Talk:Anti-gender movement/Archive 3

Need to make the lead neutral
I have repeatedly tried to address the issue of NPOV violation in this article but each time my post has been deleted without any explanation. Please stop doing this.

The whole article, especially the lead, has a massive left-wing bias (as noted by many other commenters). The claim that this "movement" is only restricted to right-wingers is extremely dubious and only made by far-left sources. Highly reliable sources show that majority of people in the US and the UK suport the beliefs of this so-called movement. This must be mentioned in the lead instead of making it appear that only right-wing loonies believe in it. 2001:569:7EFA:5D00:FD49:3AB4:4B6C:19C3 (talk) 12:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The sources you link don't mention the subject of the article. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  18:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The sources discuss about public opinion on the issues mentioned in this article but doesn't seem to directly mention the subject. Citing them will probably be considered improper synthesis?  Jack234567 (talk) 20:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, see wp:or (t &#183; c)  buidhe  00:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Not neutral
This article reads as an enumeration of ‘gender critical is fascism’. Please stop this very biased agenda.

The anti-gender movement indeed started from the conservative and alt-right side, but consists currently also out of a wide variety of people. Detransers with trans regret are not conservative or alt-right. It is very disrespectful to corner those poor people in such a corner. Concerned parents (which is an eufemism for parents in panic) with kids that come out as trans from one day to another, totally out of the blue (ROGD) are not radical alt-right parents. Also writers such as Abigail Shrier, Debra Soh, Sasha Ayad and in particular Dr Az Hakeem are progressive, not conservative at all. Hakeem is a goth even and worries about young gay persons mostly. He also worries about what he calls as ‘parents with Transhausen by proxy’, as a variant of Munchhausen by proxy. Provocative yes, but this has nothing to do with a political corner. 2A02:A443:5030:1:79EC:A8A:EDE2:2C62 (talk) 10:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Source that any of these individuals are affiliated with the anti-gender movement? (t &#183; c)  buidhe  11:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * There is no such thing as a ‘movement’. Nobody has a membership card. This article is very bad and not neutral. Just bullying people with other thoughts. Imagine you are a detrans person with regret and cornered for being a Trumper while you have just discovered you were gay instead of transsexual. The thinkers i mention are totally reasonable thinkers with gender critical views for valid reasons. 2A02:A443:5030:1:79EC:A8A:EDE2:2C62 (talk) 11:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Please discuss these edits but there is no consensus for the change removing that most gender critical folks are on the right wing. Andre🚐 11:20, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The sentences i deleted were no RS. RS is peer reviewed studies. Not citing some kind of trans activist who had the opportunity to say something political in a big news outlet. 2A02:A443:5030:1:79EC:A8A:EDE2:2C62 (talk) 11:39, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Have a read of WP:V and WP:RS. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You don’t have to teach me with these guidelines. I know how it works. The history of this talk page clearly shows a pattern: readers that don’t identify as being ultra right making an argument that the article is highly unneutral. I know US media has plenty of articles that support the view of this article, and that is essentially the problem itsself. European sources that aren’t in English give a totally different view, but you are not capable to read the EU perspective since you cannot read any of those languages. The issue of the Tavistock scandal and the measures taken bij all Scandinavian countries regarding retraction of GAMT was not a far right choice. Read the Cass review or check what Az Hakeem has to say about that issue. It’s also in his book Detrans. But nobody wants to check this dude. And that is the fundamental problem. 2A02:A443:5030:1:79EC:A8A:EDE2:2C62 (talk) 11:57, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * There is not even a article about Tavistock scandal. 2A02:A443:5030:1:79EC:A8A:EDE2:2C62 (talk) 12:00, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Google translate:
 * https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tavistock-schandaal
 * https://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_protocol
 * 2A02:A443:5030:1:79EC:A8A:EDE2:2C62 (talk) 12:03, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You clearly don't know how it works, so I again suggest reading the linked policies. And remember, this is WP:NOTAFORUM. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 19:51, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Title is nonsense
The title of the article is obviously nonsense given that most members of that movement believe in genders. It’s a simple matter of logic. Please don’t delete other editors’ commments. Rather debate here as a rational person should do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ExperiencedArticleFixerBot (talk • contribs) 19:27, 4 December 2023 (UTC)


 * While I might not have removed this post, the request is not actionable. Wikipedia article titles are based on what reliable sources call it, and you've provided no sources that use another name nor any evidence such a name better fits the WP:article title criteria. Compare the move request I made yesterday at Talk:Immunomodulatory_imide_drug, where there is a concrete proposal of a specific name supported by evidence. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  19:37, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Concur with buidhe. Mathglot (talk) 11:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)