Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
::Just making people aware of canvassing. Incidentally, your view that those two articles are "atrocious" seems to be shared by many on that subreddit.
::Just making people aware of canvassing. Incidentally, your view that those two articles are "atrocious" seems to be shared by many on that subreddit.
::In any case, you've repeated the extreme position that trans women "erase" cis women multiple times , so it's not surprising that you can't see the article's current problems. ] (]) 23:37, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
::In any case, you've repeated the extreme position that trans women "erase" cis women multiple times , so it's not surprising that you can't see the article's current problems. ] (]) 23:37, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
:::Given that you have done this multiple times now, and I know you are ] me, I thought on how I should reply. Ultimately, I decided to state the following: Here you go again with the same "Flyer is against transgender people" nonsense. This is despite ] and the ]. Considering how many times you've implied that I'm transphobic (for reporting on matters that obviously exist, as covered by reliable sources), and (as if an editor being transgender should protect them from being topic-banned and remaining topic-banned), I think it's time I take you to ]. Imply that I'm transphobic one more time, and you will be taken there. It's certainly the case that enough admins are aware of your behavior toward me. And with antics like , you only have yourself to blame. They see what you are doing. They know why you popped up here a day after I made edits to this article. They know your game. Once again, you have sought interaction with me, when I avoid you as much as possible. I wouldn't dare think to alter your posts, for example, but you dare time and time again to alter my posts. And do spare me your "I'm not afraid of you" usual talk, as if this has been been about that.
:::Nowhere have I stated that trans women erase cisgender women. That you have taken my very valid points about using the language you want to use for our medical, anatomy, and sexual articles and have translated it into that is just you seeing what you want to see, as usual, and turning this into a black and white matter when it is more nuanced than that, which is why my arguments on the language you want to use has mainly concerned non-binary people (such as yourself). Typically, trans women are not against a vagina being called a female sex organ. Typically, trans women are not against gendered language. You know, since the vast majority of trans women are binary. You very well know that there is disagreement within the transgender community over these issues, with some in the transgender community referring others as for disagreement on what ''transgender'' means and whether or not ] is needed to be transgender. A lot of transgender women, and not just conservative transgender women, disagree with your viewpoints and argue that gender-neutral language can erase or make them feel displaced, awkward, or give them gender dysphoria. When one of my brothers (yes the one you are familiar with) brought the ] controversy to my attention, I knew what to think because I've seen it for years. It was interesting to see just how many trans women agreed with her, and how many non-binary people attacked her. And the attacking didn't stop there, considering that she for later including trans man ] in one of her videos. I've told you before that not all trans people think alike, and that my circle includes transgender people of different views (including those who think like you). I get along with all of them, or else they wouldn't be within my circle. You stated before that you know that not all transgender people think alike. But time and time again, you frame things as a black and white or as though matters that cisgender and transgender people disagree on aren't also matters of disagreement within the transgender community.
:::You chastise me not only for following Misplaced Pages's rules (which the Misplaced Pages has backed me on when it comes to transgender topics and various other topics I edit at), but also for listening to both sides, or rather all sides, with regard to transgender views. If I at all listen to the "gender critical" side, I'm supposedly transphobic. Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm just not. And I'm not going to keep defending myself to you. The only reason I do so is so that these talk pages don't let your claims go unchallenged. I'm not interested in your views about what is an "extreme position." I am interested in following Misplaced Pages's rules with ]. I asked "And?" with regard to this article being linked to on Reddit because Reddit should have no bearing on what we do at this article except for ] when needed. You keep keep pointing out what is going on with Reddit at these transgender articles, but I've seen no canvassing at this article due to Reddit. This article doesn't get much traction. I called the Feminist views on transgender topics and TERF articles atrocious because they are. And my statement on that is no different than others on those talk pages who have called the articles bad articles or similar. It is not as though one has to feel that those articles are decent or good articles in order to not be transphobic. I am done discussing something like this with you. ] (]) 00:58, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
Revision as of 00:58, 8 November 2019
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
This article was created or improved during Wiki Loves Pride, ].Wiki Loves PrideWikipedia:Wiki Loves PrideTemplate:Wiki Loves Pride talkWiki Loves Pride
A fact from Lesbian erasure appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 July 2019 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that some LGBTQ activists have opposed the use of the term "lesbian erasure", because it has sometimes been used in opposition to transgender rights?
The term "Lesbian erasure" is being used increasingly, and a redirect was needed pending possible creation of an article. After searching around and not finding any really good article or section candidates for it, I created it as a section link to Compulsory heterosexuality#Lesbian erasure. This target is not ideal, as this article is about a specific essay by Adrienne Rich that touches on lesbian erasure, but isn't a general treatment of it.
