Talk:Transfeminism/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Language issues

In my opinion the language used by the author(s) is too sophisticated. I'm sure an academic can easily read it but not everybody is one. This site is supposed to be accessed by masses of people and should not use a more sophisticated language than is necessary. I don't mind sophistication if there no other way but this article abuses them. To me it appears that the people who wrote it wanted actually to display their erudition rather than communicate.

Although, normally I don't have difficulties with language sophistication (in my own language), I have a problem. My first language is not the English and I'm sure there are many readers in my situation. I struggled to understand the topic by spending an average two minutes on each sentence, reading it repeatedly and concentrating to understand and extract each ideea. After about twenty sentences I became too tired and I gave up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.162.228 (talk) 12:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

It is definitely a problem with the writing, not your reading! I can vaguely understand it as an English academic, but it reads like it is aimed at specialists in feminist studies - the lead should at miniumum be simplified so normal people can understand the topic.Yobmod (talk) 13:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Original research

Nothing in this article actually explains the theory of transfeminism; what does it stand for as a political act? Feminism is political movement focused on liberation from misogyny and sexism. That is true across the various waves, as well as womanism. This seems to have no information about transfeminism within that spectrum except to say that transfeminists are trying to be included. Womanism and other movements initially under the feminist umbrella created their own movements to articulate feminism (liberation fro misogyny) as informed by the specificity of experience, this article seems to say transfeminism is about being included in other movements?

This article really does read like an essay; while I'm sure there's some useful material there, what is there badly needs to be sourced. I'd probably take an axe to it as is, but I thought I'd post here first in case someone wants to do some salvage first. Rebecca (talk) 07:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

This is actually fairly well sourced, especially compared to a lot of wikis, but it is perhaps a bit overly academic in parts (saying this as one who wrote some of the academic bits, not trying to criticize others so much as admit some limitations).

On the other hand, a whole bunch of the articles in the feminism series are fairly academic and I wasn't the only one to write in an academic vein here.

When you say you want to "take an axe" to the article, what is it you want to change? Shorten individual sentences for readability or get rid of significant amounts of content to make the whole article shorter and more of, say, a pointer to other sites and to written materials?

Me, I don't see any reason to leave out content. In fact, I'm all for expanding this even more as we gather good information about more things happening and more writing being done by transfeminists.

But this should be accessible in the way any good encyclopedia is accessible. There are, hmm, levels of accessibility one might say. From Ency. Britannica to Encarta. That should be thought about too. If the other feminism articles are at a certain level of accessibility, should we take that into account in working on this article?

Finally, I'm not an expert in the CITATION FoRMS that are badly needed to make this read more smoothly by preventing the reader from getting lost inside the parentheses....

If there are things that don't seem to have a source and seem like they might be original research, you might also remember that most people don't re-cite in the same paragraph if it all comes from the same source. Could that account for some of what you're worried about? If not, maybe there are things that can be tracked down in the citations to double check that the citations actually refer to relevant information themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cripdyke (talk • contribs) 11:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC) ---oops! also, does anyone know why at the end of the article, there are a large number of references that don't appear? And I added manual numbering that I now realize is duplicative with some of the automated reference numbering.

and when I reread the article, it seems that some references have been deleted by people who were probably just trying to reformat things to make it more readable. None of the people that I worked with directly used the automatic references, so there were a lot in the middle of the article in parentheses. This left a couple of sections with several paragraphs with no citations - perhaps what you referred to? But I still believe that most info in here is well substantiated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cripdyke (talk • contribs) 12:05, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Billy Tipton

The image needs a rationale for use in this article. in addition, does anyone know of references to Tipton in any literature on transfeminism? if not, why is the image here, and why is there a large paragraph under the image, but no mention in the text of the article? that smacks of original research.(mercurywoodrose)75.61.128.131 (talk) 01:20, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I just deleted it... its inclusion here makes no sense to me at all! -- thanks, bonze blayk (talk) 01:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

"womyn-born-womyn policy is -allegedly- transphobic" - to the contrary, this policy is a manifestation of CORE transphobia

Hi, User:Solar-Wind! I reverted your edit because the policy of excluding trans-feminine folk who were "male assigned at birth" at MichFest - including post-op transsexual women - is an expression of core transphobia, and describing this as "allegedly" transphobic would be like describing policies at country clubs that exclude blacks or Jews as "allegedly" racist.

