kati_knitt's profile

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Mon, May 27, 2019 11:28 PM

IMDb needs to stop deadnaming trans people

IMDb should not put trans people’s old names out there. The site should make an exception for the policy of not removing factual information, since this is extremely disrespectful to all trans people working in the film industry.

Trans people’s deadnames aren’t information that people are entitled to see. It’s equivalent to posting someone’s home address. Just because it’s true, doesn’t mean people should see it. It is information that can and will be used against them. This needs to stop.

Responses

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

2 y ago

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).

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

I looked you up a little after I made my original comment, and it looks like you DO have pre-transition credits (assuming I saw the right person) - so what I said along those lines applies (though it's probably not what you want to hear). I sympathize with your concerns though, but you can't just discard your work history because of life changes.

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Well, I would delete those credits, it's more important to me that my old name isn't visible. When it comes to "accuracy", we should value the well being of trans people over accuracy.

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Deadnaming is dangerous and leads to Dysphoria. Dysphoria can lead to death.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Sorry, but IMDb does not remove credits just because one does not want them there. As I said, this is not because they are transphobic - no matter what the reason why one wants them removed, they don't. Since the credits are in a publicly released work they are not legally obligated to do so.

As someone else said your analogy of them putting your home address up fails because there is no reason to mention that in credits to identify you, but they do mention the name you were working under at the time the work was created. If you were being "deadnamed" for something you worked on AFTER you (socially) transitioned you would have a case of transphobia, but that isn't what your situation is.

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

You're focusing on the wrong part of the anology. I'm saying it's as dangerous as posting someone's home adress.

I'm aware of IMDb's policy, they need to make an exception for trans people.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Like I said, they are under no legal obligation to remove publicly available information like how you were credited in a movie or show - so keep that in mind if you decide to try and sue IMDb. Did you know that a few years ago an actress tried to sue IMDb to remove her date of birth? Guess what - she lost the lawsuit (and her case was stronger because a DOB isn't something that typically appears in publicly available credits).

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Maybe It's legal, but it's not moral and if IMDb doesn't chnage this soon, I believe that a lot of people are not going to be happy about that...

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

Dysphoria? That is for the community of neurologists, psychiatrists, psychologists and patients to sort out. It is not a policy matter. There is no evidence that it is dangerous at all, let alone as dangerous as a home address linked to an identity being published for all the world to see.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

The "cause" of every suicide cannot be determined. Furthermore, correlation does not imply causation. It is worth noting that this supposed is a phenomenon that did not exist before half a century ago. People deserve better quality of that which is touted as "evidence."

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

I wanted to kill myself because of dysphoria. There are many others like me.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

But you didn't. Therefore...

417 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

I wanted to kill myself once about an issue that had nothing to do with sexuality and tried but got scared and called 911. (Found out later that the stuff I took wouldn't have done the job, anyway.) SO? What's the point, Kati? I read one of the urls you provided about suicide and homelessness being higher for "LGBT youth". I could not be more sympathetic and I am sure some do come from abusive backgrounds. Others are unstable and cannot accept their parents' refusal to feign enthusiasm or to call them by their preferred names or pronouns. IMDb cannot cure society's woes. But the political clout of the LGBTQ cartel, the single most powerful special interest group in the country (ahead of even the abortion cartel and Planned Parenthood) ensures that society will continued to redefine itself along the terms Hollywood and social media dictate.

417 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

This thread needs to be clipped and closed, and, if necessary, the editors who continue to try to recreate it should be blocked/banned. The subject has become pointless and has been worn out by every imaginable argument.  

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

Kati Knitt sorry to hear that dysphoria led you down that path. I hope the situation is better now. 

