All posts by QueenieAG

A while back, I tried to add Randall Boggs to the animal category, under the clause that stated possessing traits of an animal/animals would be a qualifying factor, even if the character wouldn’t be considered an animal.

However, when I tried to do this, using the aforementioned clause as a justifying reason, my edit would get reverted, due to the trait possession clause not being a sufficient factor for qualifying.

For a while, I decided to sleep on it while I decided how to solve the debate once and for all, and now I have an ultimatum.

Based on my experience, the trait possession clause seems to be null and void, and I wish to have that clause removed from the category page so that any would-be editors would not make the same mistake I did.

If you have any other ideas, please let me know.

BTW: I want this discussion to be as civil as possible.

This has been something that's been on my mind for quite a while. With the rise of transgender rights, it has been brought to my attention that sex and gender are 2 separate constructs. Sex is biological and refers to chromosomes/genitalia, while gender is social/psychological and refers to how an individual presents themselves and how they want the world to see them. For this reason, the "male" and "female" categories should be based on how a character is presented, with the "genderless" category reserved for characters whose gender is ambiguous. The proposed "sexless" category would be for characters who are still identifiable as male or female but have no biological sex. Characters in the "sexless" category can be any gender and any species.