I was thinking it might be difficult to find WP:RS sources to support the statement as it is now phrased, but it does appear as if Julia Serano published some of the pointed assessments she makes on her website in "On the Outside Looking In" in her book "Whipping Girl", which would qualify.

It's true to say that the word "transphobic" to characterize this policy is perhaps not exactly precise, since MichFest accepts self-identified trans men as "womyn-born-womyn" !!! - but I think that it's a form of hairsplitting to exclude this odd brand of trans-denialism from being categorized as "transphobic" just because the discrimination here falls upon trans women only.

thanks! - bonze blayk (talk) 11:59, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

GID & Transgender, transsexual

These two topics (listed under the "Current controversies within transfeminism" section) strike me as being discussions that take place in the transgender community as a whole, and not just among transfeminists. Neither subsection, as currently written, mentions unique transfeminist viewpoints on the issues, so I'm not sure their inclusion in this article is justified. Also, "transgender, transsexual" doesn't really even seem to describe a controversy; I just read it as stating that some people make a distinction between the two terms. Sandbergja (talk) 11:45, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I definitely agree. These issues, as presented, are not transfeminist but trans issues in general. It certainly would be possible to talk about the transfeminist implications these issues have, as the medicalization of transition and gatekeeping dynamics are rife with disproportionate scrutiny on trans women which has definitely been critiqued by transfeminism. But even then, that would not be an issue of controversy within transfeminism. You could say that they are controversies within trans community in general, but not within transfeminism in particular. I would recommend removing them. Perhaps they could be moved to a general trans page if anyone feels attached to them.
Additionally the "Inclusion within mainstream feminism" subsection is not actually a controversy within transfeminism, but a controversy within feminism, except for perhaps the small statement at the end made about trans men's place within transfeminism. It would easily fit within the currently titled "Feminism vs Transfeminism" section. Then this entire section could be removed, or perhaps new controversies could be entered such as "Trans Men's Position Within Transfeminism" and also... Okay, I can't think of any. Maybe we just need a section on trans men's position within transfeminism and we can retire the controversies section until we become aware of some actual controversies within transfeminism. Nodesignation (talk) 19:11, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Some suggested changes...

I just have a couple of minor issues with the layout/language of the article that leaped out at me right away. I'm a little reluctant to wade right in with the edits, so I'm asking here instead...

One is that I think the article shouldn't open with "Here's what this Robert Hill guy says transfeminism is." It's fine to include this in the article, of course, assuming Hill is relevant to be quoted for this article, but I'm not sure it's appropriate as an opening sentence. It also seems a little jargony. Is there a more general definition of transfeminism available and citeworthy online? I think the first paragraph of the article could be a little clearer about what transfeminism is, before getting into greater minutiae of theory or history or transphobia among certain other strands of feminism.

I thought it was rather odd that an article about trans feminism opens with an awkward not very eloquent quote from a (presumably cis?) guy who I've never heard of. Googling his name and "transfeminism" only brings us back to this wiki page and other places quoting it. So I checked the source. It's a campus climate report on LGBTQ students and never mentions anything about trans issues, or transfeminism. The quote is not from that source and should definitely be removed/replaced.Nodesignation (talk) 18:58, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
I just replaced the Robert Hill quote with a much more readable definition from Emi Koyama's Transfeminist Manifesto. Although Koyama later critiqued the manifesto (see http://eminism.org/blog/entry/41), I still think the quote is still a valuable way to open the article, and I'll look for ways to incorporate her critiques elsewhere in the article. Sandbergja (talk) 15:33, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
I was just thumbing through my shiny new copy of Trans Bodies Trans Selves, and it includes a definition that is short and sweet. I just quoted that definition as well in the intro. Sandbergja (talk) 15:51, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

