Forum:SH:Writing about gender and reproduction

This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. Tommy-Macaroni 14:06, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

---

Seeing the "Sexes" to "Gender" CT pass so smoothly brings warm feelings to my heart! With that step taken, WookieeProject: Pride has further thoughts on improving our writing about genders, sexualities, and reproduction. This time around, we want to address how Star Wars has used some non-preferred language and Wookieepedia has followed suit regarding intersex people, as well as outdated uses of the word asexual. We can't change prior Star Wars publications, but need to do better on the wiki. We have to remember that even though we're writing about fiction, real people are reading our articles, so we should not be detached from how our writing affects our readers. Avoiding inadvertent use of offensive terminology is important for our neutrality; using stigmatizing language can make us look intentionally biased in favor of a point of view that is not inclusive. We will still be encyclopedic and accurate to official materials and, as a bonus, improve the clarity of our writing when terms have multiple dictionary meanings. Below, we'll address some areas that Legends handled badly and the current canon is still getting a grip on.

In the past, this would likely have required proposing amendments to the Manual of Style; however, implementing the suggestions below without a local policy change may now be in keeping with Fandom-wide policy, as seen in the Terms of Service and their LGBTQIA+ Resources article. (As a reminder, WP:PRIDE also has a Resources page to provide more information.) Some of it also follows up on the Sexes to Gender renames. Please let us know your thoughts!

Our goals are for this discussion are:

• Education!
• Correcting inaccurate uses of the Character infobox |gender= field for terms that are reproductive strategies, not genders
• Correcting inaccurate pipelinking of reproduction-related terms to gender (and the Legends equivalents)
• Removing stigmatizing language and discouraging future use
• Encouraging more thorough and accurate descriptions of species and individuals, particularly from Legends

Reproductive strategies vs. sexes and genders vs. sexualities

What do "intersex" and "asexual" mean?

Legends had problems with how it portrayed species with hermaphroditic traits, and referring to characters from those species with the noun "hermaphrodite." In real life, that language is outdated, offensive, and scientifically inaccurate when applied to people. That noun should never be used to refer to people without their consent. Language has been shifting in recent years in favor of intersex. Using stigmatizing language has contributed to misconceptions about intersex people. Of course, Star Wars has more sentient species than just humans, but that doesn't make it okay for us to use stigmatizing language when writing about any of them—those fictional characters aren't our readership.

The adjective "hermaphroditic" is still used as specialized terminology in biology when referring to certain non-human species only. These animal species are not like intersex human beings, and will be described in another section below.

Another word that has changed in common usage is asexual. Dictionary definitions show why using this word in the specialized sense (#1 and #2) can lack specificity, and cause confusion with the modern usage (#4):

To explain #4 further:

Star Wars canon has explicitly asexual characters like Leox Gyasi and Vi Moradi, with Leox's Databank entry stating: "Despite his undeniable good looks, romantic and sexual encounters are not imperative to him; in fact, he identifies as asexual." Wookieepedia needs to distinguish species or beings without sexes from asexual reproductive methods from asexual orientation, especially because we have ace readers and editors.

Real-life reproduction

Here's a simplified overview of hermaphroditism and asexual reproduction in real-world species of animals, bacteria, and fungi. Please keep in mind that those terms do not apply to human beings! We can't reproduce asexually, and intersex people are nothing like the species described below.

