User talk:bonze blayk

R

"Metal" Mike Saunders

Do you have any idea how I could contact him for an interview? His name came up during an interview about the author James Robert Baker, and I have some questions I'd like to ask him. Thanks, Jeffpw 12:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Requesting help with WP:SPS rewording

I have made the request to consider re wording of WP:SPS to have a more concise and simple definition. Could you please help with this?Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#Self_Published_Sources_is_worded_in_a_way_which_is_too_broad

Thanks --Hfarmer (talk) 14:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

You may want to check this out as it relates to the above. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Identifying_reliable_sources_(science-related_articles) --Hfarmer (talk) 01:04, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal

You are receiving this because you have commented on either Autogynephilia, Homosexual transsexual, or Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory in the past two years; all such commenters have received this notice. It has been proposed to merge these three articles to eliminate WP:Redundancy, WP:UNDUE, WP:POV, and to keep the focus on the specific Blanchardian theory of M2F transsexuality (in contrast to Transsexual sexuality, which would be to focus on the subject in general). Please feel free to comment on the proposal at Talk:Autogynephilia#Merger proposal. -- 70.57.222.103 (talk) 20:00, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

straw Poll on the merger proposals. Since you have shown some active interest in this recently I am notifying you of this. Sincerely, have a nice weekend. --Hfarmer (talk) 00:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Just FYI, Template:Crossdressing had existed on Autogynephilia since the template was created. The template should be merged in with the rest of the Autogynephilia article.

A man experiencing sexual arousal at the thought of himself as a woman, and/or dressing like a woman for the purpose of sexual pleasure can absolutely be related (in some cases) to crossdressing. It would be useful for readers to be able to easily find other articles about cross-gender sexual behavior, via the Crossdressing template. Riverstones (talk) 18:20, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Riverstone's edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Autogynephilia&action=historysubmit&diff=380407293&oldid=379296963

Revision as of 23:46, 22 August 2010 (edit) (undo)

Riverstones (talk | contribs)

(Remove sexual orientation template (seems less related), add crossdressing template)

I'm reverting your addition of the Crossdressing template to the Autogynephilia page... again. It would just confuse people who check out the page by leading them to believe that "autogynephilia" was some variety of crossdressing behavior.

I believe you don't really understand the nature and implications of the theory of "autogynephilia"; in fact, it's all about sexual orientation, and it only tangentially relates to cross-dressing. Here's Ray Blanchard, who originally developed the concept:

Arch Sex Behav. 2005 Aug;34(4):439-46.

Early history of the concept of autogynephilia.

Blanchard R.

Law and Mental Health Program, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health-College Street Site, 250 College Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 1R8, Canada. :::Ray_Blanchard@camh.net

Abstract at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16010466

"The definition of transvestism accepted by the end of the twentieth century, however, did not just fail to capture the wide range of erotically arousing cross-gender behaviors and fantasies in which women's garments per se play a small role or none at all; it actually directed attention away from them." [my italics] bonze blayk (talk) 22:47, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

OK, I see what you're saying. I understand that the word "autogynephilia" holds this connotation that is directly linked to a (quite controversial) model of classifying trans people. But the fact remains that some people are sexually aroused by cross-gender fantasies, females and males alike. Some such people crossdress and engage in other such behavior for that reason. This phenomenon exists separate from Blanchard, Bailey and Lawrence and their ideas. They do not "own" this behavior, people who feel this way or behave this way do not automatically become somehow linked to this theory. It would be good for there to be a place to describe this tendency and the associated behaviors, without having the discussion completely overtaken by this highly controversial theory (especially since many such people do not transition or even want to transition).

Currently Autogynephilia (paraphilia) and Autoandrophilia are the places, though sparse, that the tendency is discussed. Raven Kaldera's link at Autoandrophilia in particular goes into more detail than most other sources I have found. I highly recommend reading the article as it may shed some light on what I am trying to communicate. Do you have any sources? Any ideas on how to improve the articles? Thanks, Riverstones (talk) 14:59, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

November 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Trans woman has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 13:57, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the Wikipedia trans* edit wars!

James Cantor, who has recused himself from editing other trans-related articles as of February 2009 (User:James_Cantor#A_pledge) due to a MAJOR COI, shows up editing the Trans woman article, promoting the same worldview as he did on the other pages, with a quotation from a non-notable source dedicated to self-promotion (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Richard_J._Novic,_M.D.)... one who is committed to the exact same explanation for almost all transgendered behavior in males as NOT transgendered but a self-directed sexuality they designate "autogynephilia". See related articles, edit histories, etc., etc. bonze blayk (talk) 17:45, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for improving Feminine essence concept of transsexuality by adding this information. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:40, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your comment at Talk:Femininity. That whole issue has been very frustrating, and it was good to find out I wasn't the only one who had objections to some of the logic being used. --Aronoel (talk) 02:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Transgender Issues

I am uninterested in working on this, however, a section which has the heading "To Family Members" is simply not encyclopedic. The rest of the article is not bad...but that section is deplorable. If you want to work on the ostracism aspect of the article, I have no problem with it, indeed it must be included. But, at the very least, the heading needs to go, and the rest of it looks like copy from a 3-fold pamphlet. Trying to avoid an edit war here.Oberonfitch (talk) 14:44, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, Oberonfitch, I'm perfectly happy with the edit that you wound up doing on the Transgender#Coming Out section, so thank you! bonze blayk (talk) 16:17, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome, and have a pleasant afternoon. Battle averted. (Ah, if every edit were so simple.) Oberonfitch (talk) 18:51, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Gender Dysphoria source and Irrelevance

I had what I feel is just cause for deleting the cited content you have reinstated under the articles Causes of Transsexualism ("Causes") and Gender Identity Disorder ("GID"): 1.) The citation does not state that gender dysphoria is "closely related to transsexualism" and the question of it (or transsexualism; it's not made clear) being a mental disorder is irrelevant to Causes. 2.) The source, which claims "gender dysphoria ... is not a mental illness." is misused in the article GID to say "GID is not medically classified as a mental illness." Some additional notes: 3.) Gender dysphoria as a term is not interchangeable with either transsexualism or GID 4.) If the NHS does not classify GID as a mental disorder then it contends with sources such as the DSM-IV (cited in GID) an the ICD-9 (not cited). It should not be represented to discuss all classification of GID. 5.) The statement "GID is not medically classified..." in the GID article is absurd when a large part of the article is dedicated to discussing the movement to remove GID as a mental disorder.