Yes, I'm hoping it will get its own article. As to your "Debates" suggestion, that would likely be a very long article with a very acrimonious Talk page, of which the size and fury of the talk page history at Feminist views on transgender topics would barely hold a candle. If you neverthless are not afraid to wage the Battle of the That is, L, G, B, T, Q, I, and A., go for it! Mathglot (talk) 23:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
In my opinion, the Queer erasure article should be expanded first. And per what I stated at Talk:Queer erasure, any expansion should be without WP:Synthesis. If the lesbian material starts to take up most of the Queer erasure article, it can be split off into its own article. One might also consider including lesbian erasure material in the Lesbophobia article, just like bisexual erasure material is included in the Biphobia article. As for not wanting to open a can of worms, a Lesbian erasure article will be doing that anyway per the "feminist views on transgender topics" aspect. And I do mean the topic of trans women. I don't think we need a "Debates in the LGBT community" article when issues/debates within the LGBT community are covered within their respective articles, such as Biphobia, Homophobia and Transphobia. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Since this article was created by StudiesWorld, I tweaked it here and here. Yes, the lead should summarize the article, but the primary focus of the lead and overall article should not be on transgender women. Keep WP:Recentism in mind. Furthermore, with as small as this article currently is, the single lead sentence that it currently has can be considered adequate for now. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 09:22, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Comment: there's probably some info to be found on the topic of 'early' gay rights organizations under-focusing (or worse) on lesbians. One would have to see if any scholars have discussed it in terms of this phrase, of course, to avoid snyth an' all that. -sche (talk) 17:54, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
-sche, For this, I think that The Disappearing L might help, but I haven't yet gotten a chance to read it and I'm not sure when, if ever, I will. StudiesWorld (talk) 19:19, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
I read it a year ago. You can see some of its content on Google Books. Also see this 2016 "Dyke Culture and the Disappearing L" Slate source by the same author. It's an adaptation of the book. And, yes, she does address trans women in the book, which you can see in the link I provided. I wasn't surprised by anything in the book. For example, tensions between lesbian women and bisexual or trans women (including those who additionally identify or only identify as queer). Many lesbians don't or won't date/have sex with bisexual women; there are a variety of reasons for this. And a recent study investigated most cisgender people declining to date/have with sex trans people, with trans women getting most of the "not interested" responses. Here on this talk page, I linked to them.us since they go over the research for laypeople. With regard to lesbians, the tensions go beyond dating. The erasure aspect obviously concerns different things, and it's not a minority of lesbians who feel this way. So the article needs work in this regard. But the article should take care not to heavily rely on material from that author or any other author. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:23, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
I have added Lesbian erasure to the "See also" sections of all the articles listed by Mathglot above. It would be preferable to integrate each into the prose of the articles, but lacking time and sources for that, I have at least made the article visible to the casual reader. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 16:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
The sentence Several feminist lesbian activists have lamented the rapidly increasing disappearance of many physical spaces, such as lesbian bars, women's bookstores, and music festivals that were alternative lesbian spaces in which the lesbian subculture thrived. does not currently do a good job of connecting itself to the topic of erasure, as mere disappearance of a bar, e.g. because lesbians stop going to it, is not erasure. The placement of the sentence in the " in the LGBT community" section implies that the bars etc have been erased by(?) the LGBT community, but the sentence does not currently substantiate that. For comparison, the preceding section at least tries to make an argument that the collapse of certain sites was due to "erasure" of them by advertisers. Do we have RS with which to expand this sentence enough to connect it to the topic of erasure, for example by saying something like The disappearance of these spaces has been attributed by to pressure from .? If not, the sentence seems better suited to an article like History of lesbianism... -sche (talk) 20:47, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Weight
I agree with Gwenhope that there are some WP:NPOV problems here. My impression is that the section on trans women, in particular, gives WP:UNDUE weight to gender crits, and doesn't reflect the overall weight of the sources. (Relatedly, it's worth noting that this article was linked on the transphobic subreddit r/GenderCritical a little while back.) WanderingWanda (talk) 21:18, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
I see no supposed undue weight "to gender crits" with regard to the section in question. Gwenhope was alerted to this article in a derogatory fashion that shows severe misunderstanding. What we are not going to do is pretend that WP:Reliable sources do not cover the very real tension between cisgender lesbians and transgender women, including some trans women (for example, Rachel McKinnon) suggesting that cisgender lesbians are transphobic if they do not find transgender women sexually attractive/do not want to date or have sex with transgender women. You know, the suggestion that they have a "genital preference" or that "genital preferences are transphobic." As Aircorn and I made clear at Talk:Transphobia last year, this is not fake news. And your "weight of the sources" search link doesn't support "undue weight" on this specific topic. You and I have "discussed" similarly with regard to cisgender gay men and transgender men. As discussed there (and like I mentioned above), it is the case that the vast majority of cisgender people (lesbians included) have declined dating transgender people (especially transgender women). The study I pointed to above has somewhat attributed this to discrimination/transphobia, but some sources disagree because of what the biology of sexual orientation entails (being sexually attracted to secondary sex characteristics and not a gender identity, which is not a visible entity). What we are not going to do is act as though arguments from transgender authors are more valid than arguments from concerned cisgender lesbians (whether presented by those cisgender lesbians or men or trans women who disagree with the "you should be sexually attracted to me or you are bigoted" line of thinking). This goes beyond radical feminism. The section in question has one paragraph dedicated to one viewpoint, with criticism mixed in. The second paragraph addresses the very real matter of some transgender women calling cisgender women transphobic for not recognizing them as potential sexual partners and that enough trans women object to this shaming of sexuality. It also includes a Claire Heuchan statement. The third paragraph notes that some LGBT activists do not agree with the term lesbian erasure being used in regard to trans women and includes a quote from Carrie Lyell challenging the argument that trans women are pressuring lesbians to accept them as sexual partners. It's all WP:Due. And I see no need for the content to be significantly expanded. This does not need to become another Feminist views on transgender topics or TERF article, and should not. I will also note that cisgender lesbians speaking on being shamed for their sexuality is not the same thing as being pressured to have sex, although the topics are intertwined. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:29, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Just making people aware of canvassing. Incidentally, your view that those two articles are "atrocious" seems to be shared by many on that subreddit.