The other is the title of the section "Feminism vs. Transfeminism". While I know there is some tension between certain strains of radical feminism and anything transinclusive, and that tension makes up the bulk of this section, I'm not sure I like the antagonistic "vs." used in this section title, because it seems to place the two at odds with each other. It also generalizes "feminism" to be only those varieties of feminism that reject transfeminism, which is far from all of them. Transfeminism is accepted by many mainstream and radical feminists as compatible with and a subset of, or even an essential part of, "feminism" (and even "radical feminism" of the non-transphobic varieties), and titling it "Feminism vs. Transfeminism" seems to artificially reinforce the distiction/separation between the two. As a subset of feminism, whether or not all varieties of feminism would like to accept it, it's like having a section titled "Christians vs. Catholics" or "Citrus fruits vs. oranges". Perhaps a better title would be something like "Controversy over transfeminism" or "non-acceptance of transfeminism" or any of a million other things, instead of accidentally implying/suggesting that feminism and transfeminism are generally at odds. HurricaneJoAnne (talk) 11:25, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

What about "transfeminism and lesbian separatism" or "lack of acceptance among some feminist groups"? Also, on a related note, are the transphobic lesbian groups always accepted by all other feminist groups? If not, then I suggest that it might be worth mentioning that in this article in relation to their transphobic rejection of transsexual feminists/feminists of transexual background. 59.167.194.37 (talk) 02:19, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
I definitely agree that "Feminism vs Transfeminism" gives the false impression that transfeminism is not a part of feminism or the impression that feminists in general are opposed to transfeminism. (The same way "Lawyers vs Ethical Lawyers" might pose problems). I'd suggest "Confronting Anti-Trans Elements Within Feminism." That also might help re-focus the section onto things that transfeminists are doing rather than dedicating a significant portion of the page to people/things/issues that are not representing transfeminism.
Additionally, the entire section seems to be full of broad generalizations without any citation. Not all 2nd wave / 3rd wave / transfeminists believe the same points. It'd be better to point to themes or perspectives put forth by prominent individuals from each group rather than definitive statements which inevitably many people will jump up to say "I'm a _____-feminist and I don't believe that." For example, "sisterhood" might be better framed (and could be cited as) the concept of universal female experience. I understand the concept being discussed here, but I don't know any transfeminists who would voice it as opposition or critique of "sisterhood" and do know of many who strongly declare support for trans-sisterhood as well as sisterhood in general, while still opposing the concept of universal female experience.Nodesignation (talk) 18:58, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

As another comment for general editing of this page, it struck me as giving a lot of focus to perspectives and voices that are not transfeminist (particularly a lot of cis and/or male voices) and comparatively little focus on what actual transfeminists are saying about transfeminism. In fact, it doesn't look like there are currently any actual quotes from trans women on this page. Can you imagine if the Feminism page only had quotes from men? That balance seems like a problem to me and should be corrected.Nodesignation (talk) 18:58, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

GID - no longer a disorder it is a dysphoria - DSM 5 Update

I am citing for your reference one of the recent updates sent out about the DSM 5 change of status for GID - Gender Identity Dysphoria ( last classified as a disorder )

the line to the entire pdf is attached below.

"In the upcoming fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), people whose gender at birth is contrary to the one they identify with will be diagnosed with gender dysphoria. This diagnosis is a revision of DSM-IV’s criteria for gender identity disorder and is intended to better characterize the experiences of affected children, adolescents, and adults.

Respecting the Patient, Ensuring Access to Care DSM not only determines how mental disorders are defined and diagnosed, it also impacts how people see themselves and how we see each other. While diagnostic terms facilitate clinical care and access to insurance coverage that supports mental health, these terms can also have a stigmatizing effect.

DSM-5 aims to avoid stigma and ensure clinical care for individuals who see and feel themselves to be a different gender than their assigned gender. It replaces the diagnostic name “gender identity disorder” with “gender dysphoria,” as well as makes other important clarifications in the criteria. It is important to note that gender nonconformity is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition."


