Talk:Gender expression

The need for this article?

Florian Blaschke, why do you think we need this article, given that we already have the Gender and Gender variance articles? Really, the Gender variance article is the Gender expression article. The Gender variance aricle is also sourced (though not completely) while this one currently is not. What "Gender expression" sources do you have to support this article? And I mean sources that that explicitly state "gender expression," as to avoid WP:Synthesis.

I do intend to remove some unsourced material from this article if it remains unsourced. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:06, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

I struck through the above since I remembered that the Gender variance article is more so about not adhering to gender norms. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:19, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Thinking on this some more, there likely is a need for this article instead of having the term gender expression redirect to the Gender article as it had before. Now it's just a matter of appropriately sourcing and building the article, with no WP:Synthesis included. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:30, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Gender expression is definitely not the same thing as gender identity, nor gender of rearing, and that is a very crucial point. As pointed out in the Gender Analysis article, men can have a feminine gender expression and women can have a masculine gender expression regardless of whether they're cis or trans and regardless of which gender they were reared as. A ton of anti-transgender rhetoric is based on the assumption that trans women (or transfeminine people in general) are just "girly" men and trans men (or transmasculine people in general) "tomboyish" women, which completely fails to explain the kind of transgender people whose expression happens to be rather typical of their assigned gender. That's exactly the reason why I made this article: gender expression and gender identity are conflated all the damn time (and so are gender expression and sexual orientation). There's a GIANT-BLINKING-LETTERS need for this article. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 14:56, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and sorry I didn't have more sources at hand, but at least it's a start.

Also, gender variance is a kind of umbrella term. People can be variant both in terms of expression and in terms of identity. A butch cis woman is gender variant, a masculine trans man is also gender variant. Transgender and non-binary/genderqueer people in general are classified as gender variant. In contrast, "gender non-conforming" is more usually used to talk about expression specifically, in my experience. The terminology is unfortunately a mess and still in flux in this area, as far as I can tell. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 15:05, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

As for gender norms, they are simply the cultural rules that determine what kinds of expression are considered typical of a gender. So yes, the terms gender expression, gender norm and gender variance are closely connected, but they mean different things. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 15:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

It's clear that you are referring to this edit I made with regard to gender identity and my mention of gender of rearing. I stand by that edit. Gender expression has everything to do with gender identity and the way a child was reared, as numerous reliable sources make clear, and as is made clear in our Gender, Gender identity and Gender variance articles. People are not born thinking that they should wear dressers or suits, which are man-made items. Gender identity not being the same thing as gender expression is beside the point. We all know about cross-dressers, for example. The point of my edit is that gender expression is all tied up in gender identity; it is not completely independent of it.

As for creating articles, you need to be creating articles based on what reliable sources state, not because you personally disagree with the way things are viewed. Numerous reliable sources conflate gender identity and gender expression per what I just stated with this reply. At times, they are used as synonyms. By contrast, scholars are very clear that gender identity or gender expression and sexual orientation are not the same thing.

That gender variance is an umbrella term is something I addressed at the Genderqueer talk page, seen here. I indicated this at the Third gender talk page as well.

As for sourcing, as we've discussed before, you sometimes engage in WP:Activism and WP:OR. So that is my concern in this case as well. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:25, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

As I pointed out in the article, the Bem Sex-Role Inventory is explicitly designed to measure expression, not identity.

Medical professionals who work with transgender patients have a strong need for this distinction. Not every gender variant client is transgender, and professionals need to make sure that the client really has an issue with identity, not merely variant expression.

