Talk:Amber McLaughlin

Appropriate gender identity to use in article

Isn't it kind of revolting to call this rapist and murderer a woman when he's a man? 2A0B:6204:34C8:AF00:F8E7:5FAD:6598:AFFA (talk) 09:45, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Read MOS:GENDERID. XenonNSMB (talk, contribs) 16:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

User:XenonNSMB, MOS:GENDERID doesn't actually apply here, since MOS:GENDERID quite explicitly restricts its scope to living people, which McLaughlin obviously isn't – and a 2021 RFC to extend its scope to include the non-living failed to reach a consensus. That said, I think there is a broader point here, about whether MOS:GENDERID should actually apply to people whose sole notability is due to their commission of heinous crimes (and/or the ensuing investigation/trial/conviction/appeals/punishment), so I've opened a discussion on that topic. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 23:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Actually, while restrictions against including deadnames are specific to living people, other provisions - like which pronouns to use and which gender identity to reflect in articles - are not. So it is still true that MOS:GENDERID does mandate female pronouns in this article, even though it doesn't prevent the mention of the subject's former name. Newimpartial (talk) 15:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I have read the MOS GENDERD document and I quote from it here:

"If a living transgender or non-binary person was not notable under a former name (a deadname), it should not be included in any page (including lists, redirects, disambiguation pages, category names, templates, etc.), even in quotations, even if reliable sourcing exists.

Now that quote discussing living, not dead. Logic applies that it would refer to both. It also mentions "not notable". Quite right.

Here are some notable pieces of fact. He was born Scott A. McLaughlin. Was tried and convicted as Scott A. McLaughlin. He never changed his name legally to Amber Mclaughlin, and his prison and death records show Scott A. McLaughlin. Amber at best is a nickname/alias given. There is no example shown that validates the use of the pseudo-term "Deadnaming" as he did nothing to "put it to death". This is transwashing actual events/people and doing it here to normalize and convey the editors socially constructed ideology by weaving it into actual historical events . Compelled speech. I am sure this was a oversight on your parts. As soon as I am able I will change it for you, don't worry. IbringFacts (talk) 06:39, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

No, you will not be changing it without consensus to do so. Whether or not her name was legally changed isn't the point. — Czello ^(music) 07:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Why are you okay with erasing the fact that his victim was raped and murdered by a male? He’s not a woman. When you violate others with the body you were born with, you lose the right to your preferences in gender. Sure, maybe the article has to call him a woman, but why do you think it’s acceptable to refer to him as she/her in a comment? KylieNectar (talk) 00:43, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

User:KylieNectar I think you raise some valid points myself. The problem is, the issue is not decided on this page, it is a site-wide policy question, this page is just about how to try to apply those site-wide policies to this article. The actual policy is on the page MOS:GENDERID. Note the first paragraph, about pronoun usage, doesn't explicitly say whether it applies to the dead or only to the living, but in practice it gets applied to both equally. By contrast, the second paragraph onwards about "dead names" only applies to the living, so arguably has less relevance to this article. The first paragraph makes no exceptions for criminals, etc. Maybe it should, but if you want to argue that, you need to make the argument at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Biography not here. And I am going to warn you, given the political/ideological leanings of the majority of Wikipedia editors, I doubt you are going to succeed in the argument, irrespective of whether your arguments are good or bad. But if despite that, you want to try to argue the case, go ahead – but do it there, not here. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 06:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for four constructiveness. However, I am not arguing that we refer to Scott as his birth gender on his wiki page, because I understand I can’t argue for that here. I’m taking issue with Czello specifically using she/her in comments not on the page KylieNectar (talk) 00:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

People are going to disagree about when to use preferred pronouns. I understand your position, that it is wrong to do so in a case like this, but other people take an absolutist stance (they should always be used no matter what). I don't think complaining about which pronouns other editors choose to use in their comments is very useful. It may be one of those things about which it is better to "agree to disagree". SomethingForDeletion (talk) 02:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

It's not erased at all. We mention that she's transgender. We even list her birth name. Also please don't try to police my comments. — Czello ^(music) 07:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

This isn’t about the page itself. It’s you using she/her in comments when this person is a rapist who used trans people as a weapon. Rapists don’t deserve to have their identity respected and it’s disturbing that you don’t realize that. KylieNectar (talk) 00:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Again, please don't try to police my comments. — Czello ^(music) 06:24, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Please stop being a (Personal attack removed) KylieNectar (talk) 17:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

lmao, wikipedia is a joke Casint (talk) 22:18, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Especially when he changed his identity AFTER committing the crime and being sentenced. Huh… a man who raped and killed a woman suddenly deciding he’s a woman after being punished… surely he doesn’t have any ulterior motives at all and truly feels that way! Bullshit. He wanted to get a sentence repeal/be transferred to a woman’s prison and cause a media circus in hopes of getting a lighter sentence. Calling him a transgender woman does nothing but actively harm actual transgender women and victims of abuse in general. When we allow a rapist and murderer to suddenly identify as the opposite gender after facing Justice, and do not acknowledge the logical fallacy there, we make it harder for actual transgender people to exist in society. I don’t think a single trans person would agree that this man deserves to be apart of the community. KylieNectar (talk) 00:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Suggested addition to "See also"

There are a number of similarities between Amber McLaughlin and Isla Bryson, as both are trans women who were convicted of sexual crimes (and in McLaughlin's case also murder) committed before they transitioned. I think something like this should be added to the "See also" section:

* Isla Bryson, a Scottish trans woman who was convicted of two rapes committed before her transition

Would anyone object to this addition? If no, then I would appreciate if someone added this, because I can't due to the article being protected. - 188.176.174.30 (talk) 23:51, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2024

96.227.101.162 (talk) 03:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

 Not done — No Request Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 03:52, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Sex Offender Man

Scott was a man. It said so on his death certificate. He was not legally named Amber. His death certificate called him Scott. I am not transgender or homosexual, but if I was I would not want this lunatic to be any part of my community. He was so disgusting that a jury of his peers decided he had to die for what he had done. No amount of disrespect is too great for Mr.Scott McLaughlin. 96.227.101.162 (talk) 03:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)