Rob Sieger (sorry to hear you resorted to a suicide attempt, as well) just my five cents and not really valuable since I don't live in the US, but calling LGBTQ "the single most powerful special interest group in the country" seems wrong since logically that would be Wall Street and a representative of that group is currently the President of the United States. I'm not saying that Wall Street is all bad, though, it's just that any group (regardless is that special interest or not) has positive and negative aspects, LGBTQ included. Finding consensus between what different layers of population want and what can actually do about it might be the key to have at least some positive changes. 

Because so far the only thing we can all agree upon is that we're not listening to each other nearly enough, which could be said for both sides of this discussion. Then again, civilised discussion is not on the rise, currently, unfortunately. Populism is. 

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

There’s two sides here: People who are for trans people and people who are against them. The idea that both sides need to be heard out, is highly questionable in my opinion and is always leading to trans people getting just *halfway* discriminated. This way we’ll never live without discrimination

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

Kati Knitt, I hear you out, but each political situation (and some people argue that nowadays, due to globalism, each situation is political) has at least third hidden side, quite often much more. Despite people like to think of the world in simpler terms of good/bad or black/white, there are always aspects which won't fit. Depending on person's views they will either be ignored or recalibrated to fit in good/bad scenarios. 

Unfortunately, the most common result is how easy people become susceptible to mainpulation, on both sides of the conflict. I'm not saying that anyone is manipualted in that particulat disuccusion, but the interesting part of what both you and Rob say is how similar it sounds, at times, sans position on subject. I know that style of conversation, I've heard it, practiced it and was on sides of conflict. The moment of realization that at times you start to sound exactly like your opponent, just being on the other side is a scary sensation, that makes you think a lot...   

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Here’s what trans people want:

- getting correctly gendered
- getting correctly named
- self ID transition
- equal rights

We don’t ask for much. This doesn’t hurt anyone. Everyone stating otherwise just doesn’t take us seriously, doesn’t believe in science and probably doesn’t want us to exist. Just because of prejudice.

Yes, there are problems that are shades of grey, this just is a black and white situation.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

You ARE getting correctly named - exactly how you appear in the credits of your works. What you are asking does put a burden on others - when someone can't make a connection between how you are credited in your works and what is shown on IMDb that leads to confusion and questions about the accuracy of both the credits and IMDb.

You have the right to go by whatever name you like, identify as you wish, and ask people to respect that in the present and future. You cannot go back and change how you were credited in works that were created before you started using your current name. You cannot discard part of your history or split your filmography just because you don't want to be associated with what you did in the past (this goes for any reason, not just for being transgender).

I am not denying science or disrespecting transgender people. This policy of credits being under the name that you were credited under does not exist because IMDb does not respect transgender people. It exists for a practical reason - to match credits and filmography.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Sorry about the duplicate comment - technical issues (I tried deleting one but it didn't process until it was too late).

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

Kelly L., removed the duplicate comment. 

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

I'm not surprised that the outcome is pretty negative, given there are mostly cis people here and they usually don't give a f*** about trans issues.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

I do care about trans issues, but you need to understand that although people can and should respect your chosen identity going forward, you cannot change how you were referred to in the past before your transitioned. Just like if your birth name had been carved in some monument prior to your transition, you can't expect things like that to be retroactively changed.

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Yeah, I can.

417 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

"Yeah, I can" -- Kati, you can expect WTF you want; hold your breath. It is understandable, I suppose, considering that the all-powerful LGBTQ cartel always gets its way even though it likes to pretend, increasingly flimsily, that it is the underdog not the overlord.

6 Messages

 • 

270 Points

2 y ago

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

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

It's not special treatment. Cis people don't have problems with their birth names. Transgender people do. Due to our situation we deserve to have our old names out of the public eye. Deadnaming is dangerous and leads to Dysphoria. Dysphoria can lead to death.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

So? People with normal eyesight do not have the problems that the blind do, and with context, there is vice versa. People with normal hearing do not have problems that the deaf do, and with context, there is vice versa. Those are just two examples. Disinterest in establishing double standards or making accommodations for a particular class is not equivalent with disrespect.

