Talk:Transphobia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment in Fall 2020, between 24 August 2020 and 2 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Undeemiss. Peer reviewers: Juliahonda, Myusername101, Jlomax1, Marroyo7, Ezia9.

a concern

"As an example of a high-profile employment-related court case unfavorable to transgender people, in 2000 the southern U.S. grocery chain Winn-Dixie fired long-time employee Peter Oiler, despite a history of repeatedly earning raises and promotions, after management learned that the married, heterosexual truck driver occasionally cross-dressed off the job." I feel like this section almost implies that the guy is transgender just because he crossdressed. blueskies (talk) 20:26, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think that's too much of an issue. Clearly, a company firing a person for how they dress off the job is unfavorable to transgender people. The bigger issue with that paragraph is that it's based only on the actual filing by the ACLU, rather than a secondary source. It could be stretching into original research and potentially undue. Unrelated, I see that your signature is very different from your username. Your signature should make it easy to tell what your username is. If you want to change your username, you can do that by following the instructions at WP:RENAME. Best, Politanvm ^talk 20:39, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

No - crossdressing has nothing to do with being trans. Cross-dressing involves someone dressing in clothes usually worn by people of a different gender. Transgender people have a different gender to the one they were assigned at birth. Including this story implies that trans women are men dressing in women's clothing. And I fully support @Aleeza2018 in the story being removed. 92.0.35.8 (talk) 16:25, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

@Bluesunnyfox 92.0.35.8 (talk) 16:26, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

There are maybe more notable cases anyway that would be better to mention anyway, like Karen Ulane or Aimee Stephens. Rab V (talk) 19:36, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

I completely agree. Since three of us are in favour of the section being excised and only one of us supports its inclusion - do you think that a consensus has been reached and that it should be stricken? Even a consensus it hasn't been reached yet, it goes per WP:ONUS 92.0.35.8 (talk) 15:48, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

• It goes for the moment 92.0.35.8 (talk) 15:49, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi everyone. If consensus is to remove the section I'm ok with that, but I worry the case is being misrepresented. Oiler was a transgender person fired for being transgender, and the case is definitely on-topic for this page. Citing the ACLU complaint only is an issue, but there are secondary sources about the case, which I'd be happy to cite and summarize in the article if we decide to keep the content:

• The Advocate (2001)
• Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy (2007)
• Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law (2002)

Use of the phrase "cross-dressing" here is an issue. The ACLU complaint uses "dressed as a woman" and Oiler himself is quoted as saying "dress as a lady" (quoted in the Georgetown paper). I'd prefer to use similar language. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:11, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

I did not know this. In that case, I support the retention of the content. However may I ask you why you said "himself"? 92.0.35.8 (talk) 01:42, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Good question! As best as I can tell, that was Oiler's pronoun. Oiler's own attorneys used he/him and the complaint notes that "he had no intention of changing his sex or of "transitioning" to live full-time as a woman in any way". All three secondary sources use he/him, which isn't solid proof of pronoun usage but it's what I'm leaning on in the absence of a definitive statement from Oiler.

As a side note, anyone with Wikipedia Library access can get the sources I listed above, and anyone else should email me if they'd like copies to use for improving this or other articles. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:57, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

in religion

The religions section doesn't seem neutral. It starts of by talking about the christian right, linking anti-trans christian groups without any separation between diffrent forms of Christianity or differing beliefs between churches/religious communities. It than uses anecdotal quotes to talk about the struggles trans people face in Christian communities. I'm fine with that but what seems weird to me is this is then flipped in the Islam sections. With Islam there's an emphasis on diffrenting views in islam. unlike the Christian section instead of linking Islamic institutions that are considered transphobic it does the opposite linking institutions that aren't considered transphobic Gamiac (talk) 01:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

New Article

Female Privilege Feel free to add content BlackAmerican (talk) 06:32, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Criticism

As stated already in the header of the article, it may be unbalanced. Many of the topics found on Wikipedia also include an attempt to objectively address the negative aspects in the form of a review of criticism regarding the topic. Especially in the light of the way this topic has been able to polarise the discussion and the often aggressive tone and attitude that gets expressed in conflicts regarding this topic, I think it is important to also include the dark side in the article. The first criticism would be, that discussing the this topic seems to be taboo. People get cancelled for just speaking out in a critical way or simply expressing their personal ideas. This is bad practise in an open society and raises the suspicion that there might be more to this than meets the eye. Secondly a critical sign should be posted where the topic leads to physical harm, as can be expected from medical procedures regarding transpeople. A third concern is the erosion of common sense for the sake of an ideology. This is more of a war on the mind and propaganda, when it comes to leading these ideas into schools and families. I think what we see is that subjective experience is taken to be valued more than objective facts. Now in many ways it is important to listen to the subjective truth of individuals and groups. Nevertheless in this regard the transgender issue tends to become like a cult, where objective facts are being actively suppressed in order to maintain the cohering beliefstrucktures. Finally, it seems that there being made an attempt to bring all who perceive themselves as being ignored, rejected or suppressed to belong to this movement. That gives it an almost religious aspect. For politics that used to separate church from state for these reasons, deep consideration should be made when it comes to legislation in this regard. This is my first contribution to Wikipedia ever. Thank you for reading. 2003:C1:8F0C:39F2:72E9:7B8F:B4C5:7903 (talk) 13:15, 1 September 2022 (UTC)