Talk:Trans woman

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Trans woman article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11: 2 months

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

This section is here to provide answers to some questions that have been previously discussed on this talk page.

Note: This FAQ is only here to let people know that these points have previously been addressed, not to prevent any further discussion of these issues.

Q1: Why does the article define trans woman the way that it does?

A1: The definition is the result of a 2022 Request for Comment (RfC) located at Talk:Trans woman/Archive 10#RfC on first sentence (itself subsequent to a 2018 RfC located at Talk:Trans woman/Archive 4#RfC on introduction). In both RfCs, there was no consensus as to which option was preferable; in the absence of affirmative consensus, the pre-existing text remained in place both times. Wikipedia content, including that decided on by RfCs, should be based on the due weight of reliable sources. Such sources are being collected at Talk:Trans woman/Definitions; anyone is welcome to contribute definitions there for future reference.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated, especially about Neutral point of view, Wording of lede and Contradicts the articles woman and female. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting on that topic, and read through the list of highlighted discussions below before starting a new one:

Restarting a debate that has already been settled constitutes disruptive editing, tendentious editing, and "asking the other parent", unless consensus changes.

Gender studies Mid‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : see Unassessed Gender studies articles and Unknown-importance Gender studies articles
Cleanup : edit to see
Collaborate : see /Collaboration
Copyedit : edit to see
Deletion sorting : see /Sexuality and gender
Expand : edit to see
Infobox : see Gender studies articles needing infoboxes
Merge : edit to see
Notability : edit to see
NPOV : edit to see
Orphans : Brannon Masculinity Scale · Holy Virility · Media and gender · Michael Kaufman (author) · Women's education in Saudi Arabia
Photo : see Wikipedia requested photographs of gender studies
Split : History of feminism
Stubs : see Gender studies stubs
Translate : see /translation
Update : edit to see
Verify : Riot grrrl
Needs attention : see Gender studies articles needing attention

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies

Sexology and sexuality Mid‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

Women's History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article should adhere to the gender identity guideline because it contains material about one or more trans women. Precedence should be given to self-designation as reported in the most up-to-date reliable sources, anywhere in article space, even when it doesn't match what's most common in reliable sources. Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to by the pronouns, possessive adjectives, and gendered nouns (for example "man/woman", "waiter/waitress", "chairman/chairwoman") that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. Some people go by singular they pronouns, which are acceptable for use in articles. This applies in references to any phase of that person's life, unless the subject has indicated a preference otherwise. Former, pre-transition names may only be included if the person was notable while using the name; outside of the main biographical article, such names should only appear once, in a footnote or parentheses.

If material violating this guideline is repeatedly inserted, or if there are other related issues, please report the issue to the LGBTQ+ WikiProject, or, in the case of living people, to the BLP noticeboard.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in to an autoconfirmed or confirmed account (usually granted automatically to accounts with 10 edits and an age of 4 days)

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.

"Transfeminine" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Transfeminine has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 15 § Transfem until a consensus is reached. --MikutoH ^talk! 02:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

Could this article do with more, or a wider variety of, photographs? Thanuhrei (talk) 03:19, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree some more well chosen pictures wouldn't hurt. Only four seems inadequate. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 06:17, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added three images in the Terminology section that seemed tasteful & appropriate. It might be a bit much in one spot, though. I'm still thinking on where would be good places to add a few more. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:24, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In a similar note, I'm curious what people think of the header image and its recency. Miss Trans Global shares images on commons every year, and I'm curious if there's a justification to switch to the 2024 winner, the 2023 winner (a better photo) or other more recent representation. It appears they give consistent broad public domain dedications on their website and using a pageant winner seems reasonable generally, just wondering if the recency matters at all/if there are preferences. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 19:25, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I think it's an interesting idea to consider updating the image every year to show the most recent Miss Trans Global winner. I'm not entirely sold on that, but there's definitely some merit to the idea. FWIW, I like the 2023 winner photo the best out of all three (the current one and the two you provided). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:22, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really like the 2023 photo. The 2024 photo seems too busy to me (she's sitting on a ladder in front of some bleachers). The current 2020 photo is IMO fine (I prefer it to 2024) but I honestly wouldn't mind if it were cropped in a little to match the 2023 photo. Loki (talk) 17:43, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should we cite sources for the initial claim that trans women are women?

