> Trying to hammer every peg into one of just two holes is bound to > cause problems.
Then there's the issue of people who are inter-sexed (born with mixed or absent gender-specific organs, example being [[Jim Sinclair]]), genderfuck (intentionally ignoring gender-specific cultural expectations), cross-dressers, and generally anybody else who doesn't fit neatly into "male" or "female". This isn't a representation of Wikipedia, but society in general. Emily On Aug 8, 2009, at 9:06 PM, Bryan Derksen wrote: > [email protected] wrote: >> About "Women" on Wikipedia, I think "famous" is probably >> problematic, like >> "list of short women", is too much based on a judgement call. > > Heck, in a few cases the "Women" classification might prove to be > based > on a judgement call. The panoply of transgender classifications and > how > they change over time and culture is beyond me. Trying to hammer every > peg into one of just two holes is bound to cause problems. > > Not saying it wouldn't be nice to categorize those that _aren't_ edge > cases, mind you. > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
