Talk:Beira's Place/Archives/2023/May

Two options for the lead
There's a slow-mo edit war going over some language in the lead. The two options are: Which would editors prefer? I'm opposed to B, as I don't see any reliable sources that use their own voice to call trans women "biologically male". I'd also be fine with simplifying to: Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:37, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * A: "it does not hire or provide services to people assigned male at birth, including trans women"
 * B: "it does not include trans women among staff or recipients of care, on the basis that they are biologically male"
 * C: "it does not hire or provide services to trans women"
 * A It says what it needs to say just as it is. I'm not sure we should have even started the "including" bit - although I understand why we have - but we could end up with quite a list of gender identities if we aren't careful — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukewarmbeer (talk • contribs) 16:38, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * A. B is not only a dogwhistle, but also uses more convoluted language for no reason. A is better than C since AFAIK it applies to all AMABs, not just trans women specifically. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 00:52, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed with A. I'm fine with C also but B is very bad. Loki (talk) 01:47, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Looks like we have an edit already there in the artcle which I think is brilliant. It says who it’s for and by definition all other groups are excluded. We don’t need to list or describe them.

"Beira's Place is a privately owned and operated domestic violence service that was formed to provide specialist support to women assigned female at birth aged 16 and over in Edinburgh and the Lothians who are survivors of sexual violence.[4][5][6]" How about that for the lead?

Lukewarmbeer (talk) 05:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Let's not kid ourselves: this organization's notability comes entirely from its exclusion of trans women. Many sources cited in the article specifically mention that Beira's Place excludes trans women, and most of the sources frame the founding as part of the whole ongoing British TERF shebang. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 14:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Trans people are irrelevant to that organisation so If that is it”s only claim to notability I’d suggest deletion.
 * Any thoughts on that? Lukewarmbeer (talk) 15:03, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Our article Women's shelter has a little on the subject
 * “certain shelters discriminate against women from other countries or who identify as lesbian or transgender”
 * Could that not be expanded upon and Beira's Place condensed to a line or two (with a citation) as an example. That surely is enough Wikipedia space for a subject with as little going for is as simply being described as “anti trans” or “trans exclusionary”   Lukewarmbeer (talk) 15:16, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed with Maddy here. Any description of this organization that does not clearly describe its main source of notability is worthless. Loki (talk) 17:59, 29 May 2023 (UTC)