Keep in mind that the distinction between gender expression and gender identity becomes especially relevant in the acrimonious debate around gender variant children, and the diagnosis of gender dysphoria in children. Contrary to the scientific consensus and diagnostic practice, which is very clear on the central importance of maintaining this distinction, anti-trans activists often claim that children are forced into gender transition even though they merely do not conform to gender norms (and typically turn out cisgender queer as adults, so-called "tomboys" and "sissy boys"), without actually clearly indicating a variant identity and stating a desire to transition. These children were clearly not taught to be gender variant, quite the opposite. (Note that the Gender Analysis blog, while not itself a RS, lists numerous academic sources under every article that could be used.) --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:24, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Florian Blaschke, without intending to mean offense, I will note that there is nothing you can teach me about gender topics that I do not already know. I repeat: "Gender identity not being the same thing as gender expression is beside the point. [...] The point of my edit is that gender expression is all tied up in gender identity; it is not completely independent of it." Anyone with a gender identity, which is everyone (yes, even those who state that they have no gender are stated to have a gender identity) is expressing gender in some way. People express their gender identity unless they are purposely expressing a gender that does not align with their gender identity or unless they are transgender and do not know it (and by this, I mean that they are expressing a gender that does not align with their gender identity). A gender variant person expresses their gender identity in one way or another; sure, the person may identify as a woman, and may have a gender expression that does not always align with stereotypical feminine gender roles, but, at some point, especially given that women are so free today to wear clothing that was traditionally considered male clothing (like pants) without anyone stating that it's male clothing, she will have shown an expression that aligns with what society considers a woman to be. Even if she dresses in so-called men's clothing all the time, but identifies as a woman, she can be stated to be expressing her gender identity since gender identity is all about how a person views their own gender. To her, being a woman may very well mean dressing in "men's clothing" all the time. There are butch lesbians who state as much.

Gender is inescapable because so many things in this world are gendered. One can take a shirt that is obviously meant for a woman (was marketed as a woman's shirt) and state that it's not a woman's shirt, but the vast majority of society will look at it as a woman's shirt. And if that person wears it, they (with few exceptions) will not only be expressing their own gender (regardless of whether or not they identify as a woman or as a man, or other) but the gender the world views them to be expressing. If it's a man with a woman's shirt on, he will be considered to expressing feminine/female gender norms. The vast majority of society will not look at the shirt as simply feminine; they will also be looking at it as a woman's shirt.

I am aware of all of the views on this topic and the ways many people on these topics do not agree. Many transgender people do not even agree with one another on these topics, and there is always that one transgender person who sees it fit to speak for all other transgender people (which can be similarly stated of a person from any other community). Even you stating "Not every gender variant client is transgender" is an example of disagreement that exists. In this case, you are using the term transgender strictly, when various reliable sources use it as an umbrella term to describe all gender variant people. This broad usage is noted in the Transgender and Gender variant articles. That stated, yes, when medical professionals state "transgender," they usually are not talking about a genderqueer person; they are usually speaking of the matter in terms in transsexualism. All in all, I stand by what I stated above, and will forgo sitting here and debating you on your views. I learned years ago that your views, while sometimes accurate, often conflict with the literature or with what most of the literature states, and that you sometimes go off on a tangent or digression, like you recently did at Talk:Cisgender. A debate with you can go on and on. Wikipedia is the place to follow the literature -- what the sources state -- with due weight. It is not the place to right the great wrongs. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:31, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

It sounds like you both agree the article should exist, so let's end this thread and focus on the actual topics of contention and the sources (rather than getting personal). Kaldari (talk) 19:07, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@Kaldari, Flyer22 Reborn, and Florian Blaschke:Merge This article is a stub which largely duplicates the content(conceptually) of Gender role#Background although has some sources which may improve the merge target, I have opened a merge recommendation, with the more mature article. I recommend a redirection after incorporating the contents of this article, into that one. I have based this assessment on the current content of this article, which deals with masculine and feminine expression, as opposed to any other arbitrary construction which may fall under queer-gender. If you believe this topic special treatment, please add some statements and citations about how they are distinct into this article.Ethanpet113 (talk) 03:02, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Ethanpet113, like I've argued, and like sources show, gender expression is a gender identity matter. Below, Kaldari argued that "gender expression can reflect or communicate gender identity and is related to gender identity, but is still separate or distinct from gender identity." If this article is to be merged with any article, it should be with the Gender identity article. That, or the Gender variance article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:53, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@Flyer22 Reborn and Florian Blaschke: Just like gender identity, gender role, and sex assignment, gender expression should ideally be a sub-article of gender. The three "dimensions" of gender are typically cited as: assigned sex/gender, gender identity, and gender expression.[1] We include discussion of two of those three at gender, but for some reason don't cover gender expression. In fact, the term "gender expression" isn't even mentioned in the gender article! My suggestion is to move this article into a new section at gender and if it gets bigger, let it grow into a separate sub-article similar to gender identity. Kaldari (talk) 05:20, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

