Jump to content

Talk:Trans woman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Transwoman)


    Semi-protected edit request on 20 November 2023

    Hello, I'm writing to tell you that a mistake has been made in this article. You should change it from "A trans woman is a woman" to "A trans woman is a person who identifies as a woman" because of the following reasons:

    1. Saying this confuses the reader into thinking that a trans woman is actually a biological female. 2. This is leftist ideology newspeak.

    Back to the first point, a woman or male is determined by genetical markers in the 23rd chromosome pair which are XX and XY for female and male respectively. This is common biological knowledge and a source can be looked upon anywhere, including every encyclopedia that exists. 78.60.112.253 (talk) 21:44, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done: The current wording is the result of extensive discussion, during which a great many sources were evaluated. Please see the discussion archives linked in one of the yellow boxes near the top of this page. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 21:47, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We insist:
    A trans woman is not an "adult human female".
    Change it. 90.167.86.20 (talk) 10:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You can insist all you like, but the wording comes after careful discussion and consensus – not demands. — Czello (music) 10:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The consensus of a few doesn't make it true.
    The statement is false and contradicts the definition of "woman" - which is linked to this article. 90.167.86.20 (talk) 11:27, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Consensus building is how Wikipedia works. As you're using words like "true" and "false", I'd urge you to read WP:TRUTH. — Czello (music) 11:33, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Verify this for me:
    How a female can be a male.
    How two wiki entrances can be verified and in contradiction with each other, at the same time. 90.167.86.20 (talk) 11:44, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This isn't a debating forum – we go by what reliable sources say. — Czello (music) 11:45, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No. We don't have to take this nonsense seriously at Wikipedia. Get out of here. LesbianTiamat (talk) 02:00, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected edit request on 27 March 2024

    In the last paragraph of 'Terminology' change "The term has historically been applies to people..." to "The term has historically been applied to people..." PolyCloud (talk) 05:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 05:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Definition is Flawed

    The point being made by previous attempts to improve this article is that the article linked to the word "woman" defines that word as "adult human female." The definition of "trans woman" is therefore not only circular, it's illogical as it also requires that a trans woman is "assigned male at birth." The definition cannot require that they're both male and female as that would make them literally hermaphroditic (a biological impossibility in mammals), which is both an incorrect definition of what trans women essentially are and is statistically inconsistent with reality. Conversely, it also inherently and unequivocally (and correctly) implies that trans women can't have been conceived and born female which further bolsters the point that the definition in the linked article of "woman" is contradictory.

    Furthermore, the usage of the phrase "assigned at birth" implies both ambiguity and discretion (on the part of medical staff) at birth when sex is determined by the sperm at the moment of conception. This article is based on a poorly written definition that fails the most basic linguistic and scientific standards used in any other context. More alarmingly, the article fails to even remotely acknowledge, let alone address, the lack of real consensus that this very discussion should represent. In nearly any other context, but especially one regarding the definition of a word in which a subgroup of an essentially excluded group (in this case, "men") can now be included, there would be a "Definition Controversy" section but this article conspicuously lacks that.

    A better definition is: "a trans woman is a man who identifies as, or whose gender identity aligns with that of, a woman." This definition is not only succinct, it doesn't contradict itself. It also doesn't compromise the definition of "woman," which must remain intact in order for the term and identity of "trans woman" to have any subsequent meaning as it contains the word in it. Tpetross (talk) 04:32, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    We don't go by what editors' personal analyses conclude. We go by what reliable sources say. And they do not say "a trans woman is a man who identifies as, or whose gender identity aligns with that of, a woman". EvergreenFir (talk) 04:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]