In any case, you've repeated the extreme position that trans women "erase" cis women multiple times , so it's not surprising that you can't see the article's current problems. WanderingWanda (talk) 23:37, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Given that you have done this multiple times now, and I know you are baiting me, I thought on how I should reply. Ultimately, I decided to state the following: Here you go again with the same "Flyer is against transgender people" nonsense. This is despite your failed witch-hunt at ANI and the vast majority of editors agreeing with me and others to reject the type of activism you've sought to have Misplaced Pages engage in. Considering how many times you've implied that I'm transphobic (for reporting on matters that obviously exist, as covered by reliable sources), and your antics today regarding a very problematic editor (as if an editor being transgender should protect them from being topic-banned and remaining topic-banned), I think it's time I take you to WP:ANI. Imply that I'm transphobic one more time, and you will be taken there. It's certainly the case that enough admins are aware of your behavior toward me. And with antics like this, you only have yourself to blame. They see what you are doing. They know why you popped up here a day after I made edits to this article. They know your game. Once again, you have sought interaction with me, when I avoid you as much as possible. I wouldn't dare think to alter your posts, for example, but you dare time and time again to alter my posts. And do spare me your "I'm not afraid of you" usual talk, as if this has been been about that.
Nowhere have I stated that trans women erase cisgender women. That you have taken my very valid points about using the language you want to use for our medical, anatomy, and sexual articles and have translated it into that is just you seeing what you want to see, as usual, and turning this into a black and white matter when it is more nuanced than that, which is why my arguments on the language you want to use has mainly concerned non-binary people (such as yourself). Typically, trans women are not against a vagina being called a female sex organ. Typically, trans women are not against gendered language. You know, since the vast majority of trans women are binary. You very well know that there is disagreement within the transgender community over these issues, with some in the transgender community referring others as truescum for disagreement on what transgender means and whether or not gender dysphoria is needed to be transgender. A lot of transgender women, and not just conservative transgender women, disagree with your viewpoints and argue that gender-neutral language can erase or make them feel displaced, awkward, or give them gender dysphoria. When one of my brothers (yes the one you are familiar with) brought the Contrapoints controversy regarding non-binary people to my attention, I knew what to think because I've seen it for years. It was interesting to see just how many trans women agreed with her, and how many non-binary people attacked her. And the attacking didn't stop there, considering that she was attacked for later including trans man Buck Angel in one of her videos. I've told you before that not all trans people think alike, and that my circle includes transgender people of different views (including those who think like you). I get along with all of them, or else they wouldn't be within my circle. You stated before that you know that not all transgender people think alike. But time and time again, you frame things as a black and white or as though matters that cisgender and transgender people disagree on aren't also matters of disagreement within the transgender community.
You chastise me not only for following Misplaced Pages's rules (which the Misplaced Pages has backed me on when it comes to transgender topics and various other topics I edit at), but also for listening to both sides, or rather all sides, with regard to transgender views. If I at all listen to the "gender critical" side, I'm supposedly transphobic. Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm just not. And I'm not going to keep defending myself to you. The only reason I do so is so that these talk pages don't let your claims go unchallenged. I'm not interested in your views about what is an "extreme position." I am interested in following Misplaced Pages's rules with WP:Due weight. I asked "And?" with regard to this article being linked to on Reddit because Reddit should have no bearing on what we do at this article except for WP:Semi-protection when needed. You keep keep pointing out what is going on with Reddit at these transgender articles, but I've seen no canvassing at this article due to Reddit. This article doesn't get much traction. I called the Feminist views on transgender topics and TERF articles atrocious because they are. And my statement on that is no different than others on those talk pages who have called the articles bad articles or similar. It is not as though one has to feel that those articles are decent or good articles in order to not be transphobic. I am done discussing something like this with you. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:58, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
