I’m restarting this in a new topic as the old one got hijacked and is way off point.
I’ll try to make myself more clear in saying what this topic is about.
The current situation:
We have a field for artists called “gender” and it is to be used to represent the gender identity of the artist (see guidelines). There are the options “male”, “female” and “other”. “Other” is meant to be used for persons (or sometimes characters) who don’t identify as male or female, not for entities where the concept of genders make no sense (groups, companies, …).
The following is not part of the guidelines, but I think it’s common sense that the following are the evidences you use to fill out the gender field ranked by priority:
- a statement by the artist (e.g. “I identify as …”) or a profile where they filled out a gender field
- the pronoun the artist prefers
- wikipedia, wikidata and other sites that mention a gender
- the appearance and name of the artist.
Obviously, when filling this out for any random artist you are not going to assume that the artist doesn’t identify as male or female so you won’t actively search for a statement about their gender unless something hints to them not identifying as male or female.
If you fill out the gender field only based on a name nobody will attack you if it is not correct.
My critique about the current situation:
- I don’t think it is fair to have specific options for two genders and group all others together in one group. -> I’d like there to be more options.
- I specifically have a problem with the word “other”. It is not very nice, especially if a generally accepted umbrella term for genders that are currently filed as “other” exists (non-binary or genderqueer). In some cases “other” is not just an unfriendly term, but simply incorrect. Some people identify as “none” or “both” for example.
- Since some people don’t identify with just one gender there should be the option to choose more than one option.
My specific suggestion:
Since it makes no sense to discuss the actual list of genders yet I'm hiding this part of my proposal
Genders I’d suggest for now are the following. I found example artists for all of these in our DB - see my collection.
- non-applicable - for artist that are not persons or characters so the concept of genders can not apply.
- none - for people who don’t believe in the concept of genders or refuse it so the concept of genders does not apply.
- non binary (not further defined) - all persons currently labeled as “other” would go here until they are moved to a more specific gender
- non binary - this would be the super-category for all the genders below
- genderqueer - this would be related to non binary as “similar concept to”.
- third gender
- gender nonconforming
- transgender - with the two sub-entities below
IMO the trans* genders should not be used for trans people who identify as male or female (as probably most do), but only for those who are cited to identify as trans.
What would that mean for most artists on MB?
Nothing. Absolutely nothing would change.
Most artists currently filed as male or female will probably remain so. It will only be changed if it’s wrong, but that won’t be because of my suggested changes.
The only artists that are affected are the ones currently marked as “other” (the label would be changed to “non-binary” for example) and more specifically for those who publicly stated that they identify with a certain gender (they will be set to exactly that or those).
What this topic is NOT about:
- If you want to challenge the status quo in a different way (e.g. you think there should be a field for biological sex besides the field for gender identity) please do so in a different topic.
- This topic is not about whether e.g. a search for female artists should result in a list of artists who “were born with a female biological sex”, who “have a female voice” or “appear female”. Nothing will change in that regard resulting from this discussion.
- It’s also not about whether you understand the difference between two specific genders. Inform yourself or ignore it. You don’t have to use any of the new gender options that may be introduced resulting from this discussion. I’m sure there is other data on MB you don’t use because you don’t understand it.
So please stay on topic, but feel free to challenge my suggestions in a constructive way.