• A gamete is a specialized cell that fuses with another gamete during fertilization (conception). In species where each individual creature or plant produces only one of two separate types of gametes, "female" is defined as producing the larger gamete (ovum, or egg) from an ovary, and "male" as producing the smaller gamete (spermatozoon, or sperm cell) from a testis. Since the chromosomes of each individual differ, the fusion of gametes results in variable combinations and creates genetic diversity.
• Hermaphroditic species have individuals that can produce both gametes—spermatozoa and ova. However, this takes different forms depending on the species:
  • Sequential: Individuals first have ovaries that are replaced by testes later, or vice versa; their sex is male at one time and female at another time in their life cycle. Clownfish are an example. In real life, the change in sex only occurs once and can take several years.
    • In Star Wars: Every three years, adult X'Ting went through the Change, a three-month-long metamorphosis in sexual phase between male or female. Xidelphiads would enter a cocoon for at least fifteen years when changing from female to male.
  • Simultaneous: Individuals have both ovaries and testes at the same time throughout their life, and their types of reproduction vary:
    • Self-fertilization of the individual's ovum by their own spermatozoon; for example, banana slugs when a mate is unavailable
      • In Star Wars: Jabba Desilijic Tiure was the sole parent of Rotta in Legends. Swamp slugs in Legends self-fertilize, and dianogas in both continuities can choose to.
    • Two individuals mate and exchange spermatozoa with each other, then after gestation, they both lay fertilized eggs. Land snails and earthworms are examples.
      • In Star Wars: Canon dianogas could choose to exchange eggs with another dianoga.
    • Two individuals mate but each assumes one reproductive role, either fertilizing or gestating the eggs, or they take turns in multiple matings. An example of the latter is the hamlet fish.
      • In Star Wars: Legends Vratix played different reproductive roles throughout their life cycle, sometimes being the impregnator and other times the gestator. Berrites would choose which was the fertilizer and which was the egg layer. When Verpine hives needed new members, some were assigned to lay eggs and others were assigned to fertilize those eggs afterward.
    • (Plant pollination is a tangent we'll bypass.)
• Asexual reproduction does not involve the fusion of gametes. Instead, one individual produces one or more offspring that inherit their single parent's full set of genes. Some organisms that reproduce asexually have mechanisms for genetic recombination to create genetic diversity.
  • Budding: The "mother" organism produces a "daughter" that starts off smaller and connected to the mother until it matures and breaks away. This is seen in coral, baking/brewing yeast, and various viruses.
  • Fragmentation: A new organism grows from a fragment of the parent organism. Sometimes this is paired with other reproductive strategies, such as in sponges or the starfish N. belcheri which can split off a piece of an arm but also reproduces sexually. Fragmentation in some species produces clones of the parent. Many plants can reproduce this way.
  • Fission: One organism divides into genetically identical organisms. This can be binary fission (one splits into two) or multiple fission (one divides several times). This can be seen with bacteria and single-celled organisms.
    • In Star Wars: Although details aren't provided, Legends mynocks are silicon-based and split in a manner that is either actual fission or similar to fission (the distinction depends on the source).
  • Sporogenesis: Organisms reproduce via the production of spores instead of gametes. In true asexual spore formation, found in some algae and fungi, cell division results in spore cells with the same number of chromosomes as the parent. Spores grow into new organisms after dispersal through the air or water.
    • In Star Wars: Legends sarlaccs produce spores called sarlacci that are discharged from an oviduct, somehow travel through space, and then implant in the ground to start growing and forming a pit.
  • Parthenogenesis: An unfertilized egg develops into a fully-formed individual without the contribution of a male gamete. Some species that use parthenogenesis also use sexual reproduction, and either alternate between the two at regular intervals or resort to parthenogenesis when mates are scarce. There are also species that only reproduce via parthenogenesis. Depending on the type of cell division in the species, resulting offspring may be full clones or half clones. Komodo dragons are capable of this in the absence of mates.
    • In Star Wars: M'shinn mothers produced nearly identical daughters with subtle genetic changes across generations rather than full clones.