That works as well. Like I stated above, "why do you think we need this article, given that we already have the Gender and Gender variance articles?" Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:22, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ethanpet113: What do you think of my suggestion to merge this article into gender (as a subsection) rather than gender role? I don't support merging this into gender role as someone's gender expression may or may not be related to gender roles. For example, a person can express androgyny, but androgyny isn't a gender role. I think it would work better as a subsection of gender. Kaldari (talk) 05:33, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kaldari: In that instance I still don't see how an expression is distinct from a role. That simply means that andro represents a weak expression of any "classic"(in the Eurocentric tradition) role. From Gender roles:"Gender roles are usually centered on conceptions of femininity and masculinity,[2] although there are exceptions and variations." It does not distinguish gender expression. Looking at the BSRI: "Sandra Bem's goal of the BSRI was to examine psychological androgyny and provide empirical evidence to show the advantage of a shared masculine and feminine personality versus a sex-typed categorization.[1] The test is formatted with 60 different personality traits which participants rate themselves based on a 7-point Likert scale." Looking at gender non-conforming, the contents is regarding atypical gender roles and expression.

I would suggest then, that conditions with weak gender characteristics belong in genderqueer, and may be represented in the corresponding "Gender ___ ". However most articles beginning in gender deal primarily with expression of particular dimorphic traits, but may "see also" Androgyny. On a side note it seems Androgyny really needs some attention. Right now the article Androgyny seems to talk primarily with the greeks, fashion, and then largely duplicates, but does not reference other articles on gender, so I can't really make an informed decision based on it.

I suppose I can kind of see your point distinguishing expression from role using fashion as a proxy, however function informs fashion, and changes over time. Did you know for example that high heals were invented by butchers to avoid stepping on blood and guts, and thereafter became popular among the nobility- even though today we largely consider them effeminate. So if not be appearance or role, then by what metric should I judge "gender expression"? Certainly not temperament as that is intrinsic or personality as that is not gender invariant. I guess the terminology here isn't really set in stone, but I guess there is a lot of overlap with Gender role, Gender and Gender variance, so maybe some mishmash of the three adequately expresses this, I'm just saying I don't see what attribute of a being makes this topic distinct from the above. Ethanpet113 (talk) 16:18, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ethanpet113: You're probably right that most content related to gender expression is going to logically be covered at gender role. The current contents of this article, however, don't really discuss gender roles much at all, other than to say that some forms of gender expression conform to gender roles and some don't. I don't think the existing content would add much to gender role, but it would be useful at gender, since that article currently doesn't mention "gender expression" at all, despite the fact that sources commonly cite gender expression as an aspect or dimension of gender. I guess you're looking at this more from a topic ontology point of view and I'm looking at it more from a content integration point of view. I don't think our opinions are mutually exclusive. Maybe some of it should be moved to gender role and some of it should be moved to gender. What parts of this article in particular do you think should be added to gender role? Or are you just saying that "gender expression" should redirect to "gender role" and you don't care about the current content? I would be fine with the redirect pointing to gender role, FWIW. Kaldari (talk) 01:26, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@Kaldari: All but the first paragraph of the section "Defining gender expression" at present seems to deal with gender expression as a function of the stereotypes used for gender role. So everything except the paragraph

Gender expression typically reflects a person's gender identity (their internal sense of their own gender), but this is not always the case.[1][2] Gender expression is separate and independent both from sexual orientation and gender assigned at birth. A type of gender expression that is considered atypical for a person's externally perceived gender may be described as gender non-conforming.

Ethanpet113 (talk) 03:27, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

The separation between gender identity and gender expression

After digging into the edit history it seems there is some disagreement on this point. The sources I've been able to find that deal explicitly with this topic (although there are few) seem to support them being distinct concepts,[1][2][3] although I agree with Flyer that they are probably not completely independent. Gender expression is typically influenced by gender identity (but not always, e.g. transvestites). Perhaps we could find some wording that is acceptable to everyone and also reflects the sources, i.e. that they are separate, but not necessarily independent.