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Blind people get dogs that lead them around, why doesn't everyone get dogs that lead them around? I feel so left out as a person with eye sight. This is clearly discrimination of people with eye sight and we need to stop this double standard.

6 Messages

 • 

270 Points

Frankly the fact that the actor in question has decided they'd rather have a vagina now doesn't fall under the definition of useful information here.

Have you tried Wikipedia?

They care about that sort of thing.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

IMDb is not responsible for "everyone". Wikipedia is also not responsible for "everyone". The list goes on.

7 Messages

 • 

140 Points

If something as trivial like 'deadnaming' can cause a traughny to off itself, then maybe they're insane? DUH?

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

2 y ago

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.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

2 y ago

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.

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

There's no reason IMDb needs to display them.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Okay, so let's say that IMDb makes an exception for trans people like you want and allows trans people to redact their pre-transition filmography. At that point IMDb is no longer true to their policy of not allowing people to choose what parts of their work history is displayed, and you'd have other groups who similarly want to become disassociated with their old works (e.g. ex porn stars, people who no longer agree with a work or its producers for political or other reasons, etc.) complain. Unlike what you're trying to do, IMDb could very well lose a lawsuit where one sues over certain groups but not others being allowed to redact their history (as opposed to now where no one can have public credits removed regardless of the reason).

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Putting a deadname out in public is not comparable to showing old porn credits, that diminishes the significance of deadnaming. It'd be a reasonable exception that grants trans people's dignity and makes it less likely that they will be attacked by people using their deadname.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Okay again, so let's say that you get your wish. What kind of message do you think someone should see on IMDb if they watch one of your old works, see your credit with your birth name (and isn't even aware that you later transitioned), and try to look you up based on that? Should IMDb pretend that person never existed or that they are a different person than Kati Knitt? (Once again that isn't fair because under no other circumstances that I know of does IMDb allow a person's filmography to be split between two apparently different people.)

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Or, to look at it another way, what about if IMDb pretends you were credited with your current name in a work that you were not, and then someone comes to ask why they do not see a "Kati Knitt" in the credits? Or they pretend you were uncredited when you were?

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

My suggestion is that when people search for a person on IMDb with their old name, that IMDb directs them to their page, without making the old name visible anywhere. So the old name would be in some kind of invisible search tag.

I don't think it's a very clean solution, but I don't think that accuracy is as important as the well being of the credited trans person. I wouldn't put "credited as deadname" in either, because that will be a hint for people destined to find out what their deadname is. People should be able to put one and one together when they see the last name is the same and see they are credited as the same role. If the last name of a trans person changes, they could just put their old last name in as an alternate name since last names are not gendered.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

One more question for you, Kati: In your case, are you wanting to be "stealth" (i.e. remove any kind of references to you being transgender) on IMDb, or do you not mind being "out" to the public about being trans but just don't want people knowing your deadname? If the former you have a little bit more of an impetus since medical history should be kept private unless there is a practical reason to disclose it (as I said it's arguable if IMDb can practically do that with credits existing under the old name), but with the latter it would be more like anyone else who disliked their birth name and wants to remove any association with it (i.e. the privacy/medical history argument wouldn't hold the same water).

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

2 y ago

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





93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

If they wouldn't want to share their story, they wouldn't have posted it. So this is just showing how this affects people.

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

I am not deadnaming them. I am sharing their stories. Your point is ridiculous.

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

Kati Knitt, but it is a point that stands, nevertheless. 

People who posted your deadname here may argue that they're sharing your story. Have you asked the person before sharing the link here? 

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

I didn’t put their deadnames RIGHT THERE. That’s not the same thing!

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

2 y ago

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.

6 Messages

 • 

270 Points

2 y ago

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.

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

Captain Pipsqueak, just as I've said earlier. People don't want to change, but change is inevitable. It will always be there in some shape or form and our adaptibility to changes is a question of personal philosophy. 

