Template talk:Transgender topics

"Queer heterosexuality"
This has nothing to do with trans people. Tombomp (talk/contribs) 21:27, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I second this, and believe it should be removed from the template. Is there anyone who has a valid reason it should be included on the template, before I remove it?Ariadne (talk) 15:08, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Gender
I think it would be interesting to make this sidebar a bit more general: it could be renamed to Gender instead of Transgender. To me, it would make sense to put the sidebar on the page Gender, and to include the gender identities woman and man. Intersex is a physical condition, and maybe no-one identifies themselves as such (?), but I think it should be included as well. A lot of (international) Wikipedia visitors who look for information about transgender may not know of the terms gender and intersex, and it's a good thing to invite these people to read about it. Laurier (talk) 09:24, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * It's possible that a separate list grouping for "Related concepts" would address this issue. Trankuility (talk) 10:53, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Laurier, since this template is specifically about transgender aspects, I see no need to Rename it to Gender topics and/or broaden its scope. We have Template:Gender and sexual identities and Template:Gender studies for other gender matters; both of those templates are at the bottom of the Gender article. I'm also sure that people are generally familiar with the term gender. Also, regarding this edit you made to the Gender article, which I reverted (followup note here), that concerned a different transgender template: Template:Transgender sidebar. Flyer22 (talk) 22:07, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I struck part of my post above because I remember that this is the talk page for Template:Transgender sidebar; the talk page name should align with the template name, though. Flyer22 (talk) 22:10, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Okay, well, it was worth a try! ;-) I still think the term gender is not as familiar to a lot of (international) visitors as one might hope, but I know Wikipedia is not a dictionary and not an activist forum. Thank you for replying, though! Laurier  (talk) 08:24, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Add more on social issues
Hi, it would be helpful to add more links to social, political and legal issues, like Transgender people in sports. Maybe the legal section could be expanded? Trankuility (talk) 11:39, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Do identities besides transgender belong on this template? Is it misnamed?
Thought I should flag that there is a conversation regarding the above questions happening over at Talk:Pangender that really should be happening here instead. --Pfhorrest (talk) 05:23, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Proposal to change logo
Currently the Monica Helms flag is being presented in this template as a symbol of trans issues. I think the flag is problematic for a few reasons - I do not know what the best symbol is, but there is a unicode symbol for transgender - ⚧ - described at Gender_symbol. I propose that we change the United States flag symbol to the more neutral unicode symbol. Thoughts from others?  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  20:02, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Controversy around individualism of the artist
 * close association between the artist and the flag, when we could use an image which is not closely related to a particular person
 * the flag is a recently created symbol (~2000, but media records start around 2010) and a more timeless depiction might be chosen
 * it reflects United States culture when a more international symbol would be desireable
 * What is the specific controversy around Monica Helms? Funcrunch (talk) 21:26, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I wrote too pointedly. She is only controversial in the sense that she is an artist and activist with her own opinions, so I changed "controversy" to "individualism". She is controversial in the sense that any individual doing bold things without the backing of an established organization is likely to be at odds with others, and the controversy is not any deeper than that. I understand that the artist has debated with others, which is fine, but taking any position with any amount of controversy brings context and baggage into mentions of their name.
 * I got the idea to post from a trans activist group in NYC who did not want to use that particular flag because they said that the artist has sought to be noted as the originator of the flag and to be named in conversations around its use. I think it is fair to give credit, but Wikipedia is highly influential in this space and credit which Wikipedia grants can have profound value. I hesitate to recognize an individual mostly acting alone as someone who needs to be remembered for all trans activism worldwide in all circumstances perpetually when this symbol is so new. If Wikipedia presents the symbol broadly in this template where trans issues are discussed, then that seems like an editorial choice to me and to wield more influence in favor of one person than I am sure it is right for Wikipedia editors to grant. I would prefer a symbol that has most of its meaning in concept behind the symbol, and I worry that too much of the flag is tied to the artist who wished to be named as the originator. Thoughts?
 *  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  22:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you have a link to Helms stating that she wishes to be credited for use of this flag, etc.? I don't doubt what you or the folks in NYC are saying, I just would like to see more context. Funcrunch (talk) 23:50, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Since the Monica Helms flag is the established symbol, shouldn't it stay? Charlotte Allison (Morriswa) (talk) 00:46, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Related section
I propose a "Related" section for links to areas that are not transgender topics, but intersect them. For example, LGBT, Intersex, DSM, minority stress, sexual orientation. It might be a challenge to keep the list under control, but this seems to have worked out ok with Template:Intersex. Related links help to recognize intersectionalities and may also help users distinguish issues and find information. Trankuility (talk) 23:27, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Recent change
I do not think this is an improvement. Please explain. Also, the edit summary should say more about what you are doing, please. --David Tornheim (talk) 23:04, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Isn't the "fictional" redundant? And surely the "Characters" should link to the characters? Looked like a mistake to me, why don't you think it is an improvement? SpeakForMe (talk) 23:09, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No. Not all characters in film are fictional.  In documentaries, they are based on real people, e.g. Times of Harvey Milk. --David Tornheim (talk) 23:12, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough. SpeakForMe (talk) 23:30, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Detransition as identity
Please see talk subject here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:LGBT_sidebar#Detransition_as_identity - A145GI15I95 (talk) 18:51, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Queer heterosexuality
, what is wrong with including queer heterosexuality in the sidebar? Per its page it concerns "heterosexual persons who show nontraditional gender expressions, or who adopt gender roles that differ from the hegemonic masculinity and femininity of their particular culture". The subject seems relevant enough for inclusion in this see also section due to this relation. I don't see anywhere it fits in the LGBT sidebar and seems most relevant here. Helper201 (talk) 06:22, 18 January 2021 (UTC)