1. Separating Out Gender Identity from Gender Expression
2. Gender Expression And Gender Identity Are Two Separate Concepts
3. Gender Orientation, Identity, and Expression

Thoughts? Kaldari (talk) 19:04, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Are you suggesting we use those sources? If so, I must state that they are poor (with one or more poorer than the other). We shouldn't be using everydayfeminism.com, shadowproof.com and transadvocate.com opinion pieces. We should be using scholarly sources. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:04, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

If they are used with WP:In-text attribution for certain parts, I wouldn't mind, at least for Everyday Feminism (everydayfeminism.com), which has a Wikipedia article. I don't mind Everyday Feminism being used when appropriate. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:10, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

And any lack of secondary or scholarly sources discussing a distinction is exactly why we have WP:Primary and WP:Due weight. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:22, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

On another note: The transadvocate.com source states, "Gender Expression: One’s situational expression of cultural cues which communicate gender identity.", which is similar to what I was arguing above. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:27, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

And the shadowproof.com source references GLAAD, which states, "Gender Expression: External manifestation of one’s gender identity, usually expressed through 'masculine,' 'feminine' or gender-variant behavior, clothing, haircut, voice or body characteristics." This is also pretty much what I was arguing. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:32, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Here's the best source I could find. It's a 2016 college textbook:

"The second component of gender includes gender expression. Gender expression can entail physical dress and mannerisms that reflect gender identity. Gender expression is still separate from gender identity, although it is clearly related to identity." – Social Psychology: How Other People Influence Our Thoughts and Actions, p.232

That seems close to what we have discussed above, i.e. that gender expression can reflect or communicate gender identity and is related to gender identity, but is still separate or distinct from gender identity. In other words, it is possible for a person's gender identity to be different than their gender expression (which I don't think any of us would disagree with). Any suggestions for how we could word that relationship in the article so that it isn't confusing? Kaldari (talk) 07:32, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for looking for a better source. I have no opinion on how to word it (yet), except for the obvious statement that it should be in your own words unless you intend to use in-text attribution. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:34, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Also, an editor at a different article pointed to this American Psychological Association source, which defines gender expression. I'd seen the source before, though. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:17, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

From one of the APA sources: Gender expression is "the presentation of an individual, including physical appearance, clothing choice and accessories, and behaviors that express aspects of gender identity or role. Gender expression may or may not conform to a person’s gender identity." – "Guidelines for Psychological Practice With Transgender and Gender Nonconforming People" Kaldari (talk) 03:48, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

The Yogyakarta Principles material

The Yogyakarta Principles material that 204.97.96.20 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) added, seen here, should be reduced per WP:Due weight. There is no valid reason whatsoever that it should take up half of the "Defining gender expression" section or be its own section in the article. And the source stating that sex characteristics are "each person's presentation of the person’s gender through physical appearance – including dress, hairstyles, accessories, cosmetics – and mannerisms, speech, behavioural patterns, names and personal references, and noting further that gender expression may or may not conform to a person's gender identity" does not mean that the term gender expression has been incorporated into law any more than it means that the wordings "physical appearance" and "behavioural patterns" have been. The source is not focused on defining gender expression. And this is not an article about sex characteristics. The source also states, "Everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics, has the right to State protection from violence, discrimination and other harm, whether by government officials or by any individual or group." There are laws that mention sexual orientation; this does not make them laws about the term sexual orientation or "sexual orientation laws." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:34, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

As seen, here and here, the IP obviously read my post on this talk page. But these two edits further show the WP:Synthesis the IP has been engaging in. One cannot simply trade out terms like that. Either the source states what it does or it does not. Per above and these latest edits, I have downsized the material. If the IP continues to engage in WP:Undue weight and WP:Synthesis violations, the IP will be reported and/or this article will be WP:Semi-protected. And semi-protection will very likely cause the IP to edit the article under their registered account...if they want to keep editing the article in this way instead of just moving on that, that is. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:50, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Additional sources like Judith Butler who does entire entries on gender expression, performances on gender, etc. are not even sourced.Hughes6778 (talk) 22:58, 24 January 2019 (UTC) Why is Yogyakarta Principles mentioned?

