Obviously there have been a number of comments that are obviously
transphobic. However, there also have been repeated false charges of
transphobia against those who cite good policy reasons for not changing
the name. I personally oppose the change to Chelsea as premature for a
number of reasons, FYI.
And there are good reasons to question what happened at that article
process wise (the policy reasons for and against the change are
discussed ad nauseam at the talk page where editors are just trying to
get it changed back to Bradley Manning, though I think that's morphed
into a final discussion - hard to tell!! ):
* an admin changed the title to Chelsea Manning with no discussion on
the talk page, given it's a controversial move in such a high publicity
figure
*the admin then spoke to the press about it, wrote a blog entry with
their opinion, tweeted about it, and got even more media publicity for
their blog entry and/or tweets
*I would not be surprised if a number of editors also alerted the media
to her writings and actions in order to try to influence the outcome of
a Wikipedia policy decision
*I don't know how much off wiki canvassing there was, but I did start a
list of wikiprojects alerted, so at least that aspect of WP:Canvass
would be covered
*an editor threatened anyone moving the title back would become a minor
celebrity for a few days, a threat only to those whose actual names were
used, which implied outing (there's a subsection of the larger ANI
thread on that threat and related insults)
Wonder if I'll get shouted down *here* yet again for expressing my
opinions... sigh...
CM
On 8/24/2013 7:34 AM, Helga Hansen wrote:
In the German Wikipedia a huge discussion has erupted
over the question how to change the Wikipedia page for Chelsea Manning and it's
another textbook example over how to drive women of Wikipedia. You can see the gory
details here (in German of course):
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Bradley_Manning
I don't want to discuss this because it has already exhausted me to no end but
it's another example of “How not to deal with women” and especially “How not to deal
with transwomen” and it's important to understand the dynamics.
After her statement on Today, one user went over the article, changing it from Bradley to
Chelsea. When discussions about this started, two other users set up a section
"Namensänderung" that addressed some of the criticism (confusion over names,
before „Breanna“ was mentioned, how the support network has handled the name question) and
provided sources. They did this on an etherpad and then moved the complete section into
Wikipedia. By the way a modus operandi that I have heard from several women, to minimize
chances of their work being deleted again.
One admin locked the article title to Chelsea Manning. Some friends told me how happy
they were to see the page presenting her in this way.
Over the night, though, the discussion exploded. Changes were made by the minute, or
rather, the article was reverted. Every try, to change something back or to reason with
people was made impossible. To keep up, you would have had to be there, writing and
fighting not only during the day but also the night. That is just not possible for anybody
except students.
Somebody mentioned that “commonly referred to names” were ok to use, so I tried to get
people to acknowledge that the final article will influence how Manning is referred to in
German speaking countries. No avail. Instead, the amount of transphobic statements was
disgusting. People wanting to check her therapy progress, ID documents or in her pants. I
cannot blame anybody who doesn't want to deal with this sort of violence.
Every try to get people consider US laws and customs, which differ from much stricter
German transgender laws and guidelines, was totally ignored. Also, guidelines by
transgender organizations on how to write about transpeople were ignored. Somebody brought
up the fact that Manning hat entered the military in a profession reserved for men at the
time. Instead of asking an expert how to deal with it, it was solely used as an argument.
It was all just opinions, instead of facts. While some people were still talking about
knowledge, someone else would start a vote and then the majority decided.
(In case you wonder: one way would be to keep referring to Chelsea as female while noting
that the profession was reserved for men at the time and she entered presenting as male.)
Of course, people who identified as women or worse, transwomen, were shouted down to no
end and accused of being too emotional or having a political agenda. Wanting to be treated
with respect and having human rights is indeed a political agenda but none to be insulted
for. Also: one transwoman was not egligible to vote, her account was too “new”. She had
shut down her old account, from before transition for several reason (transphobia being
one).
The section "Namensänderung" was removed, too. There was no reason given and
Kathrin, the author, later told in a podcast how difficult it was for her to find out, how
and when this happened as it was removed with other sections. She managed to get it
restored with the help of an experienced Wikipedia admin. Deleting a thoroughly researched
section that is undoubtedly relevant reeks of erasure, in this case of the existence of a
transwoman. The podcast (in German) is available here:
http://www.iheartdigitallife.de/nrrrdz000020-mesh-up/
So. There's a group of mostly women, who poured their hearts into work, defended it
thoroughly and were insulted and shouted down. I honestly see no way, how we are even in a
position to get people to change guidelines anywhere in Wikipedia. Plus, we're all
exhausted.
Still, there are some ideas what to do:
- The guidelines on naming need to include how to deal with transpersons.
- As does a policy of using pronouns.
- If guidelines and policies are expanded on how to deal with marginalised groups, their
expertise has to be valued.
- Removal of sections should be easier to reconstruct
Once again: I don't want to discuss the issue at hand or even be forced to defend who
wrote what when. I also know how Wikipedia works and this mailinglist is in no place to
officially demand changes, yadayada. But this is important. If it weren't for some
very persistent people, the German entry would not even mention the fact that Manning has
asked to be referred to as a woman.
All the best
Helga Hansen
PS: It has to be said that Lana Wachowskis entry was changed without much kerfuffle, but
then it's always been a “Wachowski brothers” entry that's now “Wachowski siblings”
and there's about one pronoun used that refers to “her” and not “them”.
PPS: Please realize that I feel the need to ask not be treated to any explanations
because I have experienced that way too often.
__________________
Helga Hansen
@hanhaiwen
helgahansen.de
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap