Talk:Gender bender

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jokretzmer, KaiMorrison, WST Student (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Jlombera, Abigail Payne.

Untitled

I seriously question whether Shakespeare's Twelfth Night is a narrative of "gender bending". It is about masquerading as another person (who happens to be of another sex), it isn't about sexual deviancy.

How about adding Star Trek DS9: The symbiotic character Dax had several male and female hosts and explores at least some aspects of gender bending - one of the first "private" conversation of the charater is about the feeling of beeing female again after several male hosts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.245.66.102 (talk) 11:13, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Gender Bending?

In regards to the "gender bending" article, I think that it should stay and not be deleted since it is a term that is more scholarly than other more explicit terms that have been mentioned to replace it. I believe that college textbooks on gender would be more likely to have gender bending as the term of choice. To my knowledge, the term gender bending can be used as a form of resistance toward societal gender expectations, which could be added to the page. As for resources, Lorber's Paradoxes of Gender written in 1994 is a good one that speaks about this issue and could be used as a helpful source for the page.Amyellingsen (talk) 05:27, 28 October 2013 (UTC)Amy, UW

In Fiction

If we're to include this section, it needs some sourcing. I think the instances where the book or other work is notable and linked, usually the text covers the details of sourcing. But all of these manga and anime ones... they don't always mention episodes or any other details that would allow us to check if this is WP:V. The most recent addition, for instance, includes no mention in the linked article. For now I've flagged it for cites, but this is an issue on a number of entries on that list. - CorbieV^☊☼ 19:31, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Examples

I've added a few citations, but I'm not especially fond of the "examples" section. I think one paragraph could probably summarize gender-bending in popular culture. Or maybe two, if we spent a lot of time discussing glam rock. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:10, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

I think it would be better to have a well-written paragraph or two (yes, Glam Rock!) than a list. That way we could contextualize it more with less repetition. - CorbieV^☊☼ 17:19, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Genderfuck

Can someone explain why this belongs in the lede? The terms do not appear to be synonyms. Czolgolz (talk) 08:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

This source says that "genderfuck" is a more extreme form of "gender bending". Maybe we could quote that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:17, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Czolgolz, you tried removing the term genderfuck from the article twice, and I reverted you twice, as seen here and here. I was clear that the term is there in the lead sentence because it's a WP:Alternative title matter, and I noted that the term is mentioned lower in the lead anyway. I don't see the problem with it being right there bolded in the first sentence of the lead when it is discussed lower in the lead anyway. Furthermore, per WP:Lead, the term genderfuck should be addressed in the lead. We have sections using the term lower in the article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:04, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure how mainstream the term "genderfuck" has ever been, even though it's more used in-community (historically, anyway) than "gender bender". "Gender bender" is a more polite term that was picked up by the more mainstream media who couldn't print, "fuck" (or say it on broadcast TV or the radio). But since WP is not censored, "genderfuck" should be prominent and bolded, even if we don't choose it as the primary title of the article. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 19:58, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

@Flyer22 Reborn: - I went with the sex and gender distinction in the phrasing on "assigned at birth" to try and make this more culturally inclusive. Not all cultures assign the same gender roles based on sex; not all cultures define gender roles the same way. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 21:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

CorbieVreccan, with this edit, you focused on the fact that the link is "sex assignment" rather than "gender assignment." With this edit, I was responding to that, stating, "CorbieVreccan, that's true, but 'gender assignment' is an alternative term for 'sex assignment' and is mentioned in that article. After all, sex and gender are assigned at birth." As for your above comment, I don't see how your edit addressed the "not all cultures assign the same gender roles based on sex; not all cultures define gender roles the same way." aspect, but the vast majority of the world follows the gender binary, not third gender aspects, and bending gender is usually based on messing with the gender binary. On a side note: There is no need to ping me to this talk page since it is on my watchlist. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:53, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Unscientific & Biased

This article appears to be very biased and uses very unscientific methods of explaining the Circumstance.

Many Ideas are simply stated as Fact and controversial Sources aren't hinted to be controversial.

Wikipedia is not a Lobby for Transgenderism! I will propose Changes soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emdeelf (talk • contribs) 03:11, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review

Overall I think this article was well written and had a great structure that flowed well and get the reader engaged. As some people have mentioned before me, I do think the term "genderfuck" didn't need to be given as much emphasis as it was. Using it as a reference for street slang is acceptable, but as a way of keeping the article written in a scholarly manor, I think it would have been best to leave it at that, and not continue to use it so much throughout the text. There could have been some more elaboration in certain sections, particularly "Literature". There could have been more examples of pieces of literature, and perhaps even the history of literature's role in gender bending and how it has changed throughout history. For the most part, this article did a great job citing it's sources and gathering it's information from many sources. The only section where there was a lack in citations was the examples listed at the end. Some of the examples listed had no citation at all, and although they may very well be legitimate, doing the necessary research to provide a citation would bring more validity to the section and article as a whole. Overall, a solid article. (Abigail Payne (talk) 01:51, 17 November 2016 (UTC))

Title

Shouldn't this article be called gender bending instead of gender bender? It seems to me that the title should focus on the activity instead of individuals who bend gender roles. Does anyone else have input on this, as I am not sure of Wikipedia's rules on this. I noticed that "genderfuck" was merged into this, and its title referred to the activity instead of genderfuckers. generic_hipster 21:49, 31 December 2016 (UTC)