I thank you for your consideration on this matter, and would much appreciate if you make corrections to those articles with the above in mind. Theinactivist (talk • contribs) 23:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Also for your deletion of my summary of the Controversy section be very clear that all material formerly removed was redundant to the article, including both citations listed later. I don't see how a summary constitutes original research but I do know that original research includes the compiling of scientific evidence to assert an argument that is not made by any cited authority -- what was done by Windupbird525 before me. If my statement is too "ungrammatical" to salvage then I suggest removing the entire paragraph. Theinactivist (talk • contribs) 09:54, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm thinking about the complaint you're making above about conflicts in the usage of the terms "mental illness" and "mental disorder" etc, which makes sense... but is very difficult to address quickly, because it's noting a real controversy, with real confusion as to terminology in the Real World.

Discussion and understanding of Trans* issues is beset by problems in terminology. FWIW.

On the other hand: User:Theinactivist, your "summary" of the Controversy section was an intrinsically bad edit. See the record of your edit, and it's obvious why if you look further down in the text in the References section, where the BOLD RED text proclaims the presence of a "": you have deleted the citations for TWO scientific references used later in the text:

So: the text you deleted was NOT "redundant".

Moreover, you're complaining about this edit by User:Windupbird525... I'll quote again from the linked publication, which is distributed with the imprint of the UK's National Health Service (WP:RS? Absolutely):

"This causes a feeling of discomfort that is sometimes described as gender dysphoria (dysphoria means unhappiness). However, this is not a mental illness. Gender dysphoria is a recognised condition for which medical treatment is appropriate in some cases." - Italics mine. And note: "Gender dysphoria" and "Gender Identity Disorder" are largely commensurate terms, to the extent that the proposed name for GID in the DSM-5 is now... "Gender Dysphoria".

Windupbird525's edit is properly sourced: the phrasing could be improved; it is not WP:OR. I checked the citation when the edit was posted, because I'm fed up with bogus citations getting insinuated into Wikipedia, and it checked out largely OK.

And with respect to your edit being "ungrammatical", perhaps I should have used "this edit was not properly proofread" — "raising issue with the the problem" is wrong, right? — but there are limits on how long an Edit summary can go on!

Thanks, -- bonze blayk (talk) 12:12, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Ugh, I didn't realize I actually deleted both citations; I've never worked with Wiki's modular referencing before. It should be obvious that had I seen the bold red warning text I would have changed my edit. I sincerely apologize.

And I guess I can't comment on "gender dysphoria" until I figure out whether you're referring to the disorder, the "not a disorder" psychiatric categorization, or the psychiatric symptom which may be of a disorder or not. The NHS pamphlet seemed to me to suggest the last definition of those, but I'll assume your interpretation is correct. I understand my errors and I will try again later.

I will have to ask a favor however: find me the quotation that supports declassifying GID as a mental disorder because of the neural correlates of gender identification. I've looked for it in all the citations from the GID article in which I'd expect to find it, but I can't (of course I could have missed it, some like the HBIGDASOC are very long). The closest any comes to saying this is the NHS patient information pamphlet (which I did not say was "unreliable") which places the two ideas in proximity but does not actually link them. Thanks. Theinactivist (talk • contribs) 21:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Apology accepted, Theinactivist! (I find Wikipedia's editing and edit-history system... clumsy... myself. Besides the servers sometimes running sloooow ;-)

About finding "the quotation that supports declassifying GID as a mental disorder because of the neural correlates", there are many WP:SPS self-published sources out on the internet... maybe the psychologist Kelley Winters takes that position? (offhand, I'm not sure!) ?

Here's a link I found to after a brief search on Winters' website to an article posted by Rebecca Allison, MD, supporting non-pathologizing treatment on the grounds that... it works to improve patients' lives: ALIGNING BODIES WITH MINDS: THE CASE FOR MEDICAL AND SURGICAL TREATMENT OF GENDER DYSPHORIA . It's seems (to me) that she believes there are neural correlates, but that's not the basis for her argument here...

thanks! -- bonze blayk (talk) 21:59, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Bonze blayk, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Bonze blayk. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

• See a log of files removed today here.
• Shut off the bot here.
• Report errors here.
• If you have any questions, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:01, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Androphilia and gynephilia for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Androphilia and gynephilia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Androphilia and gynephilia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

john Money

You reverted a cleanup edit I made on John Money article. The portion I edited has been tagged has containing repetition for 10 month without significative edits. The portion i removed was in part a content similar to that of the previous 4 paragraphs, and in part details about the David Reimer case which is detailed in the corresponding article.

I did so to have an article that more or less correspond to the standard of quality required by wikipedia - existing article, with two competing versions of the same Sex reassignment controversy—David Reimer subtitle, being clearly not an acceptable article. I also tried to keep all relevant information, either in J Money or in Reimer articles. If you wish to make a more subtle edit, leading to a better quality article, i'd be glad, but returning to previous state of the article is in my mind not a good option. --Dwarfpower (talk) 14:19, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

General Thanks

Thank you for all your hard work on trans-related articles. I had just checked the history for Transsexualism to see if I made any oops-es that had to be corrected and noticed all your edits (including reverting vandalism---it is a sad state of society that people sling around the word "transsexual" as an insult, or any other LGBT term for that matter---maybe I should start using "cis-gendered" and "heteronormative" as insults! *g*). Again, your work is deeply appreciated.["A+++++ WIKIPEDIAER, WOULD READ FROM AGAIN!!!!"] os (talk) 08:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

And thank you, os , for your kind words!

But… bummer: I can no longer claim that editing Wikipedia is a "thankless" task, for momentarily I have basked in the sunshine of your love (for my revert-prone nature .-).

It's hard to believe that I'm functioning mostly as if a school-crossing guard? "Hey! Lookit this shiny whistle they gave me!" - "Huh. I got one too!" - (malaise ensues ;-).

Note… if you don't follow certain websites dealing with, ah, sexual orientation - I don't, but occasionally follow friends' links to them? - you will find that some folks already regard "cis-gendered" as a form of insult!