 * That article doesn't say anything about transgender people, so including in the template as though it is relevant to this topic would appear to be WP:Original research. Crossroads -talk- 19:11, 18 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I did place it within the see also section as I agree it doesn't specifically mention transgender but it does relate to something very similar and related in gender identity and expression. What about placing the template on Gender and sexual identities? Perhaps under the other section? Helper201 (talk) 22:29, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think it could go there, under "sexual orientation identities", "other". Crossroads -talk- 04:54, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I initially placed it there but then moved it to the see also section. It seems more relevant to gender over sexuality as far as I can see from reading the page. Helper201 (talk) 11:18, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Colors of the transgender pride flag
The colors of the transgender topics template are currently 55cdfc f7a8b8 ffffff

but based on the svg of the flag in wikimedia commons they should be 5bcefa f5a9b8 ffffff

I will make the necessary changes if I can find a good source for the 'true' colors if any. 2602:3F:E6A5:8F00:69A5:B242:D065:1E96 (talk) 04:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

According to the Proposal for Transgender Flag Emoji, "The flag is based on five pastel bands. Pastel Blue (RGB #5BCEFA), Pastel Pink (RGB #F5A9B8) and white, repeating horizontally." I will edit the hex values accordingly. 2602:3F:E6A5:8F00:69A5:B242:D065:1E96 (talk) 06:42, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Pinapinaaine
Hello All, as part of Wiki Loves Pride I began a stub for pinapinaaine from Tuvalu and I wondered if the term could be added to the template alongside fa'afafine, etc.? Many thanks, Lajmmoore (talk) 14:11, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

"Unlawful killings"
Let us maybe just call them "Murders"? Симуран (talk) 20:04, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Done, since there haven't been any objections. --Симуран (talk) 07:21, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Images perhaps not working in Template:Transgender sidebar
Looking at the article Third gender I saw there was an image provided in the source code for the template Template:Transgender sidebar. However no image is displayed on the actual page. I don't know the inner workings of this so I'm posting this comment here so perhaps someone with the know-how might find out what's happening, thank you.  Wandering  Morpheme   23:00, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


 * It looks like the image was added back in 2006, and at some point this got mashed together with the sidebar. The image and caption are irrelevant to the article, so I have removed. Wracking  talk! 01:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Unjustified content removal
It's not acceptable to remove relevant links over personal objections (WP:IDONTLIKEIT) to sourced content. The link to trans-exclusionary radical feminism clearly belongs here, in the same section as the anti-gender movement, with which it is closely linked (or a subset), as discussed by sources in the target article. --Amanda A. Brant (talk) 00:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I agree the link is relevant in this template, but placing it under the "Discrimination" heading was an absurd violation of NPOV, and the parentheses serving to imply it is another name for, or subset of, the anti-gender movement were also editorialising that goes beyond what the GCF article itself says, and certainly far beyond what there is consensus for at the GCF talk page. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 19:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Accordingly, I have moved the link to the See Also section. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 19:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The target article clearly supports it being included in the same section as the anti-gender movement. Those are two political movements or ideologies that are defined by their opposition to transgender rights, and countless academic sources discuss trans-exclusionary radical feminism as a subset of the anti-gender movement, or at the very least closely linked to it. Having anti-gender movement in one section, and the TERF movement in another, is absurd. Why is Catholic opposition to trans rights discimination, and not the anti-trans ideology that started as a fringe movement in radical feminism? Readers will expect to find these two closely related phenomena next to each other, not in entirely separate sections. Indeed, both articles very prominently mention the other, including in a hatnote. But we could remove the parentheses and include them as separate entities. --Amanda A. Brant (talk) 20:50, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It is not a violation of WP:NPOV to place Gender-critical feminism under the "Discrimination" category. From the article: Gender-critical feminism [...] is an ideology or movement that opposes what it refers to as "gender ideology": the concept of gender identity and transgender rights, especially gender self-identification.
 * The ideology/movement opposes transgender rights. The article is included in Category:Discrimination against transgender people. If you dispute that, discuss at Talk:Gender-critical feminism. Otherwise, please stop. This is disruptive. Wracking  talk! 23:13, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed, the removal was wholly inappropriate and unjustified. --Amanda A. Brant (talk) 01:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)