Talk:Pangender

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gmwalker.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

January 2006

Merge to pansexuality. While the leading sentence of Pangender talks about the difference between the word 'sex' refering to anatomy versus gender identity, the Pansexuality article is clearly talking about gender identity (not someone with all anatomies :) - so they're talking about the same thing. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-10 06:18Z

The second paragraph is self-contradictory:

Pangender is a term for people who feel that they cannot be labeled as female or male in gender. ... The term is meant by the queer community to be one that is inclusive and means "all genders".

The last sentence would imply pangender includes traditional males and females, while the first does not. So make up your mind and add citations. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-10 06:18Z

• i would disagree gender and sexuality are differant issues. --Prof Jolly 12:36, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I completely agree on the difference between gender and sexuality. What is the difference between pangender and pansexual? —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-11 01:23Z
    • Pansexuality is someone who is attracted to neither sex in any preference or more commonly someone who doesn't identify with a sexual attraction to a sex. Pangender is someone who doesn't identify with having a gender themselves. čĥàñľōŕď 01:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
      • Exactly. Pansexuality refers to an interpersonal interest of people. A sexual orientation. Classifying someone as pangendered would insinuate that the person's perception of their own gender is that they have no gender, per se. Pangendered people can be the target of pansexual attraction, but aren't necessarily pansexual. They could be autosexual or asexual. Sexual desire and sexual perception are two majorly different things. —WNF 2006-01-18 06:09Z
        • Okay, I removed the merge tag. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-18 09:05Z

• There seems to be a bit of confusion as to when this article is referring to physical sex and gender, in that it seems to be saying "both birth genders" when it just means XY and XX individuals can both identify as pangender. Or "gender" given on a birth certificate when it is merely the sex that is stated on the birth certificate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.171.223.128 (talk) 04:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

This article is far superior in it's content to Androgyne, and it seems these terms are fairly close to synonomous. Maybe merge them and ditch the ugliness that is rampant on the current androgyne article? 68.233.12.105 07:31, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Definition

To me, pangender suggests that someone feels comfortable with many different gender labels, across the spectrum — drag king, manly man, mainstream male, metrosexual, androgynous, butch woman, tomboy, mainstream woman, girlie girl, drag queen — many apply.

Yes, this may fall under the umbrella of genderqueer, but only because genderqueer is a term that encompasses most gender-nonconforming identities. Pangender is a one type of gender-nonconforming identity, and it specifically implies that one feels at home with non-androgynous identities as well as androgynous ones. --Hirsutism (talk) 14:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Pangender is a nonbinary, multi gender. Pangender describes the experience of a lot of or all genders within an individuals culture. Pangender people have a wide range of what they're comfortable with and it entirely depends on the individual. Some use neopronouns, some use any pronouns or others may use he, her, they. Squishy20 (talk) 10:16, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

With all due respect, I do not agree that Pangender is a non-binary gender. The term non-binary attributes to neither male or female identities. Pangender means the individual cannot be labeled by one gender. They do not feel like more than one person, but they feel agender, female, male, genderqueer, nonbinary, bigender, demigender, etc. It cannot be labeled by another term and therefor can only be referred to as a gender identity. Not a mix. Not a fluid gender. Pangender just is and therefor we should accept that. :) 97.68.78.74 (talk) 17:19, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

I (who is pangender) think of pangender as a term for those who identify with many genders, but at the same time. I think it to be most similar to genderfluid, but instead of changing pronouns by how I feel, it's all the pronouns all the time. I actually thought it was a version of genderfluid at first. How to use pronouns for someone who is pangender is like this: "He is a really cool friend, and I like their taste in books. I really like xym and her cats." Now that just might be me, but I think that is correct. How I would describe it is as many different pronouns as possible in one sentence, to confuse the TERFs. You may disagree, but it makes me happy so I know I am correct. Please don't invalidate us and say it's the same as pansexual, genderqueer, non binary, or genderfluid. Thank you and have a nice day/night :> --Caz 19:05, 4 December 2021 (MST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caez247 (talk • contribs) 02:05, 5 Dec 2021 (UTC)

Pangender not transgender?

Pangender is not transgender; the are only the same in the fact that they are deemed "unconventional". Thus, pangender should not be a part of the transgender series; I feel this will confuse those just learning about the different types of sexualities. Gmwalker (talk) 04:53, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Most of the articles in the "identities" section of Template:Transgender sidebar are not transgender in the strict sense (but are in a broader sense that just means "non-cis"; except for cisgender, which is also there). Maybe that whole sidebar should be renamed to "gender identity" instead of "transgender" or something, but given that it currently functions as the sidebar for gender identity related articles in general, pangender belongs in there as much as anything else.

