Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Gender identity

< Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Gender identity

Photo Example

User:Mathglot and others,
The section concerning pre-coming-out photos states "The article about The Wachowskis, for example, is better without any pre-coming-out photos since the way they looked is not well known as they shied away from public appearances.", but the article concerning them has pre-coming-out photos, this, so I think it is a bad idea to have contradictory information.
So I think that either the example should be changed on this page, or the photo should be changed on that page.
I can do stuff! (talk) 01:27, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Icandostuff Thanks for finding that; I was unaware of it. You have a very good point, and I don't know which is right. At first glance, I think the photos at The Wachowskis should be changed, but I'd like to hear what others have to say. It's contradictory now, but the sky won't fall if it's inconsistent for a little while; let's have a wider discussion about this, and see where it goes. What do you think should happen here? Thanks again, Mathglot (talk) 02:36, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Personally, I think that that part of the policy is well thought-out, so I think that the image should be removed from their article. Though, I think that a good example is needed there, so I don't really know.

Thank You User:Mathglot, I can do stuff! (talk) 03:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Violation of WP:NPOV

This guideline heavily conflicts with Wikipedia's core principle demanding a neutral writing style, as essentially all of the deviations from traditional pronoun usage suggested therein are closely associated with gender related activism, and thus generally unsuitable for writing politically and ideologically neutral articles. This page should therefore be either deleted or completely revised. Megalogastor (talk) 20:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

A person's gender is not "activism", any more than any other aspect of their identity. - Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 00:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

A person's grammatical gender and the use of corresponding pronouns is not an aspect of people's identity; the attempt to make this a personal choice that others have to follow when writing about them, and thereby spreading hitherto unusual language, is very clearly an act of activism, and thus must not be supported by Wikipedia under any circumstances. See also Wikipedia:Writing better articles#Principle of least astonishment-Megalogastor (talk) 13:00, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Gendering men with he, women with she, and even the singular they are standard practices in English dating back centuries, hardly unusual. The validity of transgender identity (i.e. the fact that trans men are men), and the fact that Wikipedia respects transgender WP:BLP subjects at least enough to correctly explain what gender they are, has nothing to do with grammar or style.

Please see MOS:GIDINFO and review the decades worth of RfCs preceding and supporting MOS:GENDERID. You are the umpteen billionth person to make one of many disingenuous grammar-based arguments in favor of misgendering living people on Wikipedia. Community consensus is extremely clear on this point, and this guideline is unlikely to change. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 16:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Oops, I forgot where I was. This is the essay documenting the 20 year history of pronoun-related RfCs on Wikipedia. Consider skimming to avoid repeating common arguments. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 16:18, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Avoid singular they/their/them when confusion is possible?

In this page it says to avoid confusing phrases such as 'He gave birth to a child', I've come across several confusing sentences using singular they such as: 'In the end, Nemo from Switzerland came out on top with their song "The Code", garnering over 591 points in the Grand Final and giving Switzerland their first win since 1988.', upon reading this one might reasonably assume Nemo is a band, but it's a person. Another example from DYK is: 'Did you know... that Jex Blackmore, an American pro-choice activist and Satanist, performed art with 100 pounds (45 kg) of rotten fruit (pictured) before their second abortion?' their made me assume 'their' referred to a partner initially rather than a singular person.

Should this page be updated to include avoiding confusing usage of they or should I just use common sense and change any confusing sentence I come across? (Although that can't be done in some cases such as DYK). Traumnovelle (talk) 20:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Common sense applies, but I don't think these specific examples are especially ambiguous or confusing, beyond the fact that readers not used to hearing about non-binary people will tend to expect the antecedent of they to be plural. At least when the (one, unambiguous) antecedent is a bluelink and clarifying facts about them are easily retrievable (e.g. by hovering), I don't think this a substantial issue, although changing e.g.

• Nemo from Switzerland -> the Swiss singer Nemo
• before their second abortion -> before having their second abortion

would be acceptable.

More egregious ambiguity is when they has multiple possible antecedents, or could be mistaken for referring to multiple people in the sentence when actually referring to only one person. For example:

• Zach^[they] and Moss^[he] went to the sub shop. They^[Zach] got fries while he^[Moss] got a sandwich.

Restructurings which improves clarity are good, but should generally not come at the cost of omitting a subject's pronouns or awkward over-reliance on using their name instead. They/them pronouns are not themselves confusing. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 23:08, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

>beyond the fact that readers not used to hearing about non-binary people will tend to expect the antecedent of they to be plural.

So the average reader will expect it to be plural...

>but should generally not come at the cost of omitting a subject's pronouns

Why? The point of pronouns is for easy communication in replace of a noun. If that cannot be achieved using phrase's like 'Zach got fries' is perfectly accept and fine. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

I think I agree, I'm just reiterating the advice in this essay, that "name-only" writing (i.e. repeating someone's name in places where a pronoun would feel most natural), should be a last resort compared to other, more clever and grammatical sounding solutions, especially if we would not have done so for he or she. I have a personal axe to grind against the "name-only" style of writing, I suppose. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 00:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Pronouns from third-parties

Hergie Bacyadan a boxer who competes in women's boxing is mostly referred to using feminine pronouns. However a single article from One Sports claims that Bacyadan prefers to use he/him but all of the direct quotes comes from their girlfriend. Even more progressive outlet Rappler would use she/her.

I have not found any sources that would indicate the subject prefers he/him. So I hope deferring from using he/him and going by she/her would be compliant to MOS:GENDERID.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 16:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Such issue would be resolved. See talk page of subject. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 17:49, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

What about minor children in a court dispute?

Father says "he", mother says "she" referring to biologically male child born in 2012, and subject of contentious pending court case. Do we go with the current legal designation, or mother's allegation of the child's preference, or ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Modern Law (talk • contribs) 15:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Is this child notable, or this hypothetical? I would imagine any such instance would need to be viewed on a case-by-case basis. If one or both parents are notable, then we can probably avoid using gendered terms to describe the child or explain that the child's gender is currently the subject of dispute. It is inappropriate for us to be discussing the genital configuration of a pre-teenager so "biologically male" is irrelevant here — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 08:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

This discussion appears to relate to Jeff Younger–Anne Georgulas custody battle. I see no reason to attempt to judge a sensitive situation without context, and the above notification looks a bit like asking the other parent. (no pun intended) –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 15:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Context: reliable sources report that the child in question is transgender and requests female name/pronouns/presentation. The application of this guideline in this case seems straightforward. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (💬 • 📝) 17:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)