It is critical for us, to maintain current awareness of emerging insights, information and shifts, when it comes to all forms of health and wellness. Please Update any documentation to reflect this change. Further reading on current state of health information for trans individuals can be found via; CPATH - Canadian Professional Association of Trans Health Providers WPATH - World Professional Association of Trans Health Providers

Sexualsherpa (talk) 14:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC) Bradley West.[1]

http://www.dsm5.org/documents/gender%20dysphoria%20fact%20sheet.pdf

References

  1. ^ DSM5.org

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Transfeminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:18, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Transfeminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Transfeminism/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
==LGBT rating==

In spite of the obvious amount of work that has gone into it, i'm afraid i have to keep the start class rating for this article for now.

The main reasons:

1) Essay: The article reads like an essay. This is difficult to avoid when the majority is written by one editor, but even so it needs to be re-written in a more encylopedic tone, with more care to ensure clarity for readers not immersed in the complexities of feminist theory (or even non-acedemics altogether!).

2) Lede: Also the lead is far to long and involved, and spends too long explaining TF in terms of other feminisms and by how it is different instead of what it IS. Should be 4 (short) paragraphs: defining the term, stating it's goals, its history, its claim to notability.

3)Citations: There are a lot of outright claims that have no citation. I believe the information is in the references, but it should be cited specifically, otherwise it is too difficult to verify. Also some of the references are given in the text in non-standard or discouraged ways. (eg (see also xxx, weblink)).

Although not compulsory (certainly not for C class), i strongly advise making use of 'footnoted' inline citations. These are easier to cite more than once, and then have the same number, making it easier to see when a reference is used multiple times, even in seperate paragraphs.

Substituted at 01:16, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:35, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Article Critique

There are a few things I saw in this article that would lead to it's improvement. The fourth citation source "transfeminism.org" is unspecific as it is a large website and it appears to be more of a blog than an appropriate resource for an article. My opinion of transfeminism aside, I think the paragraph on "womyn born womyn" does't have much of a point in this article. While it is important to represent opposing views, there just isn't any good, cited information on the topic making it important to the article. --Haleyfallin (talk) 00:45, 28 October 2016 (UTC) Haleyfallin (talk) 00:45, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Andrea Dworkin quote out of context

Dworkin wanted to end all gender roles. She made three points about transsexuality in Women Hating: 1). survival and offering free sex changes, 2). removing gender roles to allow transexuals to integrate without being despised, and 3). androgyny: "Community built on androgynous identity will mean the end of transsexuality as we know it. Either the transsexual will be able to expand his/her sexuality into a fluid androgyny, or, as roles disappear, the phenomenon of transsexuality will disappear." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.21.133.238 (talk) 03:48, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Transgender vs. transsexual

Samclot (talk · contribs), regarding this edit you made, I understand that the term transgender is generally preferred to transsexual in the LGBT community, but keep in mind that these terms are not automatically the same thing and that there are some people who identify as transsexual and/or prefer that term to transgender. The Transgender and Transsexual articles address this. If a source is specifically using the term transsexual, especially with regard to surgery, it is usually best to stick to the source's wording. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:49, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Transfeminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:28, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Inclusion in mainstream feminism

This article claims that straight feminist organizations are "often more welcoming than non-heterosexual specific organizations". This is not my experience. The idea seems quite foreign to me. Also, it spreads the idea of feminism as a movement that can't stop bickering amongst themselves.

Is there any source to this claim? If not, I'm thinking I'll simply remove the claim. The claims about gender-segregated shelters seems, intuitively, more correct. It would however be good with some sources on this, if it is still true. If it is no longer true, this claim might scare transgendered people away from shelters, which would be directly harmful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paninast (talk • contribs) 14:55, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:11, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Globalise:US tag

Currently, the article is written in such a way as to practically only be applicable to the US, especially with all the references to insurance coverage. I don't know nearly enough about this topic to contribute, but it might be helpful to consider (at the very least) European perspectives. Hentheden (talk) 12:55, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


