Talk:LGBT rights in micronations

Should we keep the "Variation" subsection?

I was unsure of this, myself. I have received feedback from people grateful to have it, as it taught them things they did not know beforehand; and I have received feedback from people who feel it is out-of-place or out-of-scope for this article. I figured I would start a discussion here on this more-formal medium in order to see and record what people think about this, ideally with their reasoning. /swέna/ 💬 06:00, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Swena I want to elaborate on my thoughts on the subject over here. I think that yes, it can be interesting to know for people but I think that it's still a very North American/Western debate and that for some people it may not resonate at all to them. Yet, the aims are kind of more-or-less the same around the world. So, unless we can put all the debates (read here debates in Asia and Africa, etc.) on the aims of the transgender community, I think we should remove this section for we are not experts on the subject nor will we cover the entirety of this subject which would then be out-of-scope for this article. Cloe de Sancratosia (Talk | Contributions) | About Sancratosia | 16:05, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Hmm, I think most of your concerns can be ameliorated by simply contextualizing current contents of the section as being more of a Western-style debate.

People from other corners of the World can add their own debates as well, if they'd like; it would be interesting to see them.

I think trans issues in general are still to some extent in a formative period, though there is of course wide agreement as to what the majority of the aims should be; I think most of the debates are around degree, rather than kind (ie: every trans person supports the right to transition, but there is disagreement around whether there should be gatekeeping, and how much if so; or, every trans person supports people using pronouns that match gender presentation (regardless of sexual organs), but lately there has been a widespread desire for people to use pronouns that match gender identity regardless of presentation, and some people even want others to use neopronouns; etc. Again: differences in degree, but not in kind.).

As for us not being experts... that's kind of the whole point of most wikis, isn't it? The people who edit Wikipedia certainly aren't experts; and as a potent example of this, I, an actual linguist, was more-or-less run off the IPA articles by a random basement-dweller with no formal education on the matter, and a poor grasp on manners.

My own contentions with the section are that it's, idk, kind of ancillary? I'm not entirely certain whether it is or isn't sufficiently topical to warrant inclusion in this article, but the fact that people have found it helpful has me inclined to think that maybe we should leave it, just for the sake of knowledge?

To that end: per your own extensive experience with LGBT matters and theory, is there anything in the "variation" section that is not factual?

/swέna/ 💬 00:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@Swena: Made some minor modifications to the article directly, the main irritant was the use of "transgenderism" but apart from that, no nothing was not factual. Cloe de Sancratosia (Talk | Contributions) | About Sancratosia | 04:10, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

It was used in a sentence attempting to portray what the transmedicalists think; in that context, I don't think it's incorrect. A transmedicalist perspective is inherently problematic from a mainstream queer feminist perspective, and there's probably no way around that fact. That said, how would you word it differently? EDIT: I just noticed you'd already edited, lol; somehow I missed that in your message earlier; I blame lack of sleep. Your revision is good -- thanks. /swέna/ 💬 07:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

It's worth noting that I did the same thing for the other side of the debate, with verbiage such as "assigned a gender at birth", which is problematic because it implies that gender is entirely socially constructed, which while perhaps mainstream in postmodernism, is very much not mainstream anywhere else. But I used the verbiage in this context anyway, because I was trying to faithfully portray a group's beliefs, and it would have been disingenuous to not in some way mention the concept of AMAB/AFAB.

/swέna/ 💬 05:25, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

One thing I've considered doing, is having it be collapsed by default, like many of the more-ancillary sections of the Aethodian language article. /swέna/ 💬 00:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@Swena: This could work, I totally support that. Cloe de Sancratosia (Talk | Contributions) | About Sancratosia | 04:09, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay -- I'll go ahead and do that then. I've already got the template for it, so it will be quite easy.

Seems like potentially a good middle ground -- makes the text clearly ancillary, while still allowing people who find it helpful to read it.

/swέna/ 💬 05:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

For the record, it also has my stamp of approval, for what it's worth. Shiro Mephistopheles (talk) 04:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)