Template talk:Transgender

LGBT portal
I've incorporated the LGBT portal box into the LGBT project template. Is it all right if I also incorporate the portal link into the Transgender template? It's really just a question of design -- the two boxes of different sizes look awkward stacked on top of each other. Dan B † Dan  D  23:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * When I saw that you had integrated it in the LGBT template, I was thinking about doing precisely the same thing to the TG template. I also dislike the way that a renderting bug sometimes causes these two dissimilar boxes to screw up the text flow around them. Go ahead. :) --AliceJMarkham 07:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Done! And I'm still on hold with the phone company! Dan B † Dan  D  01:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Access to amenities broken
The access to amenities link is broken - we either need to remove it, or make it :)

As a suggestion, perhaps a better page title would be "Access_to_amenities_(Trans)"

Cheers, Lwollert 11:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The article doesn't exist. Why don't you make it? And then join us? :D Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:27, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * When I created the template, I wanted to also create that article but real life has interfered somewhat. I don't see the need to make the title any more complicated than necessary. In fact, if someone can suggest a more compact and coherent title, that would be great. --AliceJMarkham 22:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Made the article as suggested, and updated the template to match. As it's fairly specific to transgender, the (trans) sufix is probably nessecary. PLease feel free to expand it !! :D
 * P.S. thanks for the invitation Lwollert 00:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Comprehensive list or only majors?
I note that an anon (IP) editor added Transman to the template recently.

While this is a valid transgender article, I'm concerned that adding every valid TG article to the template would result in the template turning into a list of TG articles, which would be far too big to transclude into every TG article. As such, I've reverted the addition of transman. --AliceJMarkham 04:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Seems like keeping it to the "headline" articles is more useful; additional links would clutter it up. They perhaps belong on the Template: Transgender footer? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lwollert (talk • contribs) 02:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC).


 * I see the footer template as having the same content as the side box, and essentially being applied only to articles so short that the side box dominates. I suspect that, when such articles grow beyond start class, the side box may become more reasonable and we'd change to that. In the meaintime, running a footer will hopefully reduce the number of "it dominated the article so I removed it" incidents. --AliceJMarkham 23:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Transgender as an Umbrella Term
I question the use of 'transgender' as an umbrella term for this portal. It is factually incorrect to group transgender people, transsexual people, gender variant people, cross-dressers, and drag performers in the same heading. Furthermore, using 'transgender' to describe other demographics not only causes erasure to those identities, but can illegitimize transgender experiences. I recommend changing the portal to 'trans' and removing cross-dressing and drag links. These should be in a separate section, if they are even to be grouped together. Drag is much more a part of gay and lesbian club cultures than the usually sexually focused cross dressing scene. Chezsruli 20:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know what country you are in. I realise that in some places the term is seen as a specific subgroup, although I'm unclear what subgroup you think that it applies to, given that you appear to have excluded all of them. As far as I am aware, usage in the vast majority of the english speaking world is to use Transgender as an umbrella term and usage here reflects that. Also, you appear to believe that crossdressing is an entirely sexual activity but that is not accurate either. Only a small percentage of crossdressers do it for sexual reasons, and much of this is well documented in the relevant wikipedia articles. Many transgendered people who you are trying to claim are not transgendered would find your basic statement that it is "factually incorrect" highly offensive. If you can provide verifiable references that indicate local usage in line with your assertions, you are welcome to add those references to the transgender article. --AliceJMarkham 04:04, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I do believe it is about time we got our own voice. We all have different needs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.191.115.113 (talk) 15:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * There are more and more people that reject the term transgenderd as an umbrella term. The term Transgenderd was created by "Virginia Prince, a full time cross dresser who openly disdained transsexuals, coined the term “Transgenderist” in the mid ‘70s to describe herself and others like her... but by 1981 the term “Transgender” had taken on its modern meaning of covering nearly the whole “gender community”, cross dressers, transsexuals, and intersexed people." (Source http://www.jenellerose.com/htmlpostings/20th_century_transgender.htm) My question is why we should use a term that is coined by a transvestite to describe her and others like her, and whom showed contempt towards people suffering from transexualisem. Why is it that so many that does not suffer from transexualisem, or are intersexed feels the need to put everyone in an umbrella term as transgederd.  And why in the world should transexualisem, intersexed and transvestite be a part of the gay and lesbian movement?