Added Gender field options.



Aidan wrote 7 days ago:

Seeing as there is only 2 genders from a medical and scientific standpoint and that people not identifying as those is more of a psychological and social issue I don't think we should list more than 2 genders.

Then the question becomes how do we handle people that is either offended by this or don't want their gender listed.

With the technical limitations currently on the site I suggest we just leave the gender box unchecked and use the Person's Biography to explain what's what.


pentar wrote 7 days ago:

Delenn wrote:

it's about accurately representing facts.

Such as whether a person has a "Y" chromosome? (Sorry, I couldn't help myself :) )



Delenn wrote 7 days ago:

Aidan wrote:
Seeing as there is only 2 genders from a medical and scientific standpoint and that people not identifying as those is more of a psychological and social issue I don't think we should list more than 2 genders.

Then the question becomes how do we handle people that is either offended by this or don't want their gender listed.

With the technical limitations currently on the site I suggest we just leave the gender box unchecked and use the Person's Biography to explain what's what.

You're confusing with gender with biological sex. They are not the same thing. We don't list biological sex, we list gender. Biological sex is dictated by sexual reproductive anatomy (amongst other biological factors), gender is not. (As a side note, from a scientific perspective there are in fact, more than 2 standard definitions of biological sex, such as intersex - however that's not the issue here, but if you want some recent scientific studies on gender and/or biological sex I can scan them from my biology journals).

@pentar - it's not as simple as who has XX/XY chromosomes from a biological perspective. Scientific studies show that multiple X/Y variants exist. But again, that's biological sex, which is not the exclusive component in determining gender. ;-p (It's almost as if this whole forcing people into a binary thing is not remotely accurate at all.)

And I say again, it's not about offense. Nobody has said they're offended at any point. It's about accuracy of information. Leaving it unchecked is certainly AN option, it's what we've been doing, but that doesn't make it the best or the most accurate option.

Realistically speaking, from a coding perspective, how difficult is it to add that third gender option? (I ask not facetiously, I genuinely don't know what kind of behind the scenes undertaking that would require.)



Aidan wrote 7 days ago:

If accuracy is an issue I don't see a point in adding a catch-all option as that wouldn't be any more accurate. I'm also curious about how permanent these gender associations are and how we can accurately keep track of them as they potentially cange. To be perfectly honest I see a potential pitfalls all over the place an I'm questioning if it's worth the work for a minimal amount of actors.

As others have mentioned the best way might be to rename "unknown" to something everyone can live with and use that and then use the bio for more in-depth explanations.


Jan wrote 7 days ago:

Delenn wrote:

Realistically speaking, from a coding perspective, how difficult is it to add that third gender option? (I ask not facetiously, I genuinely don't know what kind of behind the scenes undertaking that would require.)

Technically feasible.
We're interested in expanding the types of available data in 2019 so this can be discussed.
Consensus and purpose of the data needs also to fulfill the requirement of added value. How many people care about having this type of data added? What are the use cases? How does the distinction/addition help you personally?

I'm not against this type of data as long as it doesn't strain the flow of data input for editors. Meaning things should be kept as simple as possible. Having f.e. a dropdown list or whatever with 34 options isn't user friendly at all if 98.5-99.9%(according to statistics) of the cases are male/female. And if we just add 'other': will people remark that we shouldn't be excluding other gender options?

Anyway, do share your opinions/suggestions and examples of how other systems are approaching this.

Coincidentally: I used to do development for an organization that provides support to transgenders, lgbt,... So if/when we pick this up i'll ask for their input as well.

cheers,

Jan