Hello! I noticed that a lot of wikiHow articles aren’t gender-neutral. While some of the articles are about gender and gender identity, a lot of them aren’t explicitly about gender, and should use ‘they/them’ instead of ‘he/him/his’ or ‘she/her/hers.’ wikiHow readers have many different gender identities, and the articles that they read should not use gendered pronouns unless the article is specifically for a certain gender or gender identity. Thanks!
8 Likes
You’re welcome to edit articles to have gender-neutral pronouns if you see issues like this, but I’m not sure this warrants a Village Pump post.
6 Likes
I agree as well. Maybe a “gender neutrality” project would be in order?
2 Likes
So based on the discussions about gender and such in some recent General Chat threads, I’m going to add some information, just for the sake of being thorough:
It’s totally fine to change gendered pronouns to they/them or such, and I also personally opt for subtle gender neutrality where I can (like saying “person” instead of “woman” or “man” on sex-specific health topics). But we do need to remember that not every reader is informed on gender identity, so there will be occasions where total gender neutrality is not possible. It doesn’t mean wikiHow isn’t an inclusive site; it just means that in certain contexts, we may have to use gendered language for the sake of understandability. I’d love a world in which we didn’t need to use gendered language or where the terms AMAB or AFAB were more commonly understood, but we’re not quite at that point yet.
I talked with Anna about this last year with regards to SE edits, and will copy-paste what she said, for more context (some edits made for clarity):
"I do hear you on trying to be supportive of the wider audience including folks with less mainstream experiences. […] The balance probably just comes in finding where it makes sense to speak universally and when it becomes overly wordy or distracting from the actual point of sharing advice.
Either way, if there are pages you think need editing along those lines, you’re welcome to dive in - I’d just try to find that balance in avoiding making the page less accessible to others in neutralizing it, you know? It’s a fine line and I don’t have a solid example to give you, but I think there are extremes that could be offputting to all readers just because they’d read awkwardly (even to a trans person).
[…] I just always fear any kind of edict that’s taken as a blanket rule… don’t want to set off folks going and using Ctrl/F to replace every instance of ‘woman’ with uterus-bearer… it’d just feel like unsubtle overkill, I think, you know?"
So tl;dr: neutralizing gendered language is fine as long as it doesn’t get incredibly wordy or complicated, so that we don’t confuse the average person with little to no understanding on trans identity.
9 Likes
And I’d likely to be one person who’s apt to change “they” back to a specific gender: She or He. It isn’t about excluding anyone, but that he/she is more specific for the largest population of readers. IMO
Actually, even though it doesn’t seem like it, ‘they/them’ includes all readers.
4 Likes
Why? This is probably against wH policy. Articles should not be biased towards one gender without a reason. (For example, an article specifically for men or women, even then) There’s even a template out there for marking articles as pointlessly gendered so they can be edited. If you have an article on I don’t know let’s say… apply foundation (for ex). There is no point for it to be gendered because our readers could be male or female. Making it gendered pointlessly is absolutely excluding.
If I saw you editing that I would probably roll it back.
8 Likes
Thanks @InfernoTerra
for supporting my point on gender neutrality!
2 Likes
Honestly, even on some “gendered” topics, it’s exclusive. I cannot tell you how uncomfortable I felt when I was younger and would have to be looking up something related to periods or other AFAB reproductive health subjects and would see “all women dealing with periods might…” or something along those lines. I’m not a woman - I still have to deal with concerns about pregnancy, certain types of cancers, and so forth. Trans and GNC people are already regularly excluded from so many healthcare topics, to the point of being outright turned away by doctors on the basis of not being cis. We don’t need to contribute to that kind of exclusion.
7 Likes
Of course! I’ve edited a lot of articles to be gender neutral. So I may have some personal feelings on the subject, aha.
1 Like
Yeah. I was trying to convey that a little in my previous reply so good point Alex! Even on gendered subjects it can be exclusive. For trans people who may not identify as a woman or man but will still have to deal with those issues. Another thing that came to mind for me is some of the topics are applicable to both genders. For example, applying makeup. This is typically considered a feminine thing but there are plenty of men who might want to but feel discouraged by everything being gendered.
Or on the other side. Car work, is typically considered masculine and gendering this can be exclusive to a woman who was interested.
These are both for example of course. I have no experience with this as I don’t have any interest in makeup or cars (outside of driving) for that matter. However, there are certain things in society that are just pointlessly gendered and it can be discouraging. For both men and women. I absolutely agree. Anything we can do to not contribute to exclusion is a win for me.
6 Likes
Zodi
13
I’d like to add that - even if an article is very difficult to make entirely gender-neutral while also remaining accessible to the general public, that does not preclude making it partially more neutral. (e.g. an article relating to sexual health can use gendered terms to avoid confusion while also using they/them pronouns and non-gendered terms when it is not likely to be misinterpreted) I’ve asked about this a trans online space a while back and the general consensus was that a mildly gendered text is still better than one that is excessively so.
8 Likes
This is a topic I am interested in. I fully support neutrality in articles. Some time ago I made it a goal to remove heteronormanity (I don’t think that’s how you spell it) on articles. Unless the title states the gender of the reader and the gender of the other person, changing the pronouns doesn’t take long. There are a few bits that are harder to change though.
In terms of keeping it neutral for transgender and non-binary people, it usually gets harder. You still have to keep the readability up. For example, the article Cope With Puberty As a Girl
is more focused on AFAB people, rather than girls as a whole, but I doubt anyone is going to be searching for “Cope With Puberty As an AFAB Person”. In fact, I’d hazard a guess that many people don’t even know what that means. Also, despite what JK Rowling thinks,
trans people are fully aware of their biological sex and would know where to find advice about their body. I think it would be great if the language was as neutral as possible while still sounding natural so that trans and non-binary people can feel more comfortable reading about these topics.
I don’t think this is stopping us from keeping it as neutral as possible. Some simple wording changes can make a difference, such as “pregnant person”, instead of “pregnant woman” is doable. Gender neutral pronouns are also a quick fix. An example is this edit
I made some time ago to Deal With Your Significant Other’s PMS
(okay, a “simple” fix, rather than a “quick” fix).
Another possibility is leaving a note in the intro stating something like “This article defines ‘girl/boy’ as anyone ‘who is assigned female/male at birth’, if that isn’t what you are looking for, check out ‘xyz article’.” That said, I’m not sure how effective this would be, but it is certainly an option.
Also, besides being more inclusive, singular they/them also just have a better flow to them. Prove me wrong.
8 Likes
