We need to market ourselves

[RebeccaFog]

Hey,

The only reason I haven't done it is because wikipedia scares the hell out of me. I reckon us lot are the closest thing the world has to experts on androgynes.

Maybe I can be your front.  Clerical duties are fine with me.  Plus you sound intelligent as opposed to whatever I project.

I'm sure that KK and no_id and would be good contributors.  They have orderly and functioning minds (by which I don't mean to imply that the rest of us are dolts).

[Pica Pica]

and marq and mia have got there shtick down so pat now, and emerald is good for clarity.

[RebeccaFog]

How do we coerce, I mean, draft, them?

   I need to get it together and start drawing up a strategy and a loose timeline for what I hope to do.  I need to follow through.  If I fail in getting some of these ideas off the ground, I want it to be that I tried and failed rather than failing through inaction.

[Pica Pica]

I think if we wrote a draft each, posted it on here, and then beat it into shape before transferring it, it would hold a better chance of staying...I reckon many wikipedia types would want it unto 'androgyny' and not get the distinction.

[RebeccaFog]

I think if we wrote a draft each, posted it on here, and then beat it into shape before transferring it, it would hold a better chance of staying...I reckon many wikipedia types would want it unto 'androgyny' and not get the distinction.

and that's why we'll have to beat them into shape.

I gotta sign of for the night now.  Bye bye

[Alison]

I'm not exactly well versed, but I'll help however I can.

[RebeccaFog]

and, by helping, thou shalt become well versed. 

[Seshatneferw]

(by which I don't mean to imply that the rest of us are dolts)

Speak for yourself. 

  Nfr
  dolt and proud of it, but willing to help

[Shana A]

   What if one of us begins the entry.  The rest of us could add comments or suggest changes for the initial person to add.  OR,  one of us starts the entry and then several of us make the changes as the rest make suggestions and the potential changes go thru a process of review and approval.

I'd be happy to help, if it doesn't bring the project down that is  I've never done a wikipedia entry, but willing to learn.

I think if we wrote a draft each, posted it on here, and then beat it into shape before transferring it, it would hold a better chance of staying...I reckon many wikipedia types would want it unto 'androgyny' and not get the distinction.

I like the idea of working out a draft here.

z

[RebeccaFog]

  In fact, I was going to suggest Y2gender as a cultural/historical editor due to hir appearing to be well informed on our history and for having met some of the more prominent members of our group.

[Pica Pica]

did what i reckon is an o first paragraph.

[RebeccaFog]

did what i reckon is an o first paragraph.

that's good.  we need to establish a method for review, suggestion and edits. a process.

I was poking around on wikipedia and I signed up, but I think only a benighted few can create articles.  The rest of us can only edit or add.   I want to find out how 'androgyne' can become it's own topic separate from androgynous.

    I also think that the citations asked for in the tiny little androgyne section can be taken care of by inserting leslie feinberg's 'transgendered warriors' & maybe a kate borstein book as sources.  They may not be establishment approved, however, our big issue is that the establishment is not doing anything for us anyway (as far as I know).
    Also, I need to comb through the references and links that KK has provided for us in order to try to understand us from a position other than the point of view we've established amongst ourselves.  Thought is not my strong suit, however.  I probably won't retain much.
    Alternately, if there is an 'officially' approved source of info, we need to find it.

   this is going to be time consuming.  I expect at minimum it'll be a winter haul.

[Simon]

I suggest having a section on androgyne related terms.  More than just some glossary, having a subsection on each term.  There's so much contradiction out there and I think one of the reasons is that androgynes are scattered so any glossary has bigenders writing about what it means to be third gender, or something like that.  If we set up a list of subsections, those who identify with a term can write something about it.

Terms I suggest:
Bigender
Third Gender
Neutrois
Gender Fluid

I've done some stuff with Latex before.  Maybe now I'll actually get a Wikipedia account...

[Shana A]

  In fact, I was going to suggest Y2gender as a cultural/historical editor due to hir appearing to be well informed on our history and for having met some of the more prominent members of our group.

I have read a lot of transgender history, how many of them were androgynes, I couldn't really say for sure. I wouldn't want to impose my 21st century viewpoint on someone who might have felt different. Willing to try though...

Z

[Pica Pica]

i always thought what we have here would be a good beginning anyway

[RebeccaFog]

Okay then, we need to create some steps to get us started.

Maybe start a thread that is dedicated to the initial Androgyne topic.

   Then a second thread to hammer out Simon's idea of the subsections and some beginning subsection definitions or descriptions?  Though, maybe after the subsection list is decided upon, each subsection can have it's own definition thread.

   Maybe we can tag wiki related threads with a LAMP message icon in order to differentiate them from ordinary threads because these particular threads will need to be severely limited in scope.
   
If you agree.  sorry, I don't want anyone to think I'm getting bossy. 

Maybe we can use polls for voting on our standards.

threads could have several parallels.  Definition threads, discussion threads, voting threads.  A definition thread would have it's title tagged with something like [definition] the same title would be used for discussion except with a [discussion] tag and voting threads would have the same title with a [vote] tag.

just some suggestions.

[Pica Pica]

crack the whip and i'll fall in line (smiling)

[ChildOfTheLight]

- Boys will be boys and girls will be girls, but only the best get to be both

I love it.

[Kendall]

I know this is an old post but i may try to further my own efforts. I put together that free ebook that i had linked here and many places for 2-3 years. Dusting off the pdf, i may try to finally get it on amazon or something. It has been setting on my old hard drive for 2 years or so.  Will see if i get the inspiration again to look at it anew. would be nice to get my own hard copy, instead of the spiral notebook sitting on the bottom of my computer.

anyway,

kk

[Kendall]

Cool thread, I enjoyed reading through it. I'd like to go through your book. Any changes since it was originally written?

well first, i am switching most of the terminology over from "androgyne" to "non-binary gender identities" to be more inclusive of other non-binary genders that have been mentioned several places, which is a more realistic term for the data. the format has to fit a certain dimension, so i am trying to get the margins to fit a 6x9 inch book. adding a cover (which createspace requires me to use my legal name) . also i just switched most of the color graphs over to black and white, so that i can reduce the cost of the book. i finished some of the population estimates for major english countries (usa, uk, australia, canada, and world). also i am trying to finish quickly the 4 or so places that were left unfinished. i am adding page numbers and page numbers to the table of contents. not sure if i am going to be able to make a index or glossary yet. that would be really great.