Not dealing with changes at all, though and opposing them might make you end up on the wrong side of history. 

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Our mere existence annoys some people, but sorry squeaky, we’ll always be here :)

6 Messages

 • 

270 Points

Don't call me Squeaky, you argument for proper condom usage.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

Every person's pursuit of a "safe space" in the context of "freedom from" a given non-violent thing begins and ends on that person's property, and if there is a domestic civil servant or domestic combatant whose jurisdiction and work becomes relevant to that property at the same time as that servant personally belonging to some kind of disliked human category, then too bad, apart from the fact that there is the framework of "democracy" (republic) within which to work.

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Oh no, conservatives could be suffering consequences for their actions, what a tragedy

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

They removed all protections for trans people in America but conservatives are really in danger

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

2 y ago

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).

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

I’m not so sure that jumping to legal conclusions is the best way to have this conversation. The ACLU, Lambda Legal, etc all have a better grasp on that than me.

Why does IMDb—a subsidiary company of Amazon—want to stand behind this sort of speech? Is using the first credit, rather than the most recent credit as the one true credit the best way to maintain consistency in a database? What if more people, or a new generation of people, see the work with the updated credit? What if the first credit was a limited screening, and it was seen by a larger audience with the updated credit?

Also, why does IMDb insist on deadnaming people with the “birth name” category of the site? What about transgender people who updated their vital records? Which record will be used? Why is this even necessary information about someone’s filmography? What about someone who never even had credits under their deadname?

Why does IMDb only allow binary categories of actor and actress? There is a growing pool of non-binary actors. What is wrong with an encompassing category of actor, or at least a non-binary option for actor?

Why does IMDb maintain these policies, when Amazon claims to support trans workers? I suspect that IMDb sees trans talent as the actual product here. It’s worth noting that the IMDbPro is supposedly sold to talent as a resume site. It seems like there’s a conflict of interest here, where IMDbPro is used to mine data for the consumer IMDb site.

Why does IMDb—a subsidiary of a private company—stand behind this speech, regardless of whether or not the speech may be legal? This is all a bad look for Amazon, if Amazon really claims to support the LGBTQ+ community.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

On a more general note, I do have my suspicions that IMDb is neglected by the Amazon company. It seems like IMDb has all sorts of computing resources but does not have a full-time team of software architects.

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Are you suggesting that companies are willing to get behind any sort of speech, simply because it may (or may not) be legal? I generally leave legal theory conversations to civil rights lawyers, because they are the ones who navigate these issues in court.

My point is simply: Why does IMDb/Amazon want to stand behind this speech? How does this not go against Amazon's letter of support for trans workers last fall?

IMDb is a privately held company, and they can decide not to allow deadnaming on their site if they wish. Twitter banned deadnaming on their platform.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Emma - IMDb DOES use the most recent credit name as the "primary" name, as long as they intend to use it consistently in the future (which would be the case for transgender people). What they do is also mention any other names the person has been credited under as AKAs so people know that they're all from the same person.

Also with Twitter, would they ban someone from referring to a person (who later transitioned) as they appeared in the credits of an old show or movie they were Tweeting about (the Tweeting person might not even know about their transition and change of name).

The point is there is a difference between using a transgender person's old name in a present, future, or post-social-transition-past context, and retroactively changing pre-existing references (that are "hard-coded" and cannot be changed with normal means, like credits in a work) under the former name.

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Yes, I am aware. My point was about the AKAs not being necessary, given the potential harm that could come from it. IMDb would consider the true credit to be the "first credit," hence the AKA, even though more people may well have see the updated credit.

There are three separate issues here: 1. IMDb deadnaming through the "birth name" category, including cases where the person was not previously credited by that name, 2. deadnaming from AKAs from previous credits, and 3. the lack of non-binary options for non-binary actors.

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

I read your reply. I am unmoved by your argument. As people have pointed out to you, government agencies do in the United States do in fact update vital records, including birth certificates. Many trans people have birth certificates that list their current name.

As far as non-binary identification for actors, non-binary actors do exist.

At best, your point refers to the second case of deadnaming that I pointed out, deadnaming from AKAs from previous credits. If a credit has been updated, then it's been updated. Your point does not hold much weight to me. Records get updated in other databases, such vital records and legal documents.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

In the human species; males have XY chromosome pair, and females have XX chromosome pair. Are there any other combinations? Only in unfortunate abnormalities.

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

I don't understand your point Jeorj? Non-binary people and intersex people are not (necessarily) the same thing, unless someone happens to be both.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

My point is that here are exactly two sexes; no more, no less. A linguistic matter is gender: "masculine", "feminine" and "neuter". This nonsense of "non-binary" is new.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

You say that your credits got updated - does that mean that if I were to watch a movie, show, etc. that you worked on pre-transition that they updated how your name would appear in the show's credits? That's the point - it's pretty hard to change that, and IMDb mentions how you were credited in said work.

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Non-binary may be new to you. It's not overly new, no. Trans visibility is growing, yay 2019!

Again my interest here is to bring up the specific issues at hand with IMDb, specifically the three issues that affect the trans community as I mentioned above. Though it's interesting to talk about trans issues in a broader sense, I would like to see IMDb answer to the trans community here. Their generic policy reply in the press was lacking and cold.

Does IMDb want to stand behind deadnaming the trans people? Is this speech that Amazon wants to support?

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

Visibility does not necessarily translate to validity.

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

AfTer All, MayBe thOse TrANsGeNdErs aRe faKiNg iT

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Kelly, are you then saying that you agree with me that trans people should not be deadnamed by the "birth name" category and that non-binary actors should be correctly listed as non-binary?

Credits can be updated in a work sure. This isn't about me. I am addressing push back against IMDb's policies from the trans community, and their allies, at large.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

Short answer is yes on both counts.

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Thanks for your input there Ed.

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Are you IMDb staff or a moderator? If not, why do you have the power to control this forum? You can easily click the unfollow button if you no longer wish to follow this topic.

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

This spamming reminds me of when Ed posted an entire article here and how it's really hard to scroll through this thread now. Thanks Ed!

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

I see that you are troubled by the existence of trans people. How do your feelings about trans people relate to IMDb policies? This forum exists to address issues with IMDb.

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

Jeorj Euler, btw, confusing biological sex and gender is a common mistake. One does not equal the other. One also should not, at this point in society. 

That, and, well, many people are "unfortunate" in some way. As a person who does have a rare genetical condition I am, if not offended, very much irritated by calling that "unfortunate", because I live my life every day through it and I develop. As a person I won't be told by people who I am because of my health issues, slight in comparison. Nor would I be patient when people assume I'm healthy jsut because how I look and therefore I am "faking" it. It's a coin of two sides but the coin is of an ancient currency altogether - both sides are a relic that belongs in a museum. I was just told recently that I'm "no man" because I was not able to help the driver jumpstart a freaking trolleybus by pushing it. Well, okay then, if being "a man" means furthering an agonizing pain of stomach muscles (that mostly  kept me from sleeping the very night before the morning the incident happened) willingly while there were people who were more qualified to do push the trolleybus in particular situation then I won't be a man by that very specific definition. Nor should I care, really, but I do because some wild animal part of my brain thinks that my status was hurt. Well, surprise, we've gradually built a society where that is working less and less for next generations.    

I can thoroughly relate to TS people on that matter, even though I don't know any possible solution regarding the situation for IMDb as of yet.  

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

I just figured if there is a condition that is both abnormal and implies no clear net advantage to the individual in being an asset to humanity (despite humanity's apex status in the biosphere), then the condition is likely "unfortunate". No matter how much we may like or dislike it, a person's belongingness with society is heavily contingent upon having qualities that fall within the realm of the histories of "common" expectations.