Also, this discussion should really be taking place at Template_talk:Transgender sidebar instead. --Pfhorrest (talk) 05:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

WP:NOTMANUAL

Equivamp, regarding this, I agree some of that needed to be removed or reworded per WP:NOTMANUAL, but I don't see that all of it needed removal unless poorly sourced. The first listing of WP:NOTMANUAL states, "Describing to the reader how people or things use or do something is encyclopedic; instructing the reader in the imperative mood about how to use or do something is not." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:37, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

When I initially was drafting the edit, what remained of the section was "Pronouns are used in place of one's name" (which is true regardless of gender or species and is even true of objects); "it and he-she are commonly considered offensive"; and information regarding presentation and medical transition which was unrelated to pronouns. I agree that the information doesn't entirely need removed, but I didn't think the section as it was could be salvaged, really. (The Genderqueer article handles discussion of pronouns and transition better.) --Equivamp - talk 14:33, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Some of what you restored is using the imperative mood though. Most egregiously "Use pronouns correctly to show tolerance and respect for someone’s gender identity." Some other parts of it are just dancing around to avoid the imperative; saying what is appropriate or correct to do, which is barely shy of just saying to do it in the imperative, and in any case an unencyclopedic tone. It needs to be phrased so as to say that such-and-such advises/prefers/etc that people do so-and-so, so as to put the imperative force into someone else's voice that the encyclopedia is reporting on, rather than having it in the encyclopedia's own voice. --Pfhorrest (talk) 21:39, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Pfhorrest, I didn't restore anything; I let the content stay removed. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:17, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

True. Sorry, I must've read the edit history too quickly and mistaken the removal for a restoration. --Pfhorrest (talk) 17:48, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

POV Pushing

The lede of this article states that the whole two genders theory is incorrect which is a controversial statement and by no means an accepted fact. We don't have to have the word alleged, we can have some other non-POV term. Apollo The Logician (talk) 19:05, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

That you even think there is such a thing as a "two genders theory" shows that you misunderstand what that word even means. You probably think it means sex. Gender was defined from the outset (Money 1950) as a social categorization and it is a brute empirical fact that some societies use more than two such categories. There is no controversy except among uneducated people who don't know the difference between sex and gender. --Pfhorrest (talk) 21:12, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Pfhorrest is correct that there is no "two genders theory". The fact that other societies have either non-rigid or non-binary social categories based on sexual dimorphism is well accepted. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Just look up "there are two genders" in a google search.Apollo The Logician (talk) 09:06, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, top result is from some site called "Age of Shitlords", and then an angry video saying to "get the fuck over it". Not making a good case for any encyclopedically notable opinion, just a sea of misinformed idiots on the internet. --Pfhorrest (talk) 23:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

@Apollo The Logician: You cannot seriously suggest that a meme is on par with a social science theory. This is seriously testing AGF... EvergreenFir (talk) 18:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

It has its own page called Genderism Apollo The Logician (talk) 20:00, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

That article's talk page is full of accusations of it being a neologism (as you accuse this article of) and also a POV fork of gender binarism. The latter of which is the view that there ought to only be two genders, not the assertion that there are only two genders, so asserting that something is a third or nonbinary gender isn't biased against binarist views, it's just saying that it's the kind of thing those views are against. C.f. saying that homosexuality is a sexual orientation is not biased against heterosexism; heterosexism is just opposed to people being homosexual, it doesn't claim that nobody is homosexual. --Pfhorrest (talk) 22:19, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pangender. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060916091820/http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Trans_Youth_Pamphlet.pdf to http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Trans_Youth_Pamphlet.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:24, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Genderqueer

Category:Genderqueer has been nominated for renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page.

Thought this was relevant to this page and yes I am the nominator. --Devin Kira Murphy (talk) 03:52, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Redirect to Genderfluid

Moved from Talk:Trigender § Pangender

 – - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 23:22, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

I just looked over Pangender. The only citation is a dicdef. I think that could be merged and redirected to Genderfluid or Non-binary gender in general, as well. Though, if there's no better sourcing than a dicdef and the source that was flagged as a copy from WP, we might just want to turn Pangender to a redirect and leave it at that. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 20:29, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Per Mathglot, pinging @Mathglot, -sche, Roscelese, Newimpartial, CorbieVreccan, Funcrunch, EvergreenFir, and Aircorn:, re redirect of both this page and Pangender to Genderfluid, per the above and now that all the Trigender content and sourcing has been merged there. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 22:44, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Probably the right move; however, Corbie, do you have any objection to my moving this entire subsection ('Pangender') to Talk:Pangender as a new section? That's really the proper place to attract interested parties to comment. (If you do it before I get to it, please use template {{Moved discussion to}}; thanks.) Mathglot (talk) 23:01, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

No objections. I'll take care of it right now. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 23:10, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

I have no objection to this particular merge/redirect. Funcrunch (talk) 23:36, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

• Yes, just redirect this to non-binary gender. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:06, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, at this point there is not much content so a merger to Non-binary gender seems appropriate. (I would merge to there, and not to "genderfluid", since I'm not aware than pangender people's experience of their gender is necessarily fluid... but perhaps you are just using "genderfluid" as shorthand for the section of Non-binary gender that genderfluid redirects to...) -sche (talk) 01:43, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
• Support redirect or merge. gnu57 05:17, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
• Yes, support redirect to non-binary gender, with either {{R to section}} #Definitions and identity, or {{R to anchor}} direct to Pangender—which, by the way isn't there yet, so will need to be added as a new, bolded term. Both this and trigender should probably also have Rcat {{printworthy}}. Mathglot (talk) 11:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Pangender is a gender that is part of the nonbinary umbrella but they are not genderfluid. Panfluid is under the genderfluid umbrella as well as the pangender umbrella. Redirecting to nonbinary is fine although nonbinary does not in itself accurately describe pangender. Genderfluid would be an incorrect redirect. Squishy20 (talk) 10:23, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@Squishy20: You're replying to a two-year-old discussion; Pangender has already been redirected to Non-binary gender#Definitions and identity. Funcrunch (talk) 16:57, 19 June 2021 (UTC)