On 10/25/2013 7:35 PM, Risker wrote:
It's controversial because there are women who assumed a male role,
but were definitely women in their personal life. So your definition
there would be to assign them the male gender but the female sex.
And I disagreewhat's being assigned there is sex,
Apart from the discussion on the P21 property's talk page, there is
currently a proposal on Wikidata to create a 'gender identity' property.
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Person#Gender_identity
Gobonobo
On 10/25/2013 06:35 PM, Risker wrote:
It's controversial
On 10/25/2013 12:56 PM, Klein,Max wrote:
Well when Markus released his research on-list, I applauded his
innovative methods and techniques. I also wanted to remind that
forcing this binary or trinary classification onto people is not
something that the software is making us do, but rather the
I remember seeing something about this on Wikidata and just not having
enough hours in the day to comment at the time.
There are three issues being intermingled here:
*Sex, which is a biological marker determined by primary and secondary
sexual characteristics such as breasts, penises, uteruses,
The attribute that is being assigned by property 21 on Wikidata (as it is
actually being used) is not sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity. It
is simply gender, and should be labeled as such. For the majority of
people, we don't actually know for sure what their sex, sexual orientation,
or
It's controversial because there are women who assumed a male role, but
were definitely women in their personal life. So your definition there
would be to assign them the male gender but the female sex.
And I disagreewhat's being assigned there is sex, not gender.
Risker
On 25 October
