3 ms·
> There's a tricky ethical question here: if someone changed their name and ask for not being called their former name ever again, you can either ignore their w
by mrighele 9mo ago
> There's a tricky ethical question here: if someone changed their name and ask for not being called their former name ever again, you can either ignore their will, which is rude, or chose to follow it but then you are doing a disservice to the public's understanding.
Calling somebody with his former name and mentioning his former name in a Wikipedia page are two completely different things. Using the fact that the former is seen as rude by some to avoid the second is in my opinion just an example of the level of extremism of the pro-trans activists.
But if in fact it made sense, shouldn't we completely remove any reference of the previous name also from the pages of people like Yusuf Islam [1] or Muhammad Ali [2] ?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_Stevens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_Stevens
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Ali https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Ali
- komali2 9mo agoThe use of the masculine pronoun here when we're referring to someone who transitioned from male kind of gives away that you're probably less concerned with searchability and preservation of history, and more concerned with promoting a transphobic agenda. I suppose it's possible you were using it as a generic pronoun, but in that case I would have expected "they." Am I wrong?
- eimrine 9mo ago[flagged]
- komali2 9mo agoSo, you don't think I'm wrong? The OP used "he" because they have a transphobic agenda? > because we use to call a person who will always have hairs on his face as "male". We may not have solved the question, "what is a woman," but you have brilliantly solved the question, "what is a man": a human with eyebrows.
- eimrine 9mo agoIf someone uses "he" word it does not means antitransism. My point is that trying to euphemize "he" word is anistraightism. And I am even not an antigayist. If your words can be reversed so easily it means that you have no idea but a pure propaganda instead. Famous anti-white-straight-man-ism seems as a dangerous thing to me, so I oppose this unfamous Davos-protracted diversity woke ideology.
- komali2 9mo agoWe're talking about the male pronoun used in the context of a discussion of a trans woman, not some kind of men's rights thing. Did you think I was arguing that saying "he" is bad because all men are evil or something? That's how faithless your interpretation of the arguments of non transphobic people has become? Can you define "woke?"
- eimrine 9mo agoI think you are saying that "he" because you support woke ideology. It is clearly visible since you were talking about trans values also. If you need me to repeat - I will repeat: I am not antigayist and I am not anti-transist. Woke is essentually anti-nationalism and anti-white-suppremacism.
- komali2 9mo ago> Woke is essentually anti-nationalism and anti-white-suppremacism. Then, depending on your definition of nationalism, it sounds like it's an unimpeachably good thing to be Woke, so I'm super confused where you're coming from here. To be clear: I was saying that the OP was purposefully misgendering Nex Benedict in order express their transphobia.
- eimrine 9mo agoWake up, please. Noone else except of white suprematist will support your protransism, think about it. Analyze what nations typically are against it and who will protect you in the special place where you have written that comment when the yellows will come. It is OK to be transgender, but only while you are protected. White suprematists may protect transgender values but they need a freedom to be free from that kind of euphemization you are spreading.
- philistine 9mo agoNotability. Those two celebrities were known for a very long time under their old name. To prevent confusion, their old name is shown. The victim of a crime was not notable before their name change.
- whycome 9mo agoNotability is subjective
- komali2 9mo agoIn the Universe, yes. In the closed system of Wikipedia, no, it's a well defined term with clearly established criteria, tested over the years on thousands of Talk pages on controversial pages, of how to achieve consensus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
- ajsnigrutin 9mo agoMany married women are known under their husbands last names, from Maria Salomea Skłodowska, Betty Marion Ludden to Melanija Knavs. Some celebrities even use stage names, such as Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta. Many of these women are not really known under those names, but somehow, they're still listed on their wiki pages.
- littlestymaar 9mo agoMost of the married women on Wikipedia didn't get the choice of keeping their own name, so we cannot really compare it to someone who changed their name. Same for stage names, people don't use stage name because they want to escape their former name, they use stage names because it's cool. And when people use a pseudonym and want to keep their real identity secret for personal reasons, their name doesn't appear on Wikipedia, and nobody is ever complaining about that! It's as if people were obsessed by trans people in particular…
- ajsnigrutin 9mo ago
- 113 9mo ago> level of extremism of the pro-trans activists What on earth are you talking about?
- eimrine 9mo agoSometimes it easier to downvote that Earthian than to argue.
- littlestymaar 9mo ago> Calling somebody with his former name and mentioning his former name in a Wikipedia page are two completely different things Except when people keep vandalizing Wikipedia renaming people there with their dead name. And yes it happens over and over and over again. Because the most active extremists on the topic are by far the anti-trans crowd. (And it's not even close, there are trans people assaulted every week, sometimes going as far as murder this is extremism). And again, Wikipedia keeps mentioning the former name when it's necessary (look for Bradley Manning on Wikipedia, the page redirects to Chelsea Manning but the old name is state because it's important).
- could-of 9mo agoAccording to MOS:GENDERID [1], a person's former name can be used when they were notable under that name. You're trying to make it out as if there's some nefarious double standard when there's not, editors just want Wikipedia to be clear and encyclopedic. It's incredible that in a discussion about brutal violence against a child, the child victim is being painted as the "extremist"! [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biography#Gender_identity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biog...
- littlestymaar 9mo agoPeople are downvoting factual comments like this then talk about “trans-activist extremism”… Strong “Don't contradict my opinions with facts” vibe.