Suggestions for writing on Wookieepedia

• The |gender= field in the Character infobox should not be filled with a type of reproduction, such as when a species had hermaphroditic traits or reproduced asexually. This is an incorrect use of the field; since these words do not describe a gender, they should not be placed in the |gender= field. Likewise, they should not be pipelinked to Gender anywhere in the article. Although this is an error made by some Legends sources (like The New Essential Guide to Characters), we should not replicate it. Instead, state the character's gender identity (if specified) without qualifiers like "persona" or "personality."
  • Example: incorrect: |gender=[[Gender/Legends|Hermaphroditic]] {{C|masculine personality}}
  • Example: correct: |gender=[[Gender/Legends|Male]]
• For relevant non-humanoid alien species and individuals (not humans, near-humans, or humanoids):
  • Use the adjective "hermaphroditic"—not the stigmatizing noun form "hermaphrodite"—to describe an alien species or individual, regardless of whether an official source used it. The noun form is outdated and offensive.
  • For alien individuals who were hermaphroditic, their gender should be stated affirmatively as their actual gender, avoiding ambiguity or casting doubt on the validity. Their gender and pronouns should not be in quotation marks or presented as a mere role or persona. For instance, avoid this phrasing from Galaxy Guide 12: Aliens — Enemies and Allies, which is now outdated and offensive: " 'She' (all Hutts are hermaphroditic, but Churabba took on a 'female' persona) had a cunning business mind." Preferable writing might be: "Churabba was a female Hutt with a cunning business mind."
  • When further information is available for a hermaphroditic species, provide those details to clarify the usage of the term, as it has multiple meanings in real-life and in Star Wars. For instance, some species are described as capable of reproducing by themselves without a sexual partner, and others have one or more individuals contributing gametes. Be specific without relying on binary gender terms. For example:
    • "simultaneously possessing multiple types of reproductive organs" (instead of the binary phrase "both male and female sex organs")
    • "capable of selecting their reproductive role when producing offspring with a sexual partner" (instead of the binary "assume either the male or female role")
    • "able to self-fertilize and carry offspring as the sole parent" (instead of the doubtful "males could be 'mothers' of their own younglings")
  • For non-humanoid individuals, only use the adjective "hermaphroditic" when it is contextually relevant to describe that individual reproducing, and do not use the noun. If there isn't a specific reason to mention the trait (such as characters that have no offspring), there is no reason to include it in the article. This is consistent with how we don't include other biological details or species traits on character articles unless it's relevant. For instance, Chewbacca is not categorized or described as mammalian, but Wookiees are described as mammals and categorized in Category:Mammalian sentient species. Although Legends Hutts were hermaphroditic, it could possibly be relevant for an individual Hutt's article to describe them as such in the context of producing Huttlets; however, since this is already a trait of the species, it may be redundant to restate it.
• When describing a species that propagated through asexual reproduction rather than sexual, use clear terminology such as "asexual reproduction" and "reproduced asexually" to indicate it is their form of reproduction. If more specific information is available regarding the type of asexual reproduction, such as the use of spores or parthenogenesis, include that information. Avoid describing the species as a whole or individual beings themselves as "asexual" based on reproductive methods.
• When describing a species or individuals of a species that lacked sexual organs or did not have multiple sexes, do not describe them as "asexual;" instead, provide clear descriptions of their biology and/or culture.
• Some writing on the site and in some official sources has suggested there is a galaxy-wide gender binary in effect. However, this is contrary to canon and Legends acknowledging multiple genders and sexes among various species. Despite that, many of our articles are written as if only two exist. Here are some examples of what that has looked like:
  • "both sexes"
  • "both males and females"
  • "men and women"
  • "either gender"
  • "opposite sex"
  • "The species had two sexes, male and female."

  Writing that assumes a gender binary should be avoided and current instances should be revised. Instead of a binary pair, use phrases that are inclusive of multiple genders, such as "regardless of gender," "any gender," or "all genders." We can still write about sexual dimorphism in species or about cultural gender roles without assuming and specifying a strictly binary system. For instance, compare and contrast traits associated with females and with males in that culture, but don't state that those are the only two genders. As most of our editors and readers are humans,^[source?] we should especially avoid the gender binary when writing about human, humanoid, and near-human characters and species.

For the future

If we're ever presented with a human, humanoid, or near-human character that has this characteristic, we recommend the preferred language intersex if the text fails to provide a non-stigmatizing in-universe term. For instance, we might say the character is an "intersex being" or "[gender] who had an intersex condition." Intersex is not a gender, so it would not be listed in the Gender field or pipelinked to that term.

Example: Filordus

Minnabird explains revisions to this species:
On the Filordus article, the species |distinctions= field in the infobox previously contained the standalone word "Asexual" pipelinked to Gender, and the "Biology and appearance" section stated that "Filordi had no gender and reproduced on death." While this follows what was said in source materials about the Filordi, returning to the source materials in question yielded more specific information:

• Varying pronoun use ("it" for Yve vs. "he" for others) and contradictory information on gender (referring to Rikard with gendered pronouns immediately followed by "remember that Filordi are not gendered, and any gendered pronouns that we use are simply for convenience;" two individual Filordi are each stated to be "Male Filordi" [sic])
• The word "asexual" is usually paired with reproductive information. (The outlier is "they're asexual and don't have genders" in Belly of the Beaast; these are presented as two separate things with an implied, but not explicit, causal relation.)

