|
The fact that we want to use confusing language, diverse from the real biological gender — which is factual — means Wikipedia supports gender ideology and does not report objective information. Let's say I declare I identify as a Christmas tree: then you should say I am a Christmas tree? Obviously no, if we don't want to generate confusion and misinformation. And in my opinion this is a similar situation. Let me know what you think De Cerreizo test (talk) 20:20, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Christmas tree you say? EvergreenFir (talk) 20:27, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @EvergreenFir are you kidding me? I raised serious concerns. De Cerreizo test (talk) 20:43, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- We are using language here, and language has never been primarily about the precise description of scientific items. We have long referred to ships as "she", though they arrive without large gametes; prior to that, they were referred to in male terms despite not having small gametes. Or "Christmas tree" is a wonderful example. We refer to aluminum Christmas trees, despite the fact that they are not "trees" in a biological sense and never have been. We also use the term to refer to the starting lights at a drag race, despite the fact that few drag races are held on Christmas. Where Wikipedia's language is at now is roughly where mainstream usage is at at the moment, and if that doesn't suit your particular ideology, then... well, language has a habit of changing, and perhaps it will swing to your view in the future. (I'm not sure who this "we" is you're referring to; at least with the account you used for this message, you have never edited anything on the English Wikipedia other than this page and your User and talk pages. You have stated that you have an account on the Italian Wikipedia, but this is an essay for the English language site.) If you want a better understanding of why we have chosen the gender language we have, read the essay -- Wikipedia:Gender identity#I'm the King of Spain addresses specifically things akin to your "I'm a Christmas tree" statement. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 20:47, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @NatGertler Thanks for your answer. You're right, I've never edited English Wikipedia, so I may not be fully understanding how it works. Also, English is not my first language. However, I came across this policy because I was reading an article on a trans person and I got grossly confused by the language. I could partly say, as a counter argument, that using female pronouns referring to ships is not the same, as the English language commonly use those, while for many people reading female language would make believe the subject is a biological female, or vice versa. Similarly, I read the King of Spain section you linked, I think it is not so convincing because it speaks about the claim of having a public position, while this is a question of what one is. Anyway I respect your (referred to all the people who work for Wikipedia) decisions and viewpoints. De Cerreizo test (talk) 20:57, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- If you wanted to see a change in policy or guideline, this would not be the place to do so. This is a place to discuss editing this essay, which is an explanation of some of the thinking behind the guidelines. If one really wanted to make adjustment to how Wikipedia talks of trans individuals, it would be done on the talk page for MOS:GENDERID. However, you should be aware that this decision on how to handle gender identification was not arrived at without large amounts of conversation already, and your arguments which conflate "biological gender" with biological sex are not likely to move the meter much. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 21:12, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
|