Right off the bat, let me say this. Trans women are women, and there is scientific evidence of this. That being said, should we cite sources to attempt to help people who are more ignorant, or should we leave it as is? drdr150 Yell at me Spy on me 21:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We don't normally put citations in the introduction. It's not forbidden but it generally isn't needed as nothing should be in the introduction that isn't already covered in more detail in the body of the article and it should be sourced there. So that's not a definite no, but probably not. DanielRigal (talk) 21:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised this page isn't subject to more argumentation about whether every goddamn thing it says needs to be cited in triplicate, the way many other subjects which are in the current political milieu are. Not that I'm complaining, mind. I just spend a lot more time on Reddit and TikTok, these days, where every transphobic loser on the internet seems to congregate. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:25, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, because it is verifiable fact. Coresly (talk) 03:48, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's precisely why we should include sources (though, as above, not necessarily in the lead). — Czello ^(music) 12:49, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the sources lower in the article largely cover the fact, and typically the lead doesn't need to be the location for said citations. If we started seeing a lot of edit warring or vandalism around the first sentence I'd advocate for inclusion though ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 05:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which sources cover it exactly? Coresly (talk) 12:13, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some references used in the terminology section, including this GLAAD guide & at least some of the books, though I understand they're not all available to read in full online: Whipping girl, The A-Z of Gender and Sexuality. Not a lot of the sourcing on this article is explicitly full-stop definitions, but in the way that language is used there's a pretty consistent trend of referring to women across the board. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 23:43, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Outside of Wikipedia in English, that’s not a universal accepted truth. Many noted biologists like Richard Dawkins don’t agree that trans women are women. Even some trans women claim that they are trans women and not women. Other people say that trans women are women but not biological women, others on the contrary say that trans women are biological women. Wikipedia in some other languages define women as adult humans of the female sex, thus excluding trans women, who are named in their article as “people”, avoiding the word “woman”. Jorgebox4 (talk) 09:44, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Do you have any evidence of a fellow trans woman claiming we're not women? drdr150 Yell at me Spy on me 14:35, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wendy Guevara says it in this video. Sorry, it’s in Spanish.

https://m.youtube.com/shorts/Sv7awUlOLog Jorgebox4 (talk) 15:03, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One relatively obscure person, speaking in another language where nuanced distinctions might not be correctly translated, is not a good source for this. I am only aware of one other trans woman who pushes this line but she is a notorious troll not even worth mentioning by name here. This isn't going anywhere without actual Reliable Sources. In the meantime please be aware that Dawkins is not an expert on this subject. His expertise on other, unrelated, topics doesn't elevate his opinions beyond the domain of personal opinions. Finally, please pack it in with the "biological woman" terminology. Until AI advances to the point where non-biological women become more than a sci-fi trope that's just troll talk. If you want to say cisgender woman then please just say that. DanielRigal (talk) 16:14, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was just answering a question, not providing sources, because I don’t pretend to include that in the article. Another trans woman who follows the same line is Debbie Hayton, I don’t know if you mean her as a troll. Both Guevara and Hayton have their own Wikipedia articles.

Besides Dawkins I can mention Emma Hilton, Colin Wright, biologist, and Robert Winston, medical doctor. Who can you mention?

Regarding the term “biological woman”, why are you assuming it means cisgender woman? I said in my answer that many trans women consider themselves biological women! Also, even if you don’t like the term, if the sources mention it, we must follow the them.

I remember you saying that female is an adjective and not a noun, which is totally inaccurate, because it is listed as both, so please keep your personal preferences out of Wikipedia and stick to the sources. Jorgebox4 (talk) 20:47, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Stick to the sources!" says the person who has to dig to the bottom of the barrel to find anybody saying something. "Some" when referring to two trolls is not enough. drdr150 Yell at me Spy on me 21:33, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You asked for one, I gave you one. I never claimed that her views are not marginal, of course they are. She’s not a troll, by the way. Jorgebox4 (talk) 21:55, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is trolling. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (talk • stalk) 23:05, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please be more specific and explain what have I said that it’s not true? Jorgebox4 (talk) 23:21, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Many scientists", then proceeds to name exclusively fringe scientists and disgraced practitioners. drdr150 Yell at me Spy on me 23:29, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist and zoologist. He is cited in the article “sex assignment”.

Emma Hilton is a developmental biologist.

Colin Wright is evolutionary biologist.

Robert Winston is a medical doctor and professor.

Can you sustain with sources that they are fringe scientists or disgraced practitioners? Jorgebox4 (talk) 23:49, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The reason this article refers to trans women as women isn't because it's The Truth, it's because it reflects what the relevant sources say on the matter. They generally define woman using a definition based on gender rather than one based on (biological) sex. Anywikiuser (talk) 23:08, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]