-trans-definitions/
  4. ^ https://www.glaad.org/reference/transgender
  5. ^ http://www.issm.info/sexual-health-qa/what-is-the-difference-between-transsexual-and-transgender/
  6. ^ https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transsexual
  7. ^ https://transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/usts/USTS-Full-Report-Dec17.pdf
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Transgender/Archive_7&oldid=1142780679"