Content deleted Content added
DanielRigal (talk | contribs) explain |
|||
Line 3:
:Please be aware that, while you are perfectly free to remove warnings from this page, the previous warnings which you have removed are all retained in the Page History and all still stand. Removing a warning notice can be taken as proof that you have seen it and lead to the conclusion that any further disruptive edits are being made intentionally. So... No more trying to censor the word "cisgenger". No more changing the correct phrase "trans woman" to the incorrect dogwhistle phrase "transwoman". No more spin or obfuscation. No more unreferenced additions. It is time to pack it in. --[[User:DanielRigal|DanielRigal]] ([[User talk:DanielRigal|talk]]) 17:22, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
::I could have used either spelling, I didn't really think about the difference I just was being consistent, I don't really see what was a dogwhistle about it, I was just removing the word "cisgender" because I was trying to keep the language of the article neutral, by not saying that trans women aren't women, and not saying they are either (the reality they aren't women), either way the average person would find it easier to understand my version of the article than the one that is currently being presented as it is more straightforward and doesn't resort to using "cisgender woman" to describe almost all women in order to legitimise trans women as a category of women, but I am aware that in many cases wikipedia's position seems to be that trans women are women (they aren't) which is why I didn't edit the page to call them men (they are men)
but i won't edit it anymore[[Special:Contributions/2.100.205.41|2.100.205.41]] ([[User talk:2.100.205.41#top|talk]]) 20:38, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
| |||