Wikipedia:No queerphobia

This is an essay on the Wikipedia:Disruptive editing guideline.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

Shortcuts

This page in a nutshell: It is well within the scope of the

disruptive editing

guidelines to discipline editors for behavior indicative of queerphobia. This essay lays out common queerphobic beliefs and how to handle users who consistently express and advance them.

Many people are drawn to edit Wikipedia in order to promote anti-LGBT views, mistakenly believing that their beliefs are protected by the

WP:FRINGE

viewpoints and drive away productive LGBT editors.

The essay

WP:HATEISDISRUPTIVE lays out why denigrating minorities is not allowed on Wikipedia and results in blocking and banning; others such as Wikipedia:No racists, Wikipedia:No Nazis, and Wikipedia:No Confederates

lay out more specific guidelines for those forms of bigotry; this essay specifically serves to outline common anti-LGBT beliefs, disruptive manifestations of them, and the systems of recourse on English Wikipedia.

Context of this essay

Discussions have raged on for decades about how Wikipedia should write about LGBT people and topics. Gender and sexuality (

MOS:GIDINFO

contain the most up-to-date guidelines for writing about transgender people on Wikipedia.

Anti-LGBT editors frequently disrupt Wikipedia by promoting misinformation or pushing fringe viewpoints (particularly dangerous in medical articles), and create an unwelcoming environment for other editors. Editors who are unable to set aside their beliefs about the LGBT community when editing or who seek to promote

WP:FRINGE viewpoints may be restricted

from editing.

This essay outlines common queerphobic beliefs, popular misinformation about the LGBT community, and groups known to spread and support it, so that administrators and editors may recognize them, address them, and show queerphobes the door.

Arbitration remedy history

Timeline of Arbitration Committee decisions regarding gender and sexuality disputes.

In 2013 in the
discretionary sanctions
for all articles dealing with transgender issues and paraphilia classification (e.g., hebephilia). In 2014 this was updated to all pages dealing with said topics
In 2013 ArbCom had the Manning naming dispute case (WP:ARBMND) which found The standard discretionary sanctions adopted in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology or (among other things) "all articles dealing with transgender issues" remain in force. For the avoidance of doubt, these discretionary sanctions apply to any dispute regarding the proper article title, pronoun usage, or other manner of referring to any individual known to be or self-identifying as transgender
In 2015, the
WP:ARBMND
was updated accordingly.
In 2021, arbcom created the
WP:GENSEX
was amended to Gender-related disputes or controversies and associated people are designated as a contentious topic.

Beliefs, expressions, and actions

This essay and sister essays such as

WP:NONAZIS

face a common criticism: "we should sanction editors for their behaviors, not their beliefs".

This is not an unfair argument so it bears exploration. The essay Wikipedia:Hate is disruptive addresses the issue like this (emphasis added):

“

So bigots can edit here? Sure, if they edit without engaging in any hate speech or hateful conduct (which includes self-identification with hate movements). While this will be impossible for many bigots, presumably some number do manage this, people who write articles about botany without letting on that they think the Holocaust was a hoax, or fix lots of typos and never mention that they think it was a mistake to let women vote. Wikipedia policy does not concern itself with people's private views. The disruption caused by hateful conduct lies in the expression, not the belief.

The flip side of this is true too: If someone uses a bunch of racial slurs because they think it's funny, or posts an edgy statement about gay people on their userpage as a "social experiment", they are engaged in disruptive editing, even if they don't personally harbor hateful views.

”

This essay is based on that underlying principle, put succinctly as "your right to swing your fist stops where my nose begins". If you believe LGBT people are amoral deviants who need conversion therapy, but practice civility, never bring it up, and solely contribute to articles about entomology and highways, you have nothing to worry about and your contributions to Wikipedia are welcomed. This essay isn't about you. If you try to change the first sentence of LGBT to All LGBT people are amoral deviants who need conversion therapy...—or insist on talk pages that this is the case and Wikipedia needs to take your POV seriously—that is a behavioral issue and the focus of this essay.

Queerphobic beliefs

Queerphobia is the fear, hatred, or dislike of

bisexual, transgender, and otherwise queer

people. Queerphobes commonly believe that LGBT people and identities are deviant, and should be denied rights and protections.

