Advanced search

Wikipedia asshattery

(2 Posts)
Glinner Wed 21-Aug-19 19:26:47

Wikipedia are running ads that read "Hi, reader in the UK, it seems you use Wikipedia a lot; that's great! It's a little awkward to ask, but this Wednesday we need your help..." and then they ask for donations.

But something that's also a little awkward is their entry on 'Transgender Rights and the feminist movement" which ends with the following lines.

"Sally Hines, University of Leeds professor of sociology and gender identities, wrote in The Economist in 2018 that feminism and trans rights have been falsely portrayed as being in conflict by a minority of anti-transgender feminists, who often "reinforce the extremely offensive trope of the trans woman as a man in drag who is a danger to women". Hines criticized these feminists for fueling "rhetoric of paranoia and hyperbole" against trans people, saying that while spreading anti-trans narratives, anti-trans feminists abandon principles of feminism, such as bodily autonomy and self-determination of gender, and employ "reductive models of biology and restrictive understandings of the distinction between sex and gender" in defense of such narratives. Hines concluded with a call for explicit recognition of anti-transgender feminism as a violation of equality and dignity, and "a doctrine that runs counter to the ability to fulfill a liveable life or, often, a life at all]

Feminist theorist, writer and Yale professor Roxane Gay has said that issues facing non-white and marginalized women such as sexual harassment and misconduct extend to trans women as well, and that TERFs have "woefully failed" to consider trans women's experience. Gay finds transphobia appalling, with the maltreatment and agony trans people suffer, such as the high suicide rates and murder rates of black trans women, not their fault. She has also said, "I think a lot of feminists are very comfortable being anti-trans. And that’s painful to see because we should know better, having been marginalized as women throughout history and today. How dare we marginalize others now?"

There's so much wrong with this it's hard to know where to start. It's a misrepresentation of the arguments, it's ideologically freighted and academics like Kathleen Stock and Jane Clare Jones are nowhere to be seen. Why aren't they on this page, presenting their own arguments? Why is Wikipedia allowing their positions to be framed by their ideological opponents?

They want paying for that? Eh, no, thanks.

Glinner Wed 21-Aug-19 19:44:22

Someone just sent this to me

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »