Talk:Lili Elbe

message: Could someone lead me to the source of this  claim ?  23.242.139.139 (talk) 23:58, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Lili's letter from 29th January 1930, "Now he (i.e. the doctor) fears that this treatment in the dark (i.e. X-rays) may have destroyed my organs – male as well as female. Consequently, he wants me to go to Berlin as quickly as possible for the purpose of a microscopical examination. Some time afterwards he will operate on me himself. He wants to remove the dead (and formerly imperfect) male organs, and to restore the female organs with new and fresh material. Then it will be Lili who will survive!" See https://ihra.org.au/4872/lili-elbe-words/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.186.135.237 (talk) 13:18, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intersexed

message: It really is a mistake that Magnus Hirschfeld did carry out the first sex operation on Elbe. The name of the surgeon was Dr. Warnekros (from Dresden). Hirschfeld appears to have been involved in the psychological preliminaries of the operation, but he was a medical doctor, not a surgeon. Niels Hoyer's book about Elbe should be used with caution as a source for her life. Soczyczi 02:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: From the top of the section entitled "Lili":
"that Gerda's women were in fact Einar herself. No one had suspected before then that the petite femmes fatales of Gerda's work could have been modeled on anyone other than a woman, but Einar had acted as Gerda's chief model for years. [3]
After that, in the 1920s and 1930s Wegener regularly dressed as a woman, attending various festivities and entertained guests in his house as Lili Elbe."
Ok, I really sympathize with the pronoun challenges here.  In these sentences you are going through different periods of time and using both the birth name and chosen name.  I just wanted to point out the inconsistency here.  In the first paragraph, you use the birth name Einar and are referring to an early period before any major transition was occurring, yet in that paragraph you use "herself."  That's not really wrong since you could justify using female pronouns throughout the article.  However, in the following paragraph, you use the term "his house" even though in the period in question a clear transition was in play and the name Lili was established.  Rather than just changing pronouns willy nilly on my own, I wanted to see if there is a clear plan for maintaining a consistent approach throughout the article.  My guess is that there are two possibilities.  One, just use female references throughout, even when the birth name and earlier untransitional periods of life are being discussed. That ensures consistency and respect but may suffer aesthetically.  Two, separate all references chronologically and use the birth name and male pronouns for all early references and the chosen name and female pronouns for all later references.  This approach may sound better to the ear but may be more likely to violate standards and philosophical goals.jg (talk) 07:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: On Feb 12 the lede was edited to use the pronoun 'he' in reference to Elbe, then on Feb 20 it was edited again to use 'it'. Assuming good faith on the part of these editor(s), I refer to the MOS: "Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to using the gendered nouns, pronouns, and possessive adjectives that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. This applies when referring to any phase of that person's life." I'm not that well-read on Elbe's life, so I don't know if she consistently identified herself as female in the later part of her life, but 'it' is certainly not appropriate, and even before those edits the mixing of 'he' and 'she' is confusing and counter to the style guidelines. For the time being, I'm going to change all pronouns for Elbe to female.Dysfunction (talk) 03:03, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also not sure, and am having difficulty finding, about guidelines on name use for persons who have changed their names. My instinct would be to use Elbe throughout, rather than either first name.Dysfunction (talk) 03:18, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems to suit the article best, and lead to the fewest inconsistencies. —Spudtater (talk • contribs) 10:58, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistency 

message: Many Intersex people are getting increasigly fed up with Trans people appropriating Lili Elbe. Lili has been proven as having reproductive organs of male and female. This made Lili an Intersex person. Lili was transitioning from Intersex to female. Please stop marginalising Intersex people any further by trying to make out we don't exist.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.124.74.183 (talk) 11:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a reliable source for that?--ukexpat (talk) 03:24, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Taken from "The Praeger Handbook of Transsexuality: Changing Gender to Match Mindset", quote "Lili Elbe, born male in Germany in 1886, was one of the first recorded GRS cases.  Unfourtunately, she died a year after an attempt was made to surgically remove rejected ovaries that were placed in her abdomen in the original GRS.  Since her blood contained more estrogen than testosterone, feminization probably resulted from klinefelter syndrome.  This meant that she had a 47 XXY sex-chromosone karyotype, containing an extra X chromosone.  So one of the first transsexed people publicized in the media was probably intersexed." https://books.google.com/books?id=YQldwi3LVYoC&pg=PA3&dq=lili+elbe+klinefelter&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjEiImtq63NAhVS4mMKHcvkAfsQ6AEIIjAB#v=onepage&q=lili%20elbe%20klinefelter&f=false  Kitsunedawn (talk) 21:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for bringing in that source! Unfortunately, it doesn't make any claims but rather speculates that Elbe was "probably" intersex based on inference from the amount of estrogen in her blood. I think we would need a better source. -- Irn (talk) 01:41, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The article already contains citations supporting the perspective that Elbe was intersex (in the lede). But I fail to understand the premise of the argument that it is not possible to be both intersex and transgender. Numerous notable individuals who are both are listed at List of intersex people alongside intersex people who are not transgender. Trankuility (talk) 02:11, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

text: Dear Ukexpat I've found a source in Lili's letter from 29th January 1930, "Now he (i.e. the doctor) fears that this treatment in the dark (i.e. X-rays) may have destroyed my organs – male as well as female. Consequently, he wants me to go to Berlin as quickly as possible for the purpose of a microscopical examination. Some time afterwards he will operate on me himself. He wants to remove the dead (and formerly imperfect) male organs, and to restore the female organs with new and fresh material. Then it will be Lili who will survive!" See https://ihra.org.au/4872/lili-elbe-words/. The only evidence in the Wiki article questioning that Lily was intersex is the article by Jodi Kaufmann. However, in that article, Kaufmann does not have an argument against Lily being intersex, only an argument that that only way Lily could argue for treatment was to emphasize her intersex condition. Therefore there is no reasonable doubt to be had about Lili's own testimony, and references to such doubt should be removed from the article. Do you agree?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.186.135.237 (talk) 13:15, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Lili Elbe was Intersex, NOT Trans.

message: I came here as a fact checker today, of an outside manuscript in preparation that references the WP article, and found that the closing paragraph in the Marriage dissolution section was not derived from a stated source, but was rather fully plagiarised from that source. (The text appears, verbatim as it does in the source, without quotation marks.) This paragraph, in my view, needs a vary hard look, both because of the plagiarism, and because the source on which it derived is not an encyclopedic source (it is a self-published web source, see here).
As well there are various other issues with language and sourcing that keep this article from being encyclopedic; look for plaices where the prose, it is "likely that" or it is "very likely that" appear. Such subjective medical statements are not appropriate, unless they are the expressed opinion of an encyclopedic source, where the person (author) holding the opinion is clearly identified. In the indicated places, the majority of sources in support are news reports pertaining to a movie production (i.e., they are not authoritative sources regarding a medical conclusion).
I have no personal opinion on the matters being discussed. But I do strongly encourage the editors of this article to follow WP:VERIFY strictly, and not to use popular press statements to support one or another side of a fact-based matter, medical or otherwise.  Le Prof 73.211.138.148 (talk) 18:29, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Noting plagiarism and other article issues

message: Much of the section "Lili Elbe x Dora Richter: the first sex reassignment surgery" seems out of place here, as it isn't about Elbe. From the information presented here, it seems that Dorchen Richter should be the subject of her own article, not shoehorned in here. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 16:48, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved most of that content into a new article, and relocated the info about Elbe from that section to the appropriate section of this aricle. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 02:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dora Richter 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lili Elbe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160123144038/http://www.arken.dk/udstilling/gerda-wegener/ to http://www.arken.dk/udstilling/gerda-wegener/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:09, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following text seems awkward and misleading: It is generally believed that Elbe was born in 1882, in Vejle, Denmark. Her year of birth...
Einar Wegener was born in 1882 and he was male at birth, at least he was legally listed and regarded as male. The previous writer above states that, in cases of name change the name in use at the time should be used to describe the event. I agree, as otherwise it leads to a confusing narrative. I would also suggest that in referring to his gender, the pronoun for the gender he had at that time should be used, and then at some later point the feminine pronoun should be used after her transition to a woman, or perhaps after her self-identification as a woman. See the article on Cat Stevens, who was known by three different names. It smoothly makes the transition of name usage at every step, in a way that is clear to the reader.  This is not a transgender/intersex/politically-motivated comment, it is just a standard used across Wikipedia for clarity. Jaywilson (talk) 01:31, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No, per MOS:GENDERID and the large notice at the top of this page. --Fæ (talk) 06:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  The notice at the top of the page seems like a really silly policy, though: "Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to by the pronouns, possessive adjectives, and gendered nouns (for example 'man/woman', 'waiter/waitress', 'chairman/chairwoman') that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification." Isn't an encyclopedia supposed to give you the objective truth? I'm not a regular editor, just a passing reader, but from the outside it looks like this policy was written by some closet cross-dresser who wishes that being transgender was socially acceptable and is trying to use Wikipedia to influence the real world. (Just my honest reaction!) I wanted to screen-cap this article to show to some friends, but I had to go through and edit the part I'm screencapping to make it less confusing, which is an annoying hassle. You guys need to fix this policy.2601:188:C180:FC2:1163:4F9D:1C2B:8556 (talk) 16:20, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a policy that was reached after considering discussion and debate. Sorry you find it confusing and contrary to your prejudices (which are not "objective truth" I'm afraid). -Jason A. Quest (talk) 18:17, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name and gender pronoun usage 