Frequent anti-LGBT narratives include:

That being LGBT is a conscious choice or unnatural.
That LGBT people are inherently fetishistic, predatory, pedophilic, or otherwise dangerous.
That LGBT people, particularly youth, are straight people being turned LGBT through media exposure, peer pressure, or social contagion.
That the LGBT community or a subset of it are indoctrinating or grooming youth into being LGBT.
That LGBT people overall have greater societal power than
heterosexual
people.
That
parenting
should be restricted to heterosexual couples.
That recognizing same-sex marriage is a slippery slope towards legalizing
bestiality
or other strange or disfavored sexual practices.
That the open or subtextual presence of LGBT people or acknowledgment of them is inappropriately sexual or political and should be kept from the public square, media, or education.
That public spaces such as offices or schools should not protect LGBT people from bullying, deadnaming, and misgendering.
That LGBT (and intersex people's) rights are not human rights, but "just politics".^[1]

Overlapping with the narratives and beliefs above are more medically-related pseudoscientific/unevidenced proposals and typologies. The guideline

WP:FRINGE

addresses how to handle these in articles (we don't include them in articles on the broader topic, but if notable we can discuss them in their own articles while making clear they're fringe).

That LGBT identities and/or gender dysphoria are the result of mental illness.^[2]
That LGBT identities should be cured, treated, or suppressed^{gender exploratory therapy
and may justify it in scientific or religious terms.}
That LGBT people should be forced to undergo medical or psychological treatments, procedures, or testing on the basis of their identity.^[3]
That transgender people should be unable to change their legal gender, should be invariably excluded from gendered spaces, or should be legally denied
medical transition or have it otherwise made inaccessible.^[2]^[3]

The belief that when somebody talks about transgender youth, this means that they are medically transitioning below the age of 16 and are thus too young to decide to medically transition.

Queerphobic editors on Wikipedia frequently think:

That pushing anti-LGBT narratives is protected by
neutral point of view
policy.
That
biological reality
".
That LGBT editors have an inherent
conflict of interest
or are unable to write neutrally on LGBT-related topics because they are LGBT.

Possible manifestations

These beliefs may manifest in various ways that damage the encyclopedia. Below is a non-exhaustive list of possible ones.

civil POV-pushing

.

Hostility toward other editors

, such as consistently treating LGBT editors as biased, or refusing to gender them correctly.

Denigrating comments about the LGBT community in articles and talk space, often through the use of dog whistles and/or phrases serving to delegitimize transgender people (e.g. calling trans women "males masquerading as females").
Userboxes or userpages expressing anti-LGBT sentiments (e.g. a userbox with the text "This user Hate LGBT").
MOS:GENDERID
guidelines.

Aspersions

being blocked

.

Aspersions make the normal dispute resolution process difficult to go through and may create a chilling effect. Editors are encouraged to work through the normal dispute-resolution process when it comes to legitimate content disputes, such as disagreements on the interpretation or quality of sources.

What to do if you encounter queerphobia

You should always

our social policies are not a suicide pact

; we don't have to treat every harmful edit as the result of non-malicious ignorance.

For a new editor, understand that they are likely ignorant of Wikipedia systems and standards. Point them toward relevant guidelines and policies. If they are editing material related to gender identification, make them aware of the

GENSEX topic restrictions via the {{Contentious topics/alert/first|gg}} or {{Contentious topics/alert

|gg}} templates. If they are arguing against the guidelines, make it clear that you can't change the guidelines in an article discussion and direct them toward where such discussions can take place.

If an editor consistently and chronically disrupts the encyclopedia by promoting queerphobic opinions/viewpoints, you should collect relevant diffs and report them. If an editor was already made aware of the GENSEX topic restrictions, then you can request enforcement at

WP:ANI

.

Editors brazenly vandalizing articles or using slurs may be immediately blocked. Wikipedia has zero tolerance for such behavior. If an edit is grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive, it may be subject to revision deletion. If an edit breaches someone's privacy, you should request Oversight.

It can be very tempting, especially in article talk pages, to debate or rebut anti-LGBT talking points on their own merits. However, remember that

unconstructive or off-topic

, then consider collapsing, refactoring, or moving it so that you and other editors don't waste others' time.

References

[1] "About LGBTI people and human rights". Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Retrieved 18 May 2024.

[APA-statement-2] "APA Policy Statement on Affirming Evidence-Based Inclusive Care for Transgender, Gender Diverse, and Nonbinary Individuals, Addressing Misinformation, and the Role of Psychological Practice and Science" (PDF).

[O'Conner_et_al.-3] 
doi:10.1017/jme.2022.84
.

[1]

[2]

[3]