Thanks again, and have a great New Year! -- bonze blayk (talk) 01:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Gender#The lead

Hi, Bonze blayk. Will you weigh in on the above linked discussion to help us come to a new consensus? Flyer22 (talk) 04:00, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Certainly... but it will take me a bit of time to assess it? (mega-busy IRL!) - thanks, bonze blayk (talk) 06:34, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Nikolic

and AFAIK Brig. Nikolić fails entirely to meet Wikipedia's requirements for notability (WP:N) - thank you!
To which I would respond: "Your knowledge is inadequate".
If I got off my bum, I could unambiguously establish his notability, with heaps of WP:RS in less than an hour. But, given that it's late in the evening, getting a good night's sleep is more important. And if I can do it, then you yourself are more than capable of doing it too. Given that you are making your claims based on ignorance, perhaps you should inform yourself and do something productive, rather than sitting back and doing nothing and being destructive? Pdfpdf (talk) 12:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

BTW: Who-the-F*** is Anthony McAuliffe, (rhetorical question), and why should I care? As it happens, I do know who he is, I don't care, and I see NO link with what it has to do with Australian general officers. (About which, presumably, you don't care.) So pull your head in and keep your parochial opinions to yourself. As I'm sure you would be the first to say, they are unencyclopaedic. (Though I'm also sure you would spell it differently.) Pdfpdf (talk) 13:09, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't see one WP:RS cite in the entire article, other than regarding a recent controversy, which IMO is not notable; it reads like a resume; it's been edited largely through IP addresses. "AFAIK" means "As far as I know", so I am presuming nothing; the article could use (no, it requires) further citations from reliable sources to establish notability.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory of general officers - Australian or otherwise; and tagging an article which goes into inordinate detail as needing improvement (and moreover lacks adequate citations) is not "destructive". -- thanks, bonze blayk (talk) 13:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

The majority of what you say is completely true, and completely irrelevant.

It's as though you paid absolutely no attention to what I wrote. Certainly what you wrote pays no attention to what I wrote.

I don't see one WP:RS cite in the entire article - Yeah. So what? Your complaint was (is?) about WP:N, not about WP:RS. If you bother to read what I wrote, by saying it was not hard to find WP:RS, I was implying that there weren't enough of them. The absence of WP:RS says nothing about his notability - it just emphasises that nobody got off their bum and looked for them. So please explain the relevance of your statement.

it reads like a resume;' - Yeah. So what? That's got nothing to do with WP:N either.

it's been edited largely through IP addresses.' - So what?

"AFAIK" means "As far as I know", - Yeah. That's effing obvious. What do you think "Your knowledge is inadequate" means and refers to?

so I am presuming nothing; - Huh? What are you talking about?

the article could use (no, it requires) further citations from reliable sources to establish notability. - Again: Yeah, so what? That's exactly what I said. What point are you trying to make?

Wikipedia blah blah blah ... - Indeed. I agree that ' ... blah blah blah is not "destructive".' I didn't say that ' ... blah blah blah ...' was destructive.

I have a suggestion. Why don't you read what I wrote and respond to what I wrote?

Pdfpdf (talk) 15:32, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

The Gender identity and Sexual identity articles

What do you make of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies#Sexual identity? Both articles are a mess, and the way "sexual identity" is being used is WP:OR (somewhat anyway). Flyer22 (talk) 02:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, conceptually, I think "gender identity" itself has become a mess? (LOL, and I'm pretty sure that John Money knew what he intended.-)

Is this surprising? It is a cultural warzone, after all... "I have (alternately, "do not have") a gender identity, myself; hence, I am an expert on this issue!" - more lol

I've read a lot on gender issues, and frankly, I have no idea what "Sexual identity" is supposed to mean w/r/t WP:RS; I have never seen the term used before!

But anyway... I was completely unaware of the existence of the Sexual identity article, and did not even come across it when I attempted to list exhaustively every article relating to gender in July 2011 at

Talk:Transgender

This Sexual identity article appears to be an orphan.  ??? It's pretty much an unreferenced stub... OOPS! User:0x2020 has just decided to embark on a massive revision of the article, inserting statements about body dysphoria in transsexuals! FACEPALM

Oh, damn. See User:0x2020's new edits in Gender binary, featuring WP:SPS sourcing - "Close the School of the Americas" is now an expert source on gender identities? Who knew!

I was likewise unaware of the "Gender and sexual identities" portal title, which incorporates a link to the Sexual identity article! The linkage was introduced at:

Template:Gender and sexual identities Revision as of 18:46, 16 February 2009 (edit) (undo)

Wikignome0529 (talk | contribs)

(mv portals area to bottom bar, rm LGBT portal (navbox is not LGBT specific) , replace with Gender studies portal & Sexuality portal)

Well, one thing is for certain: all of these articles are a mess, especially viewed as component parts of what one hopes might be an "encyclopedic" work.

BTW, Flyer22, I intend to respond to your comment in Talk:Gender Identity Disorder... but it's a complex issue that will take some thought to address properly, and I have some pretty good reasons for selecting that phrasing. Well, pretty good? You see, I am a Benjamin Type V "True Transsexual" Geek - no kidding! - and therefore ... lol ensues.

And meanwhile... it just sank in on me this morning that the new introductory line in Gender really is a trainwreck:

"Gender is a range of characteristics of femininity, masculinity and others described as third gender"

... a "range" between... three different things? What? Oh dear. This really makes no sense at all!

thank you! - bonzie anne - bonze blayk (talk) 17:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm surprised you hadn't seen the term "Sexual identity" until now. It is definitely used by scholars, which is why it's included in the Sexual orientation, Homosexuality and Bisexuality articles. 0x2020 explained why he or she made the edits. The editor was unaware of any other definitions. Do you mind briefly commenting there and letting the editor know what is wrong with the article and the type of sources he or she is adding? Or would you prefer that I direct the user here to this section of your talk page?

Yes, all of these articles are a mess, and it's a shame that we don't have more editors helping out with them. I see that Sexual orientation identity also exists, when it should be covered by the Sexual identity article. Flyer22 (talk) 18:26, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm referring to "Sexual Identity" as being somehow related to gender identity, rather than as a term related to sexual orientation?

I've seen the term many times as what appears to be a variation of the term "sexual orientation", where it's asserted or just assumed that sexual orientation is founded upon a person's core identity (as opposed to mere caprice?).

Again, I have never seen the term used in the ways User:0x2020 is using it - as relating to body dysphoria associated with transsexuality. For another view on this... "sexual identity" is not included among these definitions offered by the American Psychological Association. It's mentioned once, glancingly and with no definition, in the WPATH SOC v6, and not at all in the SOC v7...