WP:NPOV

Currently the article, especially parts about conflicts with radical feminism, are written in a tone that suggests that transfeminists are right and radical feminists who criticize it are wrong. This is seen for instance in the section title "Transphobia in radical feminism" (implying objectivity), the privileging of opinion pieces by transgender activist authors such as Roz Kaveney, or the flying assumption throughout the article that male-to-female transgender and transsexual individuals are a type of woman, despite this still being a point of contention throughout western culture not only due to feminist opposition but especially also conservative opposition. TaylanUB (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Can you quote the parts that you see having a non-neutral tone? If you meant the section title "Transphobia in radical feminism" itself, there is nothing biased about that section header: all of the words there are neutral, academic terms, none are slang, slurs, or pejoratives, so I don't see what you mean, here. If you meant rather, that the article is unbalanced because there is no equivalent section entitled, "Transphilia in radical feminism" (or more probably, "Pro-trans viewpoints in radical feminism") then feel free to add such a section. The material currently present in the article about Andrea Dworkin would fit nicely there, and there are probably other examples that could be moved, or added to it, such as the Lesbian Avengers.
As to the remainder of your comment, remember that the article topic is "Transfeminism", so one can hardly be surprised to find the viewpoints of transgender feminists represented liberally throughout and representing the majority of the article; that's what the article is about (see WP:AT). There is no need in an article about "Transfeminism" to provide "equal time" to arguments of those opposed to it, other than a brief summary perhaps; a detailed survey of opposing views can go in another article named for it.
By analogy: in an article about views supporting the institution of slavery, you would expect to read about pro-slavery viewpoints, and indeed, that's what "Defense of Slavery" is all about. There is no need to fill up half of that article with anti-slavery viewpoints in order to achieve some sort of misguided "equal time" for the anti-slavery argument. Here as well, that's what the article is about, so it's perfectly fine and in accordance with policy that the content of a pro-slavery article match the title and be about pro-slavery arguments, even though such views are contrary to 99.9% of public and academic opinions on the subject. The pro-slavery article does not have a tone which "suggests that pro-slavers are right and abolitionists who criticize it are wrong." The section header "Proslavery Christians", does not have a role in any kind of false objectivity owing to the fact that nearly the entire country is Christian and that this is seen as a virtue; the fact that Western Civilization's most revered men of philosophy and letters "as varied as Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, and John Locke accepted slavery as part of a proper social system" does not imply that the Pro-slavery article "has a flying assumption throughout the article that" slaves are a lower element on the social class and that this is a supported argument. It merely reports what reliable sources say about the Pro-slavery argument, because that's what that article is about. Exactly the same thing pertains here. Mathglot (talk) 06:41, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Sex-segregated shelters and sexual assault support centers are not particularly reluctant to accept transfeminists

This sentence: Groups such as the Lesbian Avengers accept transfeminists, while others reject them. Particularly reluctant are sex-segregated shelters and sexual assault support centers. [citation needed]...

has no citation, and I also couldn't find a citation to support this (however I did find a source which says the number of sexual assault centers with explicitly trans & LGBT outreach is increasing). Should that just be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IllQuill (talk • contribs) 19:15, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

IllQuill, good catch. The whole section, Inclusion in mainstream feminism is rife with the ongoing conflation in this article between trans women and transfeminists. The second sentence you quote above as written is nonsense, it refers to trans women, not trans feminists (there's no such thing as a shelter which accepts trans women, but not transfeminists). The first sentence about Lesbian Avengers likewise refers to trans women, not transfeminists; I've fixed those assertions. The second one still needs a source.
However, it's questionable whether these statements should even be included in this section at all, given that the intro sentence talks about transfeminists struggling for acceptance within mainstream feminism, and the comments about acceptance of trans women by lesbian groups or shelters has zero to do with that. If you feel the sentences should be removed entirely (or moved to a more appropriate location), I'd support that. Mathglot (talk) 20:53, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Missing edits

Looking over the revision history of this page, two edits appear to be missing and inaccessible, by User:Algo8910 with time stamps 18:16, 23 June 2016‎ and 18:19, 23 June 2016‎. I find this more than a little unusual and curious, considering this is supposed to be a user-edited wiki committed to transparency. What if I wanted to look at the old revisions and source whatever claims this user was making that ended up being condemned to oblivion? What could have been done that would merit this? Even spam usually does not get this sort of treatment. Jan sewi (talk) 10:38, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

