Talk:Q1052281
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Autodescription — trans woman (Q1052281)
description: person assigned male at birth who identifies as a woman
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “trans woman” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
For help about classification, see Wikidata:Classification.
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- trans woman (Q1052281)
- transgender person (Q10701290)
- transsexualism (Q190965)
- physiological condition (Q7189713)
- gender non-conformity (Q4135211)
- gender modality (Q106647285)
- LGBT person (Q116920433) (‡)→
- transsexualism (Q190965)
- LGBTQ woman (Q130476996)
- →(‡) LGBT person (Q116920433)
- female human (Q84048852)
- female organism (Q43445)
- human (Q5)
- transgender person (Q10701290)
- trans woman (Q1052281)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
trans woman⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Untitled
[edit]This item is not the opposite of transgender male AND cisgender woman. It is "different from" these two. --WiseWoman (talk) 13:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
DE: trans Frau
[edit]Soll das Deutsch sein, oder ist diese Bezeichnung made in Vietnam? --Matthiasb (talk) 09:31, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Mujer vs Mujer trans
[edit]¿Por qué decís que una mujer trans es una mujer si incumple con las características de esta última? Una mujer trans es biológicamente un hombre por lo que de ninguna manera puede ser una mujer biológicamente hablando. O cambiáis el concepto de lo que es considerado mujer o estáis mintiendo impúnemente a vuestra conveniencia. Aitorembe (talk) 17:22, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- For one, menstruation is not an intrinsic characteristic of a woman, otherwise women on menopause are not considered women, too. Secondly, trans women are considered women in human society, which is confirmed by sources, so the fringe point of view that they aren’t is irrelevant (and already too represented on the page). Please don’t accuse anyone of lying just because you disagree with others’ perspectives. stjn[ru] 17:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- ¿En serio? biológicamente hablando sólo las mujeres pueden tener menstruación y la menopausia es una evolución natural de las mismas. Y las mujeres trans son consideradas actualmente eso, mujeres trans y lo que es una vista marginal y un intento de tergiversar las cosas es suponer que son mujeres cuando biológicamente son hombres. Y esto no tiene nada que ver con lo que cada uno se considere. De hecho, por mi parte, si estás seguro de que no estás en el cuerpo que crees que te corresponde pues por lo que a mí respecta, puedes hacer lo que consideres necesario para conseguir cambiarlo; pero la base seguirá siendo la misma biológicamente hablando, que es lo que estoy intentando correguir aquí.--Aitorembe (talk) 18:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Aitorembe: Please do not conflate gender (Q48277) with biological sex (Q290), which in any case is not binary either–see intersex (Q1097630). Also, transphobia has no place in our community and I am concerned that your comments could make trans members of the community feel uncomfortable. Thus I ask that you refrain from further pursuing these edits. I was very close to blocking you from editing for that; consider this a warning.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Comment: la traducción de esta advertencia se encuentra aquí / the translation of this warning can be found here. Madamebiblio (talk) 13:18, 3 October 2024 (UTC)- @Aitorembe: Дело не в вашем мнении, и не в "правде". Главная цель проектов Викимедиа - представить все авторитетные точки зрения, по возможности не делая предпочтения ни одной из них. Важно лишь подтвердить каждую из них максимально авторитетными источниками. --Infovarius (talk) 19:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sexuaz eta ez generoaz ari ginela esatea nahikoa zen nire akatsaz jabetzeko. Aitorembe (talk) 19:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- They said they realized their mistake. Masai giraffe (talk) 01:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Aitorembe: Please do not conflate gender (Q48277) with biological sex (Q290), which in any case is not binary either–see intersex (Q1097630). Also, transphobia has no place in our community and I am concerned that your comments could make trans members of the community feel uncomfortable. Thus I ask that you refrain from further pursuing these edits. I was very close to blocking you from editing for that; consider this a warning.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- ¿En serio? biológicamente hablando sólo las mujeres pueden tener menstruación y la menopausia es una evolución natural de las mismas. Y las mujeres trans son consideradas actualmente eso, mujeres trans y lo que es una vista marginal y un intento de tergiversar las cosas es suponer que son mujeres cuando biológicamente son hombres. Y esto no tiene nada que ver con lo que cada uno se considere. De hecho, por mi parte, si estás seguro de que no estás en el cuerpo que crees que te corresponde pues por lo que a mí respecta, puedes hacer lo que consideres necesario para conseguir cambiarlo; pero la base seguirá siendo la misma biológicamente hablando, que es lo que estoy intentando correguir aquí.--Aitorembe (talk) 18:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Potential issues: "The value for nature of statement" can't be tradition. Can you fix it @Infovarius, DenisMironov1, PaperHuman:? Also, do you think it's possible adding Wolffian (Q130432425)? Web-julio (talk) 20:18, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- I definitely agree that trans woman being a subclass of male human with the qualifier nature of statement tradition is wrong and even if I assume we want to document the transphobic belief, nature of statement: tradition is objectively not correct. I deleted this statement a couple days earlier, but it got reverted for not being neutral by @Infovarius, so I assume the preferred way would be a different qualifier or other method of saying that belief exists without implying it's true? Are beliefs like this documented in some other wikidata items where we could get inspired from? PaperHuman (talk) 23:20, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- I would choose originally (Q53737447). But also, that would be inaccurate with XtF/FtF (AFAB transfem) people. Denis added deprecation rank without a reason. misgendering (Q64737957) could be a reason. Web-julio (talk) 23:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- I would agree that the qualifier can be adjusted but I want this opinion (cultivated by most people on Earth) to be presente. Please help to do this consistently. --Infovarius (talk) 19:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- I definitely agree that trans woman being a subclass of male human with the qualifier nature of statement tradition is wrong and even if I assume we want to document the transphobic belief, nature of statement: tradition is objectively not correct. I deleted this statement a couple days earlier, but it got reverted for not being neutral by @Infovarius, so I assume the preferred way would be a different qualifier or other method of saying that belief exists without implying it's true? Are beliefs like this documented in some other wikidata items where we could get inspired from? PaperHuman (talk) 23:20, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