Flyer22? I really do not have time for the aggravation of arguments over what does or does not make sense in the context of edits in hyper-controversial areas with minimal (if any) WP:RS support, and definitely not with anonymous editors whose WP:COI (and almost all editors in trans-related topics have a COI!) is unclear! ... there is an on-going struggle between various "communities" over the gender topics, often involving inordinate degrees of venom; thus, I regard massive substantial modifications to standing articles on these topics without prior discussion with a wary eye, since it takes a lot of time to figure out just what's been deleted, what's added, what's insinuated, etc. In general, 0x2020's edits don't look truly bad to me, but all the WP:SPS citations sie provides are pretty poor, when I check them out.

thanks, - bonze blayk (talk) 19:26, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. And I did point out to 0x2020 the sourcing issue and the way that the American Psychological Association defines the term gender identity. As for you getting involved, I was also asking if you wouldn't mind me linking to your opinion on the matter there on the project talk page. But if you mind, no worries, I won't refer to you by name there or link this discussion there. And I more than understand not wanting to get involved in Wikipedia drama, although 0x2020 seems like a pleasant editor. He or she certainly has no problem admitting when he or she is wrong and trying to correct the issue. Flyer22 (talk) 20:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

gay wikipedians

Hello, I'm trying to start a deletion review of Category:Gay Wikipedians, and by association; also Category:Transexual Wikipedians. Please consider weighing in on the discussion. Thank you. Ncboy2010 (talk) 13:18, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Request for source.

I request a source for your statement that the gender binary discriminates against binary (mtf and ftm) transgender people. I go to the Ingersoll gender center and have never heard of the gender binary concept ever discriminating against binary people. I want a source that says it affects binary transgender/transsexual people.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 23:47, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

For starters, read Julia Serano's Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity. Julia identified as a genderqueer crossdresser for a long time, before realizing that she was transsexual. She's still "queer", at least in that even though she's passable, she dresses more like a butch lesbian than a femme woman? Here's another article of Serano's that might be relevant: "Bisexuality does not reinforce the gender binary".

Even for the most closely binary-identified trans persons, enforcement of the binary as a sex-based system poses severe threats to their social standing, because besides the difficulties of passing, it's a major challenge maintaining stealth, without which discrimination is almost automatic… try looking up the story of Nikki Araguz, whose legal transition to female status and completely persuasive social functioning and unquestioned acceptance as a born woman was wholly ignored in court proceedings.

This is typical of the way out(ed) binary post-operative transsexuals are treated, OK? Typical.

Please don't delete information from Wikipedia articles just because "you've never heard of it"; if you think a statement is dubious, flag it with a Citation needed tag, OK?

thanks, - bonze blayk (talk) 00:22, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

None of these sources state exclusively that binary trans people are being discriminated against by the gender binary.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 01:14, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

You can only make that statement if you are completely ignoring what those sources state, Rainbowofpeace.

Do you expect me to believe that you just acquired and read all of "Whipping Girl", and given Serano's arguments serious consideration, over the hour that has elapsed since I made that post?

Do you think those are the only sources out there? We're talking about a social truth that is almost universal: out binary-identified trans women and men face serious discrimination.

You're yanking my chain, and I don't like it. - Sincerely - bonze blayk (talk) 01:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

First off, I never claimed that trans men and trans women (binary or otherwise) did not face discrimination. I will never deny the existance of transphobia. I said that you need to find a source that says that binary transgender people face discrimination due to the gender binary. That is a very different statement than binary trans people face (or don't face discrimination). I know binary people even who arn't trans face discrimination (misandry and misogyny). So now I will state very clearly my request: Find a source that says that binary transgender people are discriminated against because of the gender binary.-01:38, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

How about this: cease your edit warring, and come up with sources for any of the other assertions in the Gender binary article you are so eager to deface.

That article has none, not one, not even one single citation in support of any of its statements.

You haven't read Serano, have you? She discusses this. Look it up.

You're not responding in earnest to my attempts to explain these matters to you, and actualy examine the sources I've provided. If you continue edit warring, I will report you. Got that?

Sincerely - bonze blayk (talk) 01:46, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

http://books.google.com/books?id=VhfrmAM5WbYC&pg=PA146&lpg=PA146&dq=%22Whipping+Girl%22+Binary&source=bl&ots=GjVlWzN3Uv&sig=T6Og14brtJS1dxHdzc5XyBcM810&hl=en#v=onepage&q=gender%20binary&f=false Okay now that should prove to you that I searched the book that you requested me to search. NO WHERE in this book does it say that the gender binary causes discrimination against binary (masculine trans men or feminine trans women) transgender people. It does talk about how it affects intersex, non-binary gender identities and androgynous gender expressions which are all NON-BINARY. However I will give you 24 hours to find a source before I revert again.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 01:57, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

SEARCHING A BOOK USING GOOGLE BOOKS IS NOT READING IT.

Good god/dess, that's mostly what the book is about: discrimination against trans women, which she dubbed "trans misogyny", because the pseudo-genderfree culture just enforces a gender binary in which femininity and particularly transfemininity is looked down upon.

Julia Serano identifies as a trans woman. She's a femme-identified binary person. She's sick and tired of seeing trans women being shat on. READ IT.

Cease the edit warring. You have no business making peremptory assertions requiring a response within 24 hours. I WILL REPORT YOU.

Believe it. You are going over the line into inappropriate editing here. - Seriously, bonze blayk (talk) 02:07, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I will try once again to explain this. I have never claimed that trans-misogyny did not exist. Of course trans-misogyny exist. But discrimination based on the gender binary can by definition only apply to be who are not on the gender binary. We are not talking about Patriarchy here which is what I think you are thinking about. We are talking about the gender binary. Patriarchy by definition places men above women. The gender binary by definition places binary genders (trans or otherwise) above non-binary genders. Again find a source.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 02:29, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi guys. el3ctr0nika here. I was wondering where all the discussion went. Hope I'm not intruding.

Rainbowofpeace: I really feel that your thinking is much too narrow/black and white here. You state on your user page that you have high-functioning autism, so I would imagine that that is why you seem to be having such difficulty "thinking outside of the box" in this case (not trying to offend). Don't get me wrong, I can and do empathize — I lean towards the autistic spectrum myself (to the extent that I was diagnosed with PDD-NOS when I was younger) and have had difficulty with black and white thinking as well — but please do at least attempt to make an effort to break out of it as best you can and to try to see where we're coming from on the matter.

Anyway, here's my attempt at explaining bonze's and I's point: "Binarism" (as you define it) relates to external gender expression just as much as it does to internal gender identity, if not much more so. In other words, binarism has more to do with the expression of gender variance rather than with how a person identifies internally. As an example, which scenario do you think would provoke more binarist discrimination: a) a large, masculine guy putting on a frilly pink dress; or b) the same guy stating that he feels more like a girl inside? The answer should be pretty obvious. Anyway, my point is this: because binarism is provoked mainly by gender variance rather than identity necessarily, it unquestionably has the potential to affect binary-identified individuals as well. In fact, since non-binary identities make up such a small portion of the population, I would imagine that, as a whole/purely in terms of amount, binarism affects gender variant binary-identified people much more in comparison. As a result, I feel that it is common sense that binarism does not apply solely to non-binary-identified people, and hence, I do not think a source that definitively states that "binarism may affect transgender and/or cisgender people as well" is at all necessary.

Also, recall that there are more attributes to gender than simply identity. The binarism article formerly listed the following attributes: gender/sexual identity, sexual preference/orientation, gender presentation/expression, gender/sex role, chromosome type, and genital morphology (also secondary sexual characteristics). Variation in any one of these can potentially result in a given individual falling outside of the gender binary to some degree. As an example, binary-identified/cisgender lesbians technically do not fall entirely into the gender binary on account of their non-binary sexual orientation, and many also display varying degrees of variance in gender expression (e.g., butch lesbians), which is another non-binary characteristic. As another example, binary-identified transsexuals as a rule have non-binary chromosome types, and there is the potential for them to display some degree of non-binary variation in virtually every one of the attributes listed above (e.g., non-ops in regards to genital morphology, variation in secondary sexual characteristics (since hormones simply can't reverse all of the effects of puberty of course), homosexual/bisexual sexual preferences, gender variance in behavioral expression (e.g., tomboyism in MTFs, which is relatively common I believe), etc). As a result of all this, I think that it's fairly obvious that transsexual and even cissexual individuals can be affected by binarism; indeed, I feel that transsexual people by definition are affected by it; and if you still feel compelled to pursue the matter, I would have to ask you to provide a citation that states that binarism only applies solely to gender identity and not to any of these other attributes of sex and gender as well.

I've gotta go for now, but I'll be back later tonight.

— el3ctr0nika (Talk | Contribs) 21:28, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

P.S.: Rainbowofpeace: I've left you a couple messages in different places but you've yet to respond to either of them. I was just wondering if you are you planning on doing so? — el3ctr0nika (Talk | Contribs) 21:28, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

I havn't been on in a while. I want you all to know that there is a difference between transphobia and binarism. Transphobia is discrimination by a non-match of sex, gender identity or gender expression. Therefore what you are talking about specifically fits in that. However only the androgynous gender expression would completely fit outside the gender binary. Therefore intersex, various forms of non-binary gender identity and androgynous gender expression would be what binarism would target. Please try and remember this is not synonmous with transphobia. I'-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 21:47, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. That is your personal (and rather narrow I might add) definition of the term "binarism". As I said again, if you want to prove that that term means what you claim it means, you'll have to provide valid citations from published material. Otherwise, you can assert your own definition of that term all day, but it won't get you anywhere. Sorry. Anyway, out of the shower and leaving for serious now. Bye. — el3ctr0nika (Talk | Contribs) 22:03, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

And second of all I'm getting tired of this stop ignoring other non-binary identites thing. I put "non-binary transgender people." I DID NOT put "genderqueer trans people." If you want to throw in binary cis or trans people that is fine but I will continue to demand a source which I have the right to do according to wikipedias policies.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 22:15, 10 September 2012 (UTC)]

-

Beg pardon, el3ctr0nika and Rainbowofpeace, I strongly prefer that you conduct your dialog somewhere other than my Talk page?

Also, I've updated the Gender binary with a citation of "Whipping Girl" to support the claim that Rainbowofpeace has disputed. And here's more food for thought for you, Rainbowofpeace, if you care to persist in your remarkable claim that binary-identified transgender or transsexual persons do not suffer from discrimination due the strict enforcement of the gender binary - which involves not just "gender identity", but concordance between sex and gender, where those who identify as cross-gendered are subjected to harsh treatment - well, death, actually, in all too many cases. THE TRANS WOMEN'S ANTI-VIOLENCE PROJECT - this is a self-published blog on tumblr, but the cases discussed here are pretty bloody awful, and are typically based on WP:RS news sources. Thank you… - bonze blayk (talk) 00:35, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry bonze. We'll get off your talk page. Rainbowofpeace, let's continue over at yours. – el3ctr0nika (Talk | Contribs) 03:06, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

How many times do I need to tell you that I acknowledge the discrimination against binary trans people (its called Transphobia). But I'm saying there is a clear difference between transphobia and binarism. Much like there is a difference between racism and antisemitism. Sure binarism is a form of transphobia just like antisemitism is a form of racism but binarism is a specific form that is about a particular group of people. Now I will tell you exactly what I am looking for. I want you to find me an article in which it says that a form of discrimination against a binary identified trans person was caused due to the gender binary. Not just something on transphobia, not just something on attacks against trans people. Now do you get it. Not all Transphobia is Binarism. Thank you.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 03:51, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Rainbowofpeace, I find your arguments almost incomprehensible. Please read the article on Transphobia: the term is used as a label for discrimination against all persons who are included in "The Transgender Umbrella", not just transsexuals, or "transgenderists" who are binary-identified, but all persons lumped under the label Transgender.

Again, please read "Whipping Girl", and tell me it's not about discrimination against binary-identified trans women… discrimination motivated by misogyny, which is rooted in a strong belief in the gender binary - and the inferiority of femininity to masculinity. It just is. Denying this makes you appear obtuse… or possibly motivated more in your arguments by ideology than by the clear and obvious facts of the matter?

Watch this YouTube video of Julia Serano performing her five minute long spoken-word piece "cocky" - here's the text of "cocky". This is "art", not "WP:RS prosody quoting other prosodists and inventors of great gobs of theory and zero practice"; I don't believe she uses the phrase "the gender binary": but that's what it's all about: it's about Julia Serano, and her life. Oh, my life too, FWIW?

bonze blayk (talk) 04:30, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Fine then, answer one question What line in the whipping girl specifically says that misogyny is caused by the gender binary. if you can find that then I will back off. As I said I'm not just looking for discrimination against trans women. I'm looking for discrimination based on the gender binary. There is a reason why binarism is different from transphobia although technically binarism is one form of transphobia along with trans-misogyny and trans-misandry.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 05:15, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies#"Sex change operation" and similar terms

You might be interested in commenting in this discussion. 134.255.247.88 (talk) 19:19, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!

1. Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
2. Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
3. Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
4. You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).

If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).

• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
• Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
• Show off your Questia access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Questia_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Template talk:Sexual orientation#Pansexuality and polysexuality

Interested in weighing in, since you have extensive knowledge on these subjects? Flyer22 (talk) 18:55, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Hi Bonze. I'm sorry about removing my comments (and username) from your talk page. I thought you would be okay with it.

Can I please have your approval to remove this content? I'm trying to remove as much of my content from Wikipedia as I can for privacy reasons. The comments are not of relevance any longer and are still readily available in the page history. I would really appreciate it if you let me remove them.

Proof that I am who I say I am: clickie.

Thanks... Chemgirl131 (talk) 19:58, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Bruce Bagemihl and androphilia and gynephilia/gynecophilia

Hey, Bonze blayk. Do you mind weighing in on this, since it concerns an edit you made? Flyer22 (talk) 00:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk page guidelines

Please put new comments beneath all older ones within a section, otherwise it makes it more difficult to understand and reply to the comments of all editors. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 21:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I almost invariably do so, unless the comment lies within a subthread; responding to comments placed within subthreads in this fashion is standard practice on the Talk pages to which I have contributed comments. I have no idea of which particular comment you are noting that might have deviated from this, if one has, since you provide no link here. - bonze blayk (talk) 21:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Oops, you are correct, I misread the spacing of KimvdLinde's post, the error was mine. Please note that I relocated your comment to below Kim's in this edit as part of my reply. No changes were made to the text, just its location. Again, my apologies; please let me know if you would like me to relocate it again. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 13:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if you would please put it back where it was: your re-factoring might lead one to believe my comment followed the one you placed before it, when it in fact preceded KimvdLinde's: look at the timestamps, please.

Oh, and maybe you should read the dialog between User:Flyer22 and myself in User talk:Bonze blayk#The Gender identity and Sexual identity articles on my Talk page to get some idea of what a mess the trans* article space warzone looks like from a trench-level perspective. - bonze blayk (talk) 14:11, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I have respaced to the original arrangement. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 15:15, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks… Sincerely, bonze blayk (talk) 01:18, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Pangender

An article that you have been involved in editing, Genderqueer, has been proposed for a merge with the article Pangender. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. --April Arcus (talk) 07:40, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

John Money

Thanks. You needn't have done that, as I would have had it covered after reading your original edit summary. It only takes me a few seconds by script, and I daresay putting those changes back would have take you quite a bit longer. Regards, -- Ohc ^¡digame!_{¿que pasa?} 01:25, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

consider joining me

Please contribute to the talk page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_cannabinoids. Would you support locking the article title against vandalism? --Potguru (talk) 19:43, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bonze blayk. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Bonze blayk. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bad Trip Records logo.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bad Trip Records logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Randykitty (talk) 17:02, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Bonze blayk. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Standard ArbCom discretionary sanctions notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Newimpartial (talk) 11:43, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Nonsense requests

Please stop with the incomprehensible talk page requests. Wikipedia is wp:not a forum. Dronebogus (talk) 18:18, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a name and location? I'm an actual person, and "scum" is an insult in the English language no matter how you slice it. Asserting 'truscum' is hate speech is not "nonsense" - This is insult is directed towards ME and people like me. - bonze blayk (talk) 18:29, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, "Irish Round Towers" are obviously grain silos. Duh. - bonze blayk (talk) 18:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Um, no. The Irish word for them, Cloigtheach means “bell tower”. The article is well-cited but says nothing about them being grain silos. Dronebogus (talk) 23:15, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

And WP:OWN is against Wikipedia policy. Duh. - bonze blayk (talk) 18:34, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Since you appear to be uninformed on these issues, what some people are now calling "transmedicalism" was better known as the "Harry Benjamin Syndrome" fringe of "HBS'ers" who likewise asserted primacy for severe cases of transgender/transgendered conditions over less intense varieties of discomfort with the gender identity commonly associated with one's sex as assigned at birth. Are insults all you've got for someone who contributed hundreds of constructive comments on articles in trans* space? Check out my record. - 18:39, 24 August 2022 (UTC) bonze blayk (talk) 18:39, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

What specifically is your problem? Is the article wrong or did someone personally insult you. Dronebogus (talk) 23:13, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Dronebogus, you just personally insulted me by referring to my Talk page comments as "nonsense," and that's just for starters!

Referring to another person as "scum" is hate speech. Referring to another person using the contraction "truscum" for "True Transsexual Scum" is likewise hate speech!

This issue has been repeatedly raised by other people in Talk:Transmedicalism only to be quashed with the Banhammer of Truth™, which is a sign of an ideological crusade on the part of editors practicing WP:OWN.

I don't see how a comment with appropriate citations on American legal standards governing freedom of speech, which are among the most liberal in the world, is "nonsense." Gee, why do I feel like I'm being baited?

BECAUSE I AM. - bonze blayk (talk) 09:28, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

eyerolling - I AM A LEGAL PERSON NOT A PSEUDONYM ON WIKIPEDIA: barmayden Annette Rose Blayk, COMETMONGER (R), an individual featuring a valid diagnosis of ICD-10 F64.0 " Transsexualism," a medical diagnosis associated with transgender conditions, and hence a likely target of such an insult, however incongruent with my own beliefs on the topic? Right: I am a member of a "targeted class." YIPPEE.

__________

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Transmedicalism Page 9 of 10

Talk:Transmedicalism - Wikipedia 8/24/22, 5:42 AM

"Calling another person 'scum' is hate speech and if you're not aware of that, your skills in the English language are seriously deficient"

Calling another person 'scum' is hate speech.

From Google: "What does it mean when you call someone a scum?"

---> scum: noun: 2 a : REFUSE b: a low, vile, or worthless person or group of people

— Merriam-Webster, Scum Definition & Meaning (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/scum)

Seriously. "Them's fightin' words!" - "Fighting words doctrine." Check it out!

---> Fighting words are words meant to incite violence such that they may not be protected free speech (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/freedom_of_speech) under the First Amendment (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment). The U.S. Supreme Court first defined them in Chaplinsky v New Hampshire (1942) (https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/315/568) as words which "by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality."

— Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute, fighting words (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fighting_words)

I'm deep trans, generally deferential to women, and don't mind all that much being called a TERF. I used to be a radical feminist! I vehemently object to being called SCUM, as would any reasonable person who is a competent speaker of the English language! - barmayden Annette Rose Blayk, COMETMONGER - bonze blayk (talk) 09:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC) [ reply ]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Transmedicalism&oldid=1106382836" bonze blayk (talk) 09:28, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I think the problem here is that it is very hard to understand what you are saying. If somebody has insulted you by calling you "scum" on Wikipedia then that is something that can be looked into. It is uncontroversial that Wikipedia editors should not be calling eachother "scum" so you do not need to argue that general point. It is not clear what specific incident you are referring to. Who said it? When and where? Were they definitely referring to you? Please try to identify the specific incident as clearly and as briefly as possible, instead of going off on long tangents of unclear relevance. DanielRigal (talk) 11:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Getting user:Text mdnp vibes here. Good faith is not an excuse for incomprehensibility. Dronebogus (talk) 03:44, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Dronebogus please restrain your insults. Please look at the comments made previously on my Talk page related to my long history editing in trans* article space on Wikipedia. I'll have to request sanctions if you keep this up.

"Calling another person a 'truscum' is hate speech." - You can't interpret that sentence?

I've observed it's a common tactic of cheap insult artists on the Internet to accuse people with a tendency to write elaborate prose of producing "word salad" such as that associated with user:Text mdnp. I'm a creative writer, not an academic writer, except for my role writing technical documentation for Cornell and my own products? Trust me: it's BORING prose!

I have a verifiable history of unreverted edits both on Pages and in Talk as bonze blayk on Wikipedia as well as a verifiable public identity. (Bonze Anne Rose Blayk is my legal name, which I write in lowercase as a poetic conceit in tribute to e.e. cummings? "Blayk," which is "a pale yellow color," I adopted as a tribute to William Blake.) I have a verifiable history working as a Network Systems Programmer from around 1985 through 2012, with my most visible work product being COMET, the COrnell Macintosh Terminal Emulator, and its licensed successors dataComet and dataComet-Secure, where I hold a verifiable license from the US Bureau of Industry and Security for the export of custom encryption code based on publicly available encryption standards!

Lots of people are not fond of my writing style as a creative writer, where I enjoy freedom from the bonds of constraint imposed by writing over 100,000 lines of working C language code for the Macintosh. My comments on US law are pertinent, because Internet Harassment is a Class A Misdemeanor in New York State subject to fines and a jail sentence of up to one year. I won't press charges, but you have no guarantee somebody else won't get pissed off over people turning editing Wikipedia into a pissing contest!

seriously. Get a grip. Annette. - bonze blayk (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

You are still utterly failing to explain what *specific incident* you are even referring to. Is English your first language? Here on Wikimedia we actually like “boring” prose and would love if you used it more often. Dronebogus (talk) 06:37, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Dronebogus: "Here on Wikimedia we actually like 'boring' prose" - "Trust, but verify!" - Ronald Reagan

I referred above not to the encyclopedic style routinely in evidence in most articles on Wikipedia, but to the "BORING prose!" that was my own product: these being the writings I composed to document the functionality of the Macintosh application I authored in the dataComet-Secure Online Documentation © 2019 databeast, Inc. (BSD license). It is indeed boring beyond belief unless you are a user of the application or have a deep and abiding fascination with the ins and outs of a full-featured terminal emulator?

Or perhaps admire the twist in the Preface on the prosodic sensibilities of Philip K. Dick intersecting a live performance local to Ithaca, NY (at a venue since demolished!) of the music of Blue Öyster Cult, which mocks the pretensions of a psychologist who can't complete a proper English sentence as she spouts freakish neologisms in her dour quest to condemn me as a psychotic maniac with a Bad Attitude? Well. Enough of that: subsequently, I assure you, 230 pages of technical jargon capable of inducing utmost boredom are in store for the casual reader!

Sincerely, Annette Rose Blayk, COMETMONGER - yes, that's me dancing in the audience as I recorded the performance of "Flaming Telepaths" linked from the Preface of that documentation by an image of a "Blue Öyster Cult V.I.P." backstage pass? - bonze blayk (talk) 08:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

I………… do not know how to respond to that. Just don’t make accusations of hate speech and “fighting words” without being clear and concise about what you are referring to. Bye. Dronebogus (talk) 09:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

PS: [[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Androphilia_and_gynephilia&diff=441018505&oldid=440915694

"It is unfortunate that Bonze's reflex to disagree causes so much, if hollow and unfocused, dissent. We're actually in tune on very much." — James Cantor (talk) 16:08, 23 July 2011 (UTC)]]

You do know who James Cantor PhD is, right? The clinical psychologist and expert sexologist formerly working with Ray Blanchard et. al. at CAMH? Right.

If not, why are you bitching me out other than pure ignorance? bonze blayk (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Fuck the War EP for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fuck the War EP is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fuck the War EP until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

UtherSRG (talk) 19:17, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

September 2023

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

User:331dot - User:Dronebogus engaged in a WikiWar on me, including a round of incredible personal insults shared above? It's in the history. Have you shared a similar warning with him, or is this another round of the Wikilawyering just unleashed on an innocent article Fuck the War EP, which I did not create, by a lot of "motivated editors" (a/k/a) WP:CABAL? TWO of the editors there seeking to delete the article exhibit some serious WP:COI even as User:DanielRigal accuses ME of having a Conflict of Interest, apparently expecting me to forget he launched in on these very pages in support of the cheap insult art brought on me, as well as an inane deletionist campaign on some mildly humorous comments I made on other articles?

"Getting user:Text mdnp vibes here. Good faith is not an excuse for incomprehensibility. Dronebogus (talk) 03:44, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]"

That's not an insult? Really.

Numerous editors have left comments on Transmedicalism complaining of the clear bias displayed towards those preferring legitimate medical treatment of Transsexualism rather than fly-by-night providers of illegal hormonal treatments. User:Dronebogus deleted mine! WP:OWN much? WP:OWN LOTS!

- barmayden Annette Rose Blayk, COMETMONGER bonze blayk (talk) 13:06, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Please provide the specific diffs where personal attacks were made against you. I don't see any on this page, but maybe I missed them. 331dot (talk) 15:37, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@331dot: I really do not know what this user’s problem is. Yes I made that comment (over a year ago) no I don’t remember what the context was beyond reverting something Bonze Blayk did that clearly made no sense it’s a few sections up on the talk page and it’s easy to see why I made it. They seem to view everyone who disagrees with them as part of The Cabal against them. I seriously think a WP:CIR/WP:IDHT/WP:CIVIL block should be considered Dronebogus (talk) 18:14, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

"They seem to view everyone who disagrees with them as part of The Cabal against them." - User:Dronebogus

Firstly, I am not a 'they,' I am a 'she.' - I was correctly assigned by the surface appearance of an adequate penis as Male at Birth, but I suffer from a duly diagnosed case of ICD-10 F64.0 Transsexualism, which is generally accepted as an appropriate diagnosis by most of the medical doctors who have treated me, with a small minority from the "mental health community" who believe ALL transwomen are delusional? The expert who came to accept I'm transsexual? My mother, Jean Cox Saunders! (I am on 100mg/day Spironolactone for high blood pressure and suppression of testosterone production and injected estrogen for feminization, as well as medical marijuana prescribed for me to treat Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder under New York State law, and those are the only medications I take.)

With respect to The Cabal, it is true I have been targeted by a small number of very bad people online and in real life as a consequence of being a developer of secure communications software, most notably dataComet-Secure, which is currently not supported, since the encryption suite is severely obsolescent and badly in need of updates. They are not "The Cabal," they are a bunch of hapless losers and jackals - including both computer hackers and drug dealers - who refuse to comply with State, Federal, and international law because they believe they can get away scot-free with breaching security on my computer systems and premises at DATABEAST INC at 1668 Trumansburg - because "some people" locally misdiagnosed me with "psychosis" precisely because I claim I am a Network Systems Programmer subjected to such attacks despite overwhelming evidence this is the case! (See my Linkedin profile at Bonze Annette Rose Blayk for proof. NB: Linkedin profiles are verified by editors working for Linkedin!)

I am under treatment by a psychiatrist for PTSD and PTSD alone, so please back off the claims that imply I suffer from Paranoid Schizophrenia. - I post frequently on Twitter as @HonestAbeLinkin where I maintain contact with a number of reputable psychiatrists and psychologists - just for example. - Annette - bonze blayk (talk) 12:34, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

You are assigning a lot of meaning to that statement that I don't think is there. "They" often refers to "the other person we're talking about" and is not necessarily a slight against transgendered persons. You don't need to provide your medical history. I'm not you, I don't have your life experiences, but what you are saying is in that statement isn't there. If you are unable to act in a civil manner action will need to be taken. I would take a step back, focus on my own well being, and see what I could do to change here. 331dot (talk) 12:54, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Annette, please understand that we wish you well even though we don't always agree with your actions here on Wikipedia. I know that the AfD might feel personal but it really isn't. Also, I really don't think that any of the people who you are interacting with here are in any way connected to anybody else who may have caused you trouble elsewhere in the past. It clearly sounds like you have a lot going on so my advice to you is to only interact with Wikipedia in ways that do not affect you negatively. If a situation gets too stressful on Wikipedia then it might be best to back off and let the Administrators sort it out. Other things are far more important. --DanielRigal (talk) 13:51, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

User:331dot, since I have been summarily blocked from editing the [article in question], here is a bit of evidence that the Angry Samoans FUCK THE WAR EP was issued by Triple X Records as a release on BAD TRIP RECORDS - images posted to ANGRY SAMOANS - FUCK THE WAR EP CD scans. thank you. - Annette bonze blayk (talk) 13:14, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm blocked from the AfD discussion? My error!

I'm not going to defend what you folks should be devoted to improving. If you folks proceed to kill the article, I'm not going to take responsibility for your failure to WP:AGF and show respect for editors with a different style of writing than the "clear and concise" standard you appear to advocate, which - by the way - will make Wikipedia a playground for "editors" using ChatGPT and the like to compose their comments for them. - Annette bonze blayk (talk) 13:19, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

User:DanielRigal - You came into this controversy because you were monitoring my Talk page here - you can't consider the possibilty AfD is populated with people who were brought in by WP:CANVASSING? Please note we are both in the same profession and there's a global Cyberwar of astonishing pitch and intensity going on, cf. [SolarWinds Cyberattack Demands Significant Federal and Private-Sector Response (infographic)]

User:Oaktree_b - " We don't have time to read rambling musings that have nothing to do with the subject at hand."

Another TL;DR because "some people" don't approve of my writing style and "some people" incorrectly believe I'm psychotic, some precisely because of my association with the ANGRY SAMOANS and their latterday affection for posturing as a band obsessed with "psychotic hatred" on their pioneering hardcore punk album BACK FROM SAMOA.

"Back from Samoa Review by Mike DaRonco - Destructive, mischievous, and politically incorrect are just some of the words to describe L.A.'s Angry Samoans. And with their second album Back From Samoa, they remain to have that inability to care about who's toes they step on; as long as they continue to blast out their aggressions, it's all good."

They developed those themes after I left Los Angeles, where I resided for only one year!

And if you look up Angry Samoans it lists me as "Kevin Eric Saunders" because of their rules that as an "artist" I must have a relationship with a Label that affords me "editing privileges" on their artist's page, where my own work in support of the Angry Samoans on the web as BAD TRIP RECORDS and ANGRY SAMOANS doesn't count at all! That's ridiculous!

As a consequence, many people quite reasonably infer, incorrectly, that I am a "synthetic persona" and just another bullshit artist trying to get traction in the music industry, which as a punk rock band, we always shunned!

In closing, my writing style has never been appropriate for editing in article space in general because I'm extremely verbose in person as well as being a touch typist? Yes, I ramble, and I dislike insults both direct and indirect. I am a sensitive person!

AND good with language TO THE EXTREME!, as Homer Simpson might put it? - thanks, Annette bonze blayk (talk) 14:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I do not yet see any blocks on your account, so I'm not sure what you mean. 331dot (talk) 15:32, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Why is it so difficult to just write in a clear, concise manner? Is this how you write in business emails? Order coffee? Dronebogus (talk) 22:32, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Just keep it simple and on topic. We scroll past these long walls of text. We're here to discuss the sources, or lack of, for the article. I really don't have time for the rest of it. Oaktree b (talk) 00:19, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MomCoverGIMP-GillSansBold-500x500.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MomCoverGIMP-GillSansBold-500x500.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fuck The War.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fuck The War.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:10, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)