@Jan sewi:, you are right that spam can be retrieved from history, but certain kinds of defamatory material and content with copyright issues are permanently removed so they are not visible even to administrators. See WP:OVERSIGHT. Mathglot (talk) 21:10, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

some possible edits

Hi everyone! I am a masters student in gender studies. I was thinking of making the following edits to the page, and since I am very new to wikipedia editing I'd really appreciate any comments or suggestions. You can check my sandbox to see what I have, but I am also copying it here. I want to add this to intro to reflect the more recent discussion on the definiton and use of transfeminism, trans/feminisms. "Transfeminism is the site within which activists and academics try to imagine the relations among gender, sex, sexuality and embodiment in ways that promote trans peoples and women’s liberation together, in ways that account for these differences. These differences are not solely about gender or sex; they are about nationality, class, race and ability as they affect women’s lives. Given that they play out in different social settings and constitute various subjectivities recent articulations of transfeminism use the "/" sign to signify the complicated nature of such explorations.[1][2] Therefore, rather than agreeing on one theory or framework for understanding what gender or sexuality is, trans/feminisms work to explore how those relations can be reimagined in politically useful ways.[3][2][4]"

and i want to add "Transfeminism In Relation To Trans Identities" to major issues part. I discuss the medical and social model and how describe their relation to transfeminism.

"Explanatory models of trans identity are important because politics and study of trans peoples depend on certain assumptions even if they are not explicitly stated. The models that are used to explain trans identities and experiences are often related to the authors assumptions about body, gender, sex and politics.

There are two major explanations of trans identity that trans people appeal to in mainstream trans activism and in academia. These explanations can be covered under two main frameworks that correspond to social and medical models of trans identity. These models are also distinguished as wrong body narrative associated with medical model and beyond-the-binary framework associated with social model.

Beyond the binary model is a social constructivist model, which takes both sex and gender as social constructions and emphasize trans peoples subjectivity concerning the right to express their gender in any way they choose.This model is much influenced by Judith Butler's work.This model has been criticized for failing to account for and erasing trans peoples experiences.

Medical model supposes a difference between biological sex and gender identity that is often called gender dysphoria and treats this issue through medical intervention. Although medical model has been criticized for pathologizing trans people by some prominent activists, some other academics and activists have appealed to the wrong body model, saying that transsexuality might be a biological condition of being born in the wrong body and should be understood as an embodied condition rather than a construction.

Academic articulations of what is called transfeminism started with The Transfeminist Manifesto in which trans identities are largely formulated according to social beyond the binary model. Writing that that sex and gender are both socially constructed and social institutions such as medicine, religion or law are oppressive due to their social power in defining one’s social identity, Koyomo also suggests that a politics of purity that excludes and punished trans (and non-trans) women’s expression of their gender identities is also oppressive to women. In this vein, Koyoma articulates transfeminism as the grounds for political coalition among feminists that engage with class, race, sexuality and other issues while working toward the goal of women’s liberation.

On the other hand, there are others like Julia Serano and Jay Prosser, who are more closely aligned with the wrong body model. For example, Serano argues for the notion of subconscious sex which may or may not be in alignment with one’s biological sex, and that society bestows privileges upon those who are in alignment. She articulates the troubling implications of seeing trans people as pure social constructs, and considers how, from a materialist view point, biology may also play a role in gendered behaviour. Serano argues that critiquing feminine behaviour as being anti-feminist itself is anti-feminist because femininity is always degraded in the society. Thus her perspective illuminates the oppression trans people and women experience due to expression of femininity. However, she leaves little room for critiquing gendered behaviour that could indeed be problematic for women." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Detefabel (talk • contribs) 21:26, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Femininity

Hi! Under this section of the page, there is a huge chunk of text relating to the Saturday Night Live sketch with Pat. I believe this would be more useful as its own section of examples within feminism, Having it placed here makes the page seem like an essay rather than an encyclopedic work. --Peterpiscera7 (talk) 08:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

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): Dv336.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

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): Ebrault, Kaitlin 121, Dresnick95. Peer reviewers: Iriszhao0619, Msoposky, Tarapark96.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

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): Kjc377.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2018 and 21 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Detefabel.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Transfeminism/Archive_1&oldid=1153075961"