WP:Student editing

Kaseyscors, I reverted (although I should not have used WP:Rollback) this because genderspectrum.org is not a WP:Reliable source and you seem to be engaging in some WP:Synthesis. I also reverted because not everything from the "Gendered lives" source should be stated in Wikipedia's voice. Sometimes WP:In-text attribution should be used. For example, you added, "Gender, gender expression and gender identity are not innate and are usually less stable and more fluid than sex." And yet we know from sources in the Gender identity article that biology seems to somewhat plays a part in gender identity, that core gender identity is usually formed by age three, and that, after age three, it is extremely difficult to change. If we are speaking of genderqueer people, gender identity is more fluid. But beyond that, it is usually rigid. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:05, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Also keep WP:Copyvio in mind. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:16, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you for this really well written explanation, Flyer22 Reborn! Kaseyscors, make sure to take note of this when working on the content. I would also recommend that you take this training module. While gender expression is not necessarily a medical or health topic per se, it does go over several points and elements that would definitely be good to take into consideration with this. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:39, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Shalor (Wiki Ed), I'm not concerned about WP:MEDRS in this case. I don't see this as a WP:MEDRS issue. Regarding this material that I just reverted Aweingar and Z0egrand on, it is a matter WP:Synthesis and cobbling together sources on other topics just to build on this topic. We already have a Transgender article, a Trans woman article, a Trans man article, an Androgyny article, a Gender variance article, a Cross-dressing article, a Gender role article, a Third gender article, a Genderqueer article, and a Bem Sex-Role Inventory article. It shouldn't take using sources on those topics to try to create an article on this topic. This is why, above, there is talk of merging this article with some other article. Like I stated, there are few sources on the topic of gender expression itself. With this edit, I also moved the Bem Sex-Role Inventory link, which was already in this article, to the See also section.

On a side note: Since this page is on my watchlist, I prefer editors don't ping me to it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:27, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

By contrast, these sources that WOOHYUN JUNG (Harry) added with content are specifically about gender expression (in part). That's better. I sightly tweaked the material with this edit. Will tweak further later. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:24, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Z0egrand, it's still a no. The only thing that looks acceptable to include from all of that is the "Adolescents' Acceptance of Same-Sex Peers Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Expression" material...as long as no WP:Synthesis is involved. Actually read WP:Synthesis. And WP:Tone. Read WP:Student editing as well. You and your class should read all of that. Experienced Wikipedians are not going to ease up on the rules just so you and your class can get a grade or a solid grade. Do not WP:Edit war. If I continue to see problems from you and your class, I will take the matter to the WP:Education noticeboard. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:06, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you for this - I've left a message for Z0egrand and I'm going to ping Ian (Wiki Ed) on this, as Z0egrand is from his class. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I have re entered my section of sexuality and gender expression confusion and the analysis of Judith Butler's heterosexuality matrix. I went over these edits with my professor to make them more clear hopefully. Z0egrand (talk) 19:11, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Z0egrand, as seen here, here and here, I tweaked the material and removed "The most common examples of this issue are in sports" material. "The most common examples of this issue are in sports" material appears to be synthesis. Even if it isn't, it's not needed anyway. That Amélie Mauresmo piece is WP:Undue weight. Don't re-add it. The Judith Butler material does not need its own section; it fits right in the "Confusion between gender expression and sexuality" section. I'm trusting you that Lisa Disch actually ties Butler's theory to gender expression. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:42, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

More synthesis and a combination of related topics reverted here and here. Alexmikhail likely is not with the class, but Agordo1108 is. Agordo1108, see what I stated above and at Kaseyscors's talk page. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:30, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review

It's looking good so far, I feel like you could possibly use some more information like maybe a brief history behind gender expression or where is originated. VernM22 (talk) 23:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: History of Sexualities

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2022 and 15 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jbeckerman, Avagooding22 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by LivMourning (talk) 21:53, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Examples

"Gender expression can be androgynous, agender (no gender identification), bigender, genderfluid, genderqueer, non-binary, pangender, transgender, and other gender identities"

Could we have detailed explanations of what each of these expressions entail? It would be really nice to have this information in an encyclopedia. Moniony (talk) 22:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

They are covered elsewhere; I've linked all of these terms where you can read about each. –Vipz (talk) 17:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I followed your links and still cannot find any examples. Take the bigender link for example, it only has a generic description "Identifying as bigender is typically understood to mean that one identifies as both male and female or moves between masculine gender expression and feminine gender expression, having two distinct gender identities simultaneously or fluctuating between them. This is different from identifying as genderfluid, as those who identify as genderfluid may not go back and forth between any fixed gender identities and may experience an entire range or spectrum of identities over time" - without actually giving any examples of those gender expressions. What does "moves between masculine gender expression and feminine gender expression" mean? Examples of that?

Some examples in this very article would in particularly be helpful especially in elucidating cases of identity being different to expression. Moniony (talk) 11:50, 23 April 2023 (UTC)