The word "asexual," with its many meanings, is not sufficient on its own to accurately report what the source material says about Filordi. The article was therefore rewritten to clarify that "asexual" refers to their method of reproduction and that the Filordi were not gendered as a rule, although some individuals were referred to as male. The word "asexual" in the |distinctions= field and its pipelink to Gender/Legends was also replaced with two more pointed descriptions. Character articles (seen in the Filordi category) had their |gender= fields and article bodies updated as well.

The Legends article on gender does a nice job succinctly but accurately representing what has been said about this species:

"The Filordi reproduced asexually and did not have genders as a species; however, some individuals such as Verkul Seimbo and Nui Gneppe were considered male."

Delete this problematic category

We also propose that we DELETE Category:Hermaphrodites, which is currently in the parent category Category:Individuals by gender; it is not a gender and is an offensive term. Again, this would also be consistent with how we don't categorize individuals by the characteristics of their species. We could continue to use Category:Hermaphroditic species (for sentients) which is in the parent category Category:Species by biology, and the subcategory Category:Hermaphroditic creatures (for non-sentients).

Counter-arguments

• Counter-argument: The noun form of hermaphroditic is used in Legends sources. Removing it would be a violation of the core principle of Wookieepedia of documenting everything in the Star Wars universe without original research.
  • Counter-counter-argument: This proposal does not suggest that information about the sexual or gender characteristics of any of the relevant species be deleted or not documented. It simply argues for modifying our language to be both more precise and less stigmatizing. Moreover, words like hermaphroditic are already used in sources, so adapting our writing still utilizes language found within Star Wars. In a way, we're actually proposing documenting more information to explain how those characteristics manifest in different species instead of just using a single word without further details. It's worth noting that Star Wars: The Old Republic's Codex Lore entries clearly state that being intersex is unrelated to gender, so making this change has IU justification.
• Counter-argument: "Intersex" isn't an in-universe term, so including it in our articles would be original research.
  • Counter-counter-argument: It is true that intersex has not been used in-universe as of this writing, but ultimately intersex is just a dictionary word that, according to the Intersex Society of North America, means having "a reproductive or sexual anatomy that doesn't seem to fit the typical definitions of female or male." Wookieepedia does not have a requirement for any other dictionary word that it must be used in-universe before it can be used to describe the subject at hand; there's no reason that this subject should be any different.
• Counter-argument: Removing that noun violates WP:NOTCENSORED.
  • Counter-counter-argument: That's not what that policy means. WP:NOTCENSORED is about preventing Wookieepedia from making changes solely because outside groups want us to. That is not happening here. The policy does not prevent us from deciding as a community to remove content that we feel does not belong on the Wook. We have done so many times before, from the LEGO tab to numerous trash compactors to the recent removal of the image on Breast/Legends. Further, retaining the word may violate other policies. Nothing in our policies requires that we use a slur if the source used it, but policies do require avoiding transphobic, homophobic, aphobic, and other offensive language related to genders and sexualities.
• Counter-argument: If we stop using this word from Legends/the past, it could lead to us removing things that come from the future Star Wars canon.
  • Counter-counter-argument: This argument was made on a prior proposal regarding harmful language practices, but as with that propostal, we shouldn't use a "slippery slope" to justify opposing this change. Yes, other proposals to change our writing might occur in the future, and they might be undesirable proposals for future voters, but that doesn't mean that this one is.

Discussion

Questions? Feedback? Immi Thrax (talk) 04:33, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

• Great work, and detailed! :D — YakovChaimTzvi (talk) 14:40, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Thank you! :D! Immi Thrax (talk) 23:35, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
• I think I gave most of my feedback while you were drafting this! Some of the added words in the Filordus example section need a little proofreading:
  • "the infobox was previously contained the standalone" ("was" should be deleted)
  • "'Filordi were not gendered' immediately after referring to Rikard with gendered pronouns 'for convenience;'" (I think a linking word got left out before "immediately"; maybe "then"?)

