IMDb needs to stop deadnaming trans people

Do you have credits under the old name or not?

If so, it's pretty difficult to retroactively change how you're credited in a film, show, etc. that many people likely have a copy of. Therefore, regardless of why you may have later changed your name, your credits need to match how you were credited in said work. (This policy applies to everyone, even if they may personally want to become disassociated with their past work - including for example former porn stars.)

If your IMDb history is entirely after you (socially) transitioned, and the issue is IMDb putting your birth name in the biography section, you probably have a better defense (especially if you're not out to the public, since this runs contrary to IMDb prohibiting mentioning medical information on their pages - and in most cases a transperson's birth name effectively gives away their history). However, if there is a pragmatic reason for mentioning the birth name (like matching up work history that is under that name) then you are less likely to be successful.

If you look at Wikipedia's policy on handling transpeople's birth names it follows a similar spirit as my opinion - if you were notable under the old name and mentioning it is necessary to meaningfully identify what you're known for then they list the name, otherwise they typically don't (or at least not mention it in the first sentence like they generally do).

They don't deserve special treatment. They'll be credited with the name they were born with and like it.

It's a very sensitive issue and although I sympathize with those who experience the problem, there is a side to it that compares badly to home address: in case of home address it's extremely unlikely that one would be able to find one watching some of the movies in filmography, while with credits it is practically a certain fact. 

That and even if fully deleted attributes will be reinstated on short notice by users who casually re-check the credits for differences.

How about this if you're so intent on removing any references to your birth name: Contact the producers of every work mentioned on IMDb that you worked on under your old name, and ask them to change your name in the credits on releases going forward. Even if such a thing were possible, people will still have copies that were released before so you probably won't have success with that either.

You need to understand that there is a difference between people in the present (and post-coming-out past) refusing to acknowledge your gender identity, and asking that references in credits that were accurate at the time (and practically impossible to change in said works) be altered.

This practice outs people as trans without their consent: https://twitter.com/theamycoop/status/922029659117760512

And it actually makes trans people reluctant to work in the film industry: https://twitter.com/maemorrigan/status/1133462355202007040

I’m not the first one who complained about this.

https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topi...

This post is a year old. And IMDb has done nothing. IMDb doesn’t care about trans people.

I was hoping I'd finally found somewhere that I wouldn't have to deal with you... people, but it appears nowhere is safe now.

While we're at it let's take a look at how the courts in the U.S. view "disparate impact" discrimination cases (where a facially neutral policy disproportionately impacts a marginalized group - which if challenged IMDb's policy on birth/other former names in how they impact transgender people in the entertainment industry would qualify). (IANAL, but from my understanding this is how it works.)

The challenge at the lowest level of "scrutiny" would be: Was the policy created with discriminatory intent or not? Or, with the issue of deadnames specifically: Do they deadname transpeople but don't mention old/real names when talking about non-transgender people who've changed their name or who go by a different name than their legal name? IMDb would certainly win on that point.

The next question would be: Is there an important reason for the policy? This is where IMDb's two areas of deadnaming concerns (in the biography section and in the credits) would likely diverge.

With the former, the trans community has a reasonable shot at winning, since publishing birth names* as part of one's biography (when one has no relevant history under it) is not important in IMDb's mission. *Publishing "real names" when one uses a different one professionally (e.g. stage names) would be more defensible from IMDb's perspective than publishing one's birth name when it has been changed for personal reasons not related to their career (including but not limited to trans people) - this is why if IMDb does not want to give "special treatment" to trans people my suggestion would be to institute a "professional vs. personal" distinction in how birth names are treated in biographies.

With the latter, IMDb is more likely to prevail, since mentioning all (qualifying) credits that one has is an important function for IMDb's mission, and mentioning the name(s) that said credits are under is important for properly identifying them (otherwise, as I've said, when someone sees the name in the credits in the work and on IMDb there would be practical confusion).

The final question that would be asked in a legal challenge would be: Are there any alternatives that could achieve the goal that would have less of an impact on the group? The trans community prevailing even here would be iffy, since like I've said you can't go back and retroactively change your name in works that have already been released. In the more marginal cases, like trans people who are credited with their birth name only in some obscure school project that the general public likely wouldn't have copies of, there might be a defense in redacting the name there - but that is not likely to apply when one has used the name professionally in movies/shows/etc. that have been made public at large. I know that's unfair to transgender people who've transitioned at later points in their life, but this issue is about pragmatic identification and not mentioning old wrong-gender names for the purpose of erasing one's gender identity.

Finally, here's an analogy I thought of when comparing the two deadnaming situations: There has been a push by many for schools to get rid of early start times in the morning. Sometimes schools start early because of the preferences of teachers, coaches, etc. while other times it's for reasons like there aren't enough buses and bus drivers to have everyone in the district start at the same time. The former is analogous to publishing birth names out of standard practice without being a true necessity (a "cultural change" that would be easy to implement in practice), while with the latter you have practical obstacles that you can't just change by decree alone (at least not without likely shifting the issues elsewhere).

I can't get rid of these notifications but I am so sick of trannies and their mental health issues

It looks like trans and LGBTQ+ organizations will be taking legal action over the issue.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/26/movies/imdb-transgender-names.html

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/06/imdb-glaad-sag-aftra-lawsuit-transgender-names-lgbt-1202153313/

Isn’t this thread basically about: can IMDb list the BIRTH NAME of a person?


”...the name that you were given at birth, when this is different to your current or usual name.”


I find it confusing that we’re talking about sex and gender. It is about the birth name. Or, at least it should be. Can IMDb (or other sites) list the name Marion Mitchell Morrison, or should it just use John Wayne?

My point was that essensially we’re talking about the birth name? No? Whether it’s John Wayne’s birth name (which was just a random example obviously) or the birth name of a transgender person, the basic idea is the same: one birth name was given/recorded, but for some reason or another the person wanted to change his/her name somewhere along the line.

Long story short: I would assume that the birth names can be listed.