Chelsea Manning name row: Wikipedia editors banned from trans pages

[Deadoon]

[QUOTE=catbarf;42681550]Except if you are inventing new meanings for words and then getting pissy when not everyone else is on the same page, it makes [i]you[/i] equally an asshole. I have no problem calling Chelsea a she, just as I refer to my two trans friends in real life as she. What you seem to fail to realize is that most people won't, and it's [i]not[/i] because they're trans-hating ingrates, it's because [i]you[/i] are attempting to redefine words that most people think have pretty concrete definitions, and it's utterly childish to insist that everyone else change to fit your views. And it won't happen, either, at least not for a long time.

Find another way to express the concept you're trying to express, or learn to deal with it when people say 'no, (x) means (y), not (z)', and don't be surprised if media that is attempting to use the least ambiguous, most common definitions settles for an older, more widely accepted one regardless of how you personally feel about its accuracy.[/QUOTE]

If it really matters as much as this, see what happens if you were to change all of those gender nouns to their sex on wiki for every transgender individual, you will be banned quite quickly and your edits will be auto-reverted.

[SgtCr4zyGunz]

seriously what the fuck is wrong with you? you said "i have no problem calling chelsea a she but the majority of people wont" so that justifies labeling her something she's not? that just means the majority of people are fucking stupid.

[catbarf]

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;42681652]seriously what the fuck is wrong with you? you said "i have no problem calling chelsea a she but the majority of people wont" so that justifies labeling her something she's not? that just means the majority of people are fucking stupid.[/QUOTE]

No, it's more like you are utterly failing to understand the concept of subjectivity, which is a pretty big deal when you're talking about language.

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;42681609]the majority of people are ignorant about transgenderism and the current definition is inaccurate. it doesn't get any special privilege for being the commonly held belief. it's wrong.[/QUOTE]

It's wrong [I]according to your definition[/I]. It's correct [I]according to another definition[/I]. These definitions are entirely subjective. They are [I]words[/I]. They connote [I]ideas[/I]. The particular string of noises that form a word can't be right or wrong intrinsically, only the [B]way the ideas a word represents are applied[/B] can be right or wrong. You can't say someone is stupid just for using a different definition that conveys a different idea, only if they misuse it and apply it when the idea it conveys does not match the facts. It's hardly reasonable to expect everyone else to change commonly held definitions to match yours.

I mean, jesus, this is like inner city kids telling their grandparents that they have no reason to be upset over them referring to each other as 'nigga' because they've changed the meaning and their grandparents just need to get with the times. Can you understand the concept that sometimes words have different meanings for different people, and it's unreasonable to expect everyone else to change to be as progressive as you? That it's not done out of malice, and it takes time to change? That someone could use the older meaning and [I]not[/I] despise you and everything you represent? That if you want to be clear, [I]sometimes[/I] you have to use meanings that are shared by as many people as possible, otherwise you're effectively speaking another language and nothing is getting through?

[Deadoon]

[QUOTE=catbarf;42681798]No, it's more like you are utterly failing to understand the concept of subjectivity, which is a pretty big deal when you're talking about language.

It's wrong [I]according to your definition[/I]. It's correct [I]according to another definition[/I]. These definitions are entirely subjective. They are [I]words[/I]. They connote [I]ideas[/I]. The particular string of noises that form a word can't be right or wrong intrinsically, only the [B]way the ideas a word represents are applied[/B] can be right or wrong. You can't say someone is stupid just for using a different definition that conveys a different idea, only if they misuse it and apply it when the idea it conveys does not match the facts. It's hardly reasonable to expect everyone else to change commonly held definitions to match yours.

I mean, jesus, this is like inner city kids telling their grandparents that they have no reason to be upset over them referring to each other as 'nigga' because they've changed the meaning and their grandparents just need to get with the times. Can you understand the concept that sometimes words have different meanings for different people, and it's unreasonable to expect everyone else to change to be as progressive as you? That it's not done out of malice, and it takes time to change? That someone could use the older meaning and [I]not[/I] despise you and everything you represent? That if you want to be clear, [I]sometimes[/I] you have to use meanings that are shared by as many people as possible, otherwise you're effectively speaking another language and nothing is getting through?[/QUOTE]

Ok, so we can't be push being progressive because other's aren't? If you explain it to them and they accept it then it isn't an issue, and shouldn't be.

If they go and argue that you are wrong without explaining it in any way other than tradition and going based on a book that is constantly changed, it can be considered malicious. That is what you are doing.

[SgtCr4zyGunz]

[QUOTE=catbarf;42681798]No, it's more like you are utterly failing to understand the concept of subjectivity, which is a pretty big deal when you're talking about language.

It's wrong [I]according to your definition[/I]. It's correct [I]according to another definition[/I]. These definitions are entirely subjective. They are [I]words[/I]. They connote [I]ideas[/I]. The particular string of noises that form a word can't be right or wrong intrinsically, only the [B]way the ideas a word represents are applied[/B] can be right or wrong. You can't say someone is stupid just for using a different definition that conveys a different idea, only if they misuse it and apply it when the idea it conveys does not match the facts. It's hardly reasonable to expect everyone else to change commonly held definitions to match yours.[/QUOTE]

calling chelsea manning "he" does not match the facts. i didn't know trying to educate people about gender was unreasonable.

i don't know how many times i have to repeat this. trying to defend calling a transgender MtF "he" because of some bullshit excuse like "it's language" or "it's the dictionary" is bigotry sorry to break it to you.

[quote]I mean, jesus, this is like inner city kids telling their grandparents that they have no reason to be upset over them referring to each other as 'nigga' because they've changed the meaning and their grandparents just need to get with the times. Can you understand the concept that sometimes words have different meanings for different people, and it's unreasonable to expect everyone else to change to be as progressive as you? That it's not done out of malice, and it takes time to change? That someone could use the older meaning and [I]not[/I] despise you and everything you represent? That if you want to be clear, [I]sometimes[/I] you have to use meanings that are shared by as many people as possible, otherwise you're effectively speaking another language and nothing is getting through?[/quote]

so being progressive is unreasonable? calling someone by their desired gender is fucking unreasonable? chelsea manning is a woman who would like to be referred to as "she" THIS IS NOT COMPLICATED. call her by her desired gender, fuck the language, fuck the dictionary, this is about a human being who wants to be accepted. you're extremely rigid adherence to language is part of the problem transpeople face in society. you yourself may not be malicious, but we have enough assholes that try to justify hated against transpeople with the "but by definition you're a (fe)male!!!" excuse and we don't need people like you giving them validation.