Talk:Discrimination against transgender men

WikiEdu assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2022 and 4 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: RaeStecker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zes9f9 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Citations for Etymology

I had removed the citations for etymology previously as the source is the coiner of the term's blog- which is counted as an unreliable source. Wondering how best to remedy the situation as sourcing the blog would mean it is an 'unreliable source' - though it is the original source. I'm going to add it back in, though I am aware that the trans man who coined transandrophobia is in the middle of writing a book about it, so perhaps that can be cited once published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Transandrosupport (talk • contribs) 20:21, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

See my most recent comment at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Advice on reliable sources; what you really need is a secondary source about the blog, rather than the blog itself. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:22, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Need for secondary sources

Transandrosupport, you've written: "Other attitudes displayed towards transgender men and transmasculine people involve perceiving them as incapable of making their own decisions about their life and transition. This often stems from misogynistic attitudes that affect cis women similarly. Neurodivergent transmasculine people in a particular are singled out for this". This is cited to an essay by JK Rowling, but as far as I can tell, you're suggesting that Rowling is the one doing the singling out, so the source is serving as an example, not as something that verifies those three sentences. If you want to write that neurodivergent transmasculine people in particular are singled out for this, then you need a source that states that. Similarly, you've referenced a claim about Rowling and Shrier targeting trans men to Shrier. Unless Shrier writes something like "JK Rowling and I regularly target trans men", then you need a secondary source here. Rather than using references as examples of something you've observed (this is considered original research), you need to use them to cite sources that directly support the content of the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:58, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

To try to illustrate the issue here, imagine that famous people A, B and C make transphobic statements (primary sources). Newspaper Z (secondary source) then publishes an article, highlighting that several famous people have made transphobic statements. The Wikipedia article can include the claim that transphobic statements have often been made by famous people, referenced to the newspaper article (secondary source), or it can factually report what famous people A, B and C said (citing the primary sources), but it can't make that general claim about transphobic statements often being made by famous people without the newspaper (secondary) source. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:22, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Transandrosupport, you added a source for the claim that the term transmisogyny was coined by Serano in 2007, but as far as I can see, the source doesn't actually state that. Have I missed something? Cordless Larry (talk) 16:04, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Not to worry - I've found a reliable secondary source and will add it shortly. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:07, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

cordless larry I actually found that source on the page for transmisogyny itself, but at least there's another source now. I only have so many trans books in print, hence my sourcing difficulties. I also want to bring up something that concerns me about the user Crossroads, who has recently assessed this article. They are marked red on Shinigami Eyes, a chrome extension that allows trans people to mark organisations and users on the internet as transphobic and each review is verified with a dedicated group that checks for false flaggings of transphobia. Hence I'm a little bit on edge with their criticisms, so long as they remain in good faith I'll hold my tongue, but, there is something to be said about someone others have noted to be transphobic critiquing a page about transphobia. Thoughts? I won't do anything unless I feel a criticism becomes bad faith. Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 16:12, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

It's best to assume good faith unless and until specific problematic behaviour can be identified - in which case it should be reported. Of course that doesn't mean that you have to proactively engage with an editor you'd prefer not to engage with. I don't see any problems with their edits to this article so far though - the original research issue is really what I'm flagging in this discussion. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Title

I've looked, and the only reliable source I can find that uses the term transandrophobia is the Slate article already cited in the draft. Everything else is on social media. Given this, I'd suggest we consider an alternative name for the article, avoiding neologisms and going for something descriptive if necessary. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:05, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@User:Cordless Larry that seems sensible, I do know the page on nonbinary issues is called 'prejudice against nonbinary people' so something like that? Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 16:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Would "Discrimination against transgender men" be appropriate in your view, Transandrosupport? Cordless Larry (talk) 16:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@User:Cordless Larry that seems appropriate to me, though I'm not sure how you change a title- I'll have a see if I can figure it out Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 16:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

That's OK - I'll move it now. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:48, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Maybe initiate a merge for this?

Is there any reason this can't be covered in the trans man page? There isn't a discrimination against transgender women page, and there's plenty more to say about them. Someone will demand that it be created since one for trans men exists, but the trans woman, feminist views on transgender topics, TERF, and Blanchard's transsexualism typology pages cover so much about issues affecting trans women already. Nowearskirts (talk) 06:03, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Nowearskirts that's because the page about trans women's discrimination is called Transmisogyny and the page for nonbinary people is called discrimination against nonbinary people. Suggesting a merge here would mean merging transmisogyny with trans women and discrimination against nonbinary people with nonbinary gender. As it stands, trans men were the only group that didn't have a dedicated discrimination page, not the other way round. Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 15:39, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

categorisation

Category:Transphobia Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 16:19, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Typically we don't categorise talk pages, only the pages they are linked to. I have removed this categorisation tag now as it is already on the main page for this article. Tvcameraop (talk) 16:58, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Tvcameraop thank you! Sorry I wasn't aware of that, I'm still quite new to how Wikipedia works Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 15:38, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• FTM flag.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:22, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Title change

There exists the article transmisogyny, should this not be titled transmisandry to have some consistency? JDBauby (talk) 23:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@JDBauby As explained in the article itself, there are intracommunity reasons why transmisandry is not currently the de-facto term for this concept. Many of them relate to the presence of the term 'misandry' in transmisandry- there has been conflation with 'men's rights activism' which hampers the attempts of trans men to describe oppression unique to them. Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 21:36, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

misogyny

many of the problems under the misogyny section seem to not actually be misogyny but rather social harassment since cisgender girls and women don't face them. Feralcateater000 (talk) 17:37, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

"misogyny" is defined just about everywhere as "prejudice against women" so yeah, imho it's utterly bizarre that the "misogyny" section is titled in such a fashion as to imply that trans men are women.