7 Messages

 • 

140 Points

2 y ago

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

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

In order to not receive notifications from a particular thread, click "Unfollow" to unsubscribe from it, on the right side of the screen. 

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

That's a slur, can people just put slurs in this forum?

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

Kati Knitt, not for long, usually, and depends on their other actions, I suppose. I've seen worse, but mostly people try to stay in line. 

Ed Jones (XLIX) everyone has a different boiling point. I mean, I'm not agressive or very sensitive, but some terms can provoke the most turbulent reaction in me. It's good to have less of a boiling point, but it's not giving people the right to say words which are considered offensive. 

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

It's not offensive to you because you're not trans

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

Nobody claimed it was "not offensive".

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

Ed, this thread is not going away. There will be a new post every once in a while, roughly no matter what.

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

2 y ago

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

Finally some good news :)

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Ed, I have seen that you would prefer people to be silent on the issue. That is obviously not happening here, and it is beyond any individual person at this point.

417 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

How much longer is this moronic thread going to continue.BLOCK the harassers (Emma Arpin, Kati Knitt) and close this out for good. I am sick and tired of getting emails every time this thread is reopened. We all know the all-powerful LGBTQ cartel is used to getting its own way. End this pointless and absurd back and forth.

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

I made no statements about winning anything. I posted that the issue is back in the press (a fact :D proven by the links posted above). Also, LGBTQ+ and trans organizations joined SAG-AFTRA in a lawsuit. And yes, I do welcome more attention to the issue. IMDb may well see the harm that this issue causes to their reputation.

417 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

"“In February 2018, a judge stopped enforcement of the law. SAG-AFTRA and its allies are currently appealing that ruling and expect an oral argument date in the Ninth Circuit by the end of the year.” -- Then appealed to SCOTUS by the losing side, which will rule that IMDB can do what it likes as a private business. Then IMDB should delete any and all pages pertaining to those who have a problem with this policy. There is no right to privacy in a country in which privacy hardly exists. And just how, btw, does IMDB "profit" from any of this?

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

That's funny, seeing as how IMDb broke no law.

73 Messages

 • 

2.5K Points

From the looks of things this is not a lawsuit in of itself, but rather some groups are using the ongoing legal challenge of IMDb posting birthdates to similarly address the issue with transgender people and their birth names.

From a practical standpoint it's reasonable to compare posting birth names in the biography section to posting DOBs in the same section, i.e. IMDb does it as a matter of publishing facts about a person (and there could reasonably be a privacy/discrimination argument there as posting information like that is not essential in identifying one's filmography). However, when it comes to cases like the OP's where the old name is mentioned in order to identify credits the person has under that name, that will be a much harder sell legally (since the name is put there for a pragmatic reason and not merely as a fact about the person).

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Yes, GLAAD and numerous trans/LGBTQ+ organizations signed on with SAG-AFTRA to appeal the lower court decision from lawsuit over the California law (AB 1687).

There are cases of IMDb deadnaming people without previous credits. There are three issues going on here that affect trans people, and the birth name category is one of those three. We'll see where this case goes! There are solutions to make IMDb better to the trans community for all three of the issues, including previous credits. IMDb has simply chose, so far, not to implement any changes to their policies. None of this is a great look for IMDb (or Amazon), and there's more to company policies than legal cases.

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

Emma Arpin just to clarify: were the cases of deadnaming with no previous cases actually reported? Considering delicate nature of the problem I am pretty sure it was done through direct contact with IMDb, but if not then problem could and should be adressed here and might not even be related to cases of previous credits: it just happens from time to time, as in this case

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

A public forum is not the best space to ask for help with this topic, for the reason you stated, but yes, IMDb has refused to help people in those cases.

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Why are you citing a lawsuit, specific to topic of the publication of ages and one that pre-dates the California law (AB 1687)?