  Otherwise looking fantastic. Is this the end place for this piece of writing, or is there a plan to ask that this or some of this be made more visibly available to people looking into editing (eg MoS)? —Minnabird ^(talk) 18:20, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

  • • Thank you for catching those, and I made the corrections! I'd like feedback on what happens with this now, but maybe MoS is suitable for some of it. Immi Thrax (talk) 23:35, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
• This all seems logical and well researched to me. As long as we're careful to always make sure that no information is being lost when we do the rewording I'd support going ahead with these changes. Ayrehead02 (talk) 21:36, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Species-wise, I definitely intend there to be nothing lost plus adding more information. So many interesting things to detail further! Character-wise, I feel that it's extraneous and unnecessary to name an individual's potential reproductive type when they never reproduce; however, I don't consider omitting that to be a loss of information, like how it's unnecessary to specify that Luke Skywalker is a bipedal mammalian vertebrate with binocular vision. What do you think? Immi Thrax (talk) 23:35, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
• Per all the above. I'd gladly lend my support here. OOM 224 ^{༼༽talk༼༽} 21:41, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
• Took a while to get through, but that's a testament of how well researched and thorough this is. I agree with above. --Vitus Infinitus^Talk 21:52, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
• I think I get it but just to get things clear concerning an FA of mine; Boorka, any mentions of Hermaprhodite would be removed from the article and it would just say that he was a male, without specifying that as a Hutt he had multiple types of reproductive organs? Commander Code-8 ^{Hello There!} 01:13, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
  • You got it! Immi Thrax (talk) 01:27, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
• I think we will have to pay particularly close attention when assigning gender to the Hutts of Legends, whose gender identity and expression were not assumed to be static, even when sex/gender conflation and a fixed gender binary were assumed among non-hermaphroditic species. While some Hutts are pretty consistent in their gender identity and expression (I can't recall Jabba ever presenting, or thinking of himself, as anything but male), others adhere to a particular gender paradigm that seems to be cultural for some members of the species; Aruk Besadii Aora was among this camp, whose gender expression (and perhaps identity, though I can't recall if we get any writing from Aruk's POV that clarifies this) varied according to Hutt expectation, where he presented as male unless pregnant, in which case she presented as female. I believe still other Hutts (and I'm admittedly drawing a blank on an example right now) were more like what we now call genderfluid, where gender identity and/or expression was independent of any biological trigger like pregnancy, and instead depended on the whim of the Hutt in question, or pragmatic concerns about which gender best suited their business dealings. Hutts like Jabba are easy, but articles (and particularly infoboxes) of those that change gender, either due to Hutt custom or otherwise, will likely need discussion and a careful touch. jSarek (talk) 08:52, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Thank you so much for highlighting this. One of the suggestions while drafting this was that their last-known gender identity could be used for infobox purposes, but the drawback is that it doesn't present the full picture of their genders over time. For instance, I'm aware of Jiliac Desilijic Tiron's identity shifting, possibly permanently, to female when she became pregnant—the excerpts Minnabird found surprised me with how well they handled the subject. I haven't personally read narrative materials where a specific Hutt's presentation was fluid, just some reference materials that it could happen; the Hutts I've read (besides excerpts of Jiliac) have had one fixed identity. I'm unfamiliar with Aruk so I'd like to learn more! With that article being a FAN, that's one to prioritize. I want to be sure our writing doesn't inadvertently give the impression of equating or comparing Hutts to real-world trans or intersex folks.^{(damn it, Legends)}
    My DPL search produced a couple hundred Hutts that currently have the h-word in their infobox. I'd greatly appreciate one or more fellow editors assisting with researching and updating them! Perhaps a SH thread specifically for Hutt article updates so people not on Discord could provide input? Immi Thrax (talk) 19:01, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
    • I believe it was actually VergenceScatter who brought up Jiliac! I'd also like to look more into Hutts and see what the best way to handle them is. (I also don't think we have guidelines set up for handling gender fluidity, which is another thing that begs for research...hmmmm.) —Minnabird ^(talk) 04:57, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
      • I've added a project page to WP:PRIDE for working on Hutts and other, given the extent of articles that need updating. Immi Thrax (talk) 16:18, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
      • As an update, a CT will go up at some point for style guide additions... and, of course, help wanted for fixing the Hutts and others. :) Immi Thrax (talk) 09:59, 23 July 2021 (UTC)