I'll also note the body text under it doesn't even mention misogyny once. I'm just gonna change the title to "body autonomy" or something to better reflect the body text. Tdmurlock (talk) 03:33, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

@Tdmurlock It was titled such since while misogyny is generally a prejudice against women, more broadly it is prejudice against perceived femininity. E.g. cisgender gay men may be subject to homophobia which has misogyny at its core (in the sense that historically, men attracted to other men were seen as more feminine by homophobes). It was not titled in such a fashion to imply trans men are women - it's just that anybody regardless of gender can experience misogyny. It just happens to be that cisgender women are typically more likely to be affected by it. See also: Sikh victims of Islamophobia - Sikhs aren't Muslims, but have often been mistaken for Muslims in Islamophobic attacks. One would assume Islamophobia mainly affects Muslims but pointing out the Islamophobia in attacks against Sikhs mistaken for Muslims isn't implying Sikhs are Muslims. The removal of bodily autonomy from trans men is rooted in misogyny (i.e. trans men having bodily autonomy taken away by people who see them as women are experiencing misogyny because they aren't being seen as their actual gender and are thus being treated like women, despite not being women). Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 20:52, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) If trans men experience prejudice for being perceived as feminine, isn't that just transphobia? Similarly, isn't prejudice against sikhs who happen to be confused for muslims simply anti-sikhism? If you insist on using the term misogyny, I would advocate it be specified as "misdirected misogyny", just as I would personally be in favor of the phrase "misdirected islamophobia" in reference to anti-sikhism against sikhs who happen to be confused for muslims.

EDIT: in fact, the only source that seems to actually use the term "misogyny" in that section is the citation from "From the Inside Out : Radical Gender Transformation, FTM and Beyond", which seems to be an autobiographical work comprised mostly of poetry and short stories, not exactly the most reliable source known to humanity imho. Tdmurlock (talk) 20:59, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

By that logic trans women experiencing prejudice for being perceived as masculine are also experiencing 'just transphobia'. But the specification of language is important to convey specifically what kind of transphobia - especially as it intersects with different lived experiences. Imo 'misdirected [oppression] is no longer neutral language that goes against the rules of wikipedia. Is homophobia experienced by two bisexual men holding hands misdirected because they're actually bi and not gay? Bigots don't stop to ask to check they're being bigoted against the 'right' person. Brandon Teena experienced *directed* misogyny because his attackers knew he wasn't a girl but due to his trans status intended to cause harm by raping him to humiliate him - then they murdered him. Seems pretty directed to me. Ditto Sikhs experiencing Islamophobia - the Sikhs who have been murdered for being mistaken for Muslims were also not misdirected targets. Anti-Sikhism would rather imply bigotry aimed at them because they are recognised as Sikhs - but as I stated, I was referring to Sikhs murdered after 9/11 who weren't being perceived as Sikhs at all when they were being murdered.

Additional sources can also be added to that section, I haven't gotten round to it yet as it is late rn in UK time. Vulture (a.k.a. Transandrosupport) (talk) 21:53, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree that section needs further sources to justify it's heading. Just for reference, though, the pages for Brandon Teena, Killing of Tony McDade, and Killing of Banko Brown mention the term misogyny exactly zero times. Similarly, the pages for the Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting doesn't mention islamophobia. That said, the Murder of Balbir Singh Sodhi article does mention islamophobia, but it seems to be a drive-by category addition that doesn't actually reflect the content of the article.

"Bigots don't stop to ask to check they're being bigoted against the 'right' person." I agree, which is why imho we should employ language referring to prejudice against trans men that doesn't reinforce transphobic assumptions that feminine-presenting trans men are women. Tdmurlock (talk) 23:30, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Trans guy here. Saying we experience misogyny is not misgendering us or implying we’re women. You don’t have to be a woman to experience misogyny, especially if the person perpetrating it is treating you like a woman in order to be misogynistic to you. 68.234.156.37 (talk) 01:02, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I believe that you believe that. However, the usage of the term misogyny on the page is not explicitly stated in the sources referenced and thus imho constitutes a violation of WP:SYNTH. I'm all for letting the homies cook, but I remind us to be mindful of Wikipedia's core policies, as the usage of the term misogyny here seems to be an interpolation that does not actually reflect the language employed in the sources to which it is attributed. Tdmurlock (talk) 01:19, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I did change the section title to bodily autonomy Feralcateater000 (talk) 14:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)