Talk:Gender nonconformity
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gender nonconformity article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | 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. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | On 12 July 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Gender variance to Gender nonconformity. The result of the discussion was moved. |
Possible Additions of Conversion Therapy for Genderqueer Children
editHey all. I was scrolling through this page, and noticed that there isn't anything really referring to how 'gender identity disorder' was previously listed in the DSM and had several 'treatments' tantamount to conversion therapy. A good example of these practices is Kenneth Zucker and his practice at Toronto's Centre for Addiction and Mental Health: Gender Identity Service before it was shut down. There is a wikipedia page about Kenneth Zucker which we could include, and there have been several books written about him and his practices, such as "Trans Kids: Being Gendered in the Twenty-First Century" written by Tey Meadow. Just felt that this is important information regarding how gender non-conformity was viewed in the medical field and how that has changed (though very little). (Sneezygirl) (talk) 12:46, November 2021 (UTC)
Claims not cited
editIn the second paragraph of the Social status for Men vs Women section, a claim has not been cited. I have not been able to find a source to back up the claim made. I think this should be addressed to clean up the article.
Requested move 12 July 2024
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved to "Gender nonconformity", as originally proposed. (closed by non-admin page mover) Frost 15:52, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Gender variance → Gender nonconformity – According to Google Ngrams, gender nonconformity is the more commonly used term. The article should be named with its common name. Urchincrawler (talk) 16:32, 12 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support - also supported by note hits in scholar gender noncomformity vs gender variance, so agreed per WP:COMMONNAME we should rename the title. Raladic (talk) 17:08, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Request Can someone offer 2 sources which support a position? I would like to see more evidence than just a count of Google Ngrams. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure how else I would go about comparing use besides Ngram and Radalic's comment with Google scholar hits, but here are a few things that could count for evidence towards it.
- The APA dictionary includes gender nonconforming but not gender variance or gender variant.
- The article for childhood gender nonconformity uses "nonconformity" for its title rather than "variance", so the move would make the pages more consistent with one another.
- Searching "gender nonconformity" gets 373,000 results on Google while "gender variance" has 234,000. Urchincrawler (talk) 01:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support, preferring the hyphenated version:
- "Gender non-conformity" is clearer than "Gender variance". "Gender variance" sounds like it could mean gender diversity, which is about ratios and representation. Non-conformity also hints at choice, helping distinguish it from the topic "distribution of intersex conditions".
- Hyphenated is easier to read than unhyphenated. MOS:HYPHEN suggests taking readability into consideration, not just common usage. MOS:CONFORM recommends ignoring source usage on punctuation specifically, although it's primarily about quotations. Many publications write for a specialized audience or primarily native English speakers, while Wikipedia seeks a broader audience. GLAAD, who are thoughtful about communicating to audiences less familiar with gender topics, recommend the hyphenated form, although they do not comment on punctuation explicitly. We can survive future debates about whether the adjective form uses a space/hyphen/dash ("gender–non-conforming people") by rephrasing if necessary. Jruderman (talk) 21:44, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if MOS: HYPHEN is applicable here as it says "Hyphenation clarifies when the letters brought into contact are the same (non-negotiable, sub-basement) or are vowels (pre-industrial), or where a word is uncommon (co-proposed, re-target) or may be misread (sub-era, not subera). Some words of these sorts are nevertheless common without the hyphen..."
- Nonconformity does not have the same letters or vowels come into contact. I also would argue it's not an uncommon word considering there are several articles with the word in the title but not hyphenated. (Nonconformity, Nonconformity in Wales , Nonconformity to the world, etc.)
- While I'm not strictly opposed to hyphenating it to be gender non-conformity, I would need a more compelling explanation as to why that should be the case. Urchincrawler (talk) 23:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think you're right that I went overboard with my interpretation of "uncommon" in my reading of MOS:HYPHEN. The examples there are super weird.
- Fwiw, there are some examples of the hyphenated version on Wikipedia: Non-conforming mortgage and Non-conformists of the 1930s. However, they are fewer and less prominent than your examples. Anyway, consistency within Wikipedia isn’t the main concern here, because the other articles can be changed if there’s a strong argument for one style or the other.Jruderman (talk) 01:36, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Terminology error in childhood section
editTerminology error in childhood section - heterosexuality is not a gender it is an orientation. It feels like this section is intentionally confusing and irrelevant. 218.214.173.57 (talk) 07:34, 17 November 2024 (UTC)