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

I said I'm not a lawyer, and I generally leave legal theory conversations to be had with lawyers, which you are not. It was my polite way to say that I am unmoved by your legal arguments :D

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

Ed Jones (XLIX), comment with a ton of references was caught in the spam filter, fished it out. 

93 Messages

 • 

1.8K Points

@Emma: I really hope they’ll eventually won’t deadname anyone, whether they have old credits or not...

45 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

Now, you're citing a defense based on the publication of "factual information," which has nothing to do with jurisdiction.

Yes, that was the first ruling over AB 1687. Yes, that is what is being appealed. In addition to Amazon's lawyers, SAG-AFTRA, GLAAD, and many other LGBTQ+ organizations have lawyers working on the case. We will see what gets decided. If there was nothing to be decided, then there would be no appeal. That is how legal rulings work. I doubt this will be true in this specific case, but sometimes, they work their way up to the Supreme Court.

None of that changes my original point. You're not a lawyer, and I am not overly moved by your legal arguments on a help forum.

My point has simply been: Is deadnaming trans people in the film/tv industry really speech that IMDb and Amazon want to get behind? We will see what gets decided by courts. That is a different conversation.

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

231.2K Points

Rob Sieger, I'd say that your rhetorics are more on the harassing side then anything Emma or Kati ever said here. Then again, it's just my opinion and I'm not here to judge. For now people on both sides (you very much included) wrote so much on the issue that it becomes evident that it's actually far from being irrelevant. Because clearly, if so many people are indeed not loosing the grip on the thread then subject has a lot of social relevance. 

Meanwhile to all people here: can we please not use "moronic", "silly" and words which are far worse when we're talking about each other. Moreover, repeatedly asking for people to stop the thread by continuing it with actually doing so is not exactly efficient either. 

Ed Jones (XLIX), at this point saying that something is unlikely or won't happen might not be an option. Last few years were full of events which virtually no one thought were possible. At this point everything should be labeled as plausible, because present logic fails us in terms of predictions. We have several presidents of large countries literally no one thought would actually win the elections (and some that were not expected to still be there, as well), war conflicts in areas which were not suspected to house such at all, several weather anomalies which cannot be explained, some of the most unexpected celebrity deaths ever, movies which were projected to fail at box office only to actually have fair chances... Point is: we live in a different world, somehow. It changes. For better or for worse. IMDb changes from time to time, as well, so that's plausible too. 

1.9K Messages

 • 

63.3K Points

2 y ago

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?

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

Hi, Eboy. No. This thread is not only or basically about whether or not IMDb can list the birth name of a person. The activists here want for "as" attributes to be hidden as well, or for pages to be split across separate names belonging to the same identity; which in either case would mitigate unwanted items in the "alternate names" feature.

You may not have been following along since the beginning, so this is confusing to you. The activists claim that the circumstances of the existing system (a longstanding system) does not harm cisgender folks but does harm transgender folks, so that is why "gender" keeps coming into the dialog. It's not a thing between male and female exactly, but between cisgender and transgender, and thus between...
  • cisgender males ("normal" males) and transgender females (having XY chromosome pair but identifying as female);
  • cisgender females ("normal" females) and transgender males (having XX chromosome pair but identifying as male).
Am I causing further confusion? I hope not. The overarching territory of the topic is somewhat alien to traditional thinking. There is also an apparent need to explain the vocabulary of all this, since a lot of cisgender people apparently do not know that the word "cisgender" refers exactly to them.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

I don't believe the activists care to insist that John Wayne not be "deadnamed". He has been deceased a long time, for one. There is a strong chance that deceased persons and historical figures are fair game for all kinds of factual exposure. He lived a cisgender life, as well. (I doubt his childhood fit the hypothetical inverse scenario I presented earlier.) The activists have been rather explicit that they do not want for transgender people to be "deadnamed".

1.9K Messages

 • 

63.3K Points

2 y ago

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.