message: The section on Elbe's surgeries mentions Dr. Erwing Gohrbandt's vaginoplasty surgery twice, but provides only his last name (not even the title "Dr."), with no explanatory links. As there is no page for Dr. Gohrbandt himself, I searched for his name and found it, with a little more identifying information, on the page for Dora Richter. I'm not sure what the best way to address this would be, but I think there definitely needs to be either no mention of Gohrbandt at all, or more info than just his last name—preferably, something indicating who he was in relation to the other doctors Elbe was treated by. I don't know enough about Gohrbandt (TBH, nothing at all beyond what's on Dora Richter's page) to know whether he's worthy of his own page, much less to write one, but since he seems to be the first person to have ever performed vaginoplasty, he's significant enough to be worth more than just a last name reference. Quantumpanda (talk) 00:59, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dr. Gohrbandt? 

message: While reading about Magnus Hirschfeld's role in the homosexuality trial of Kuno von Moltke I noticed that the name of von Moltke's ex-wife (who testified against him) during the time of his trial was 'Lilly von Elbe'. Have any scholarly sources noted the parallel here? Was Lili Elbe's name a reference to this? PigeonAppreciator (talk) 18:52, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source of her name? 

message: In October 1930, Danish court invalidated the couple's marriage. At that time, Lili Elbe had transplanted ovaries and did not have scrotal, testicles and penis. Removing all male genitalia and transplanting female gonad are sex reassignment surgeries. Danish court thought that Lili was legally a woman in October 1930. Vaginoplasties of Dora Richter and Lili Elbe were performed in 1931. It should be mentioned that Lili Elbe was the first recipient of SRS. --Sharouser (talk) 01:34, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That needs a WP:Reliable source. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 22:46, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Many WP:Reliable sources refer Lili Elbe as the first recipient or SRS. --Sharouser (talk) 12:28, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

text: Rest in Peace for User:Flyer22 Frozen. Per 'Hoyer, Main into Woman, 1933, page 112', Lili's photograph was referred as Einar Wegener (Andreas Sparre) as Lili Elbe, Dresden, May 1930, between second and third Operations. Per 'Hoyer, Main into Woman, 1933, page 128', She was referred as Lili Elbe, Woman's clinic, Dresden, June 1930 (after the operation). These sources are enough sources. Sharouser (talk) 16:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Other reliable sources say that she was not the first. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 17:26, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

text: Is Gender Fluid?: A Primer for the 21st Century says that she was the first sex reassignment surgery recipient which surgery was enough for legal gender change. I will add a distinction between Lili Elbe and Dora Richter. Sharouser (talk) 05:19, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lili Elbe was the first recipient of SRS. 

message: The well-intended removal of her original name is not consistent with Wikipedia policies. That name is well known, with plenty of sources available. (It wasn't cited because it was obviously true.) In fact, she put that name on each of her paintings. As the article indicates, she achieved notability under that name, and that work remains well known. WP policy recognizes that names under which a person was notable are appropriate to include, because doing so gives them proper credit for it. (This even applies to living persons, which she is not.) Bottom line: Before she transitioned, the person known as "Einar Wegener" was a noteworthy painter. Someone researching the artist should be able to find information by searching for that name on Wikipedia, and understand right away when they come to this article that it is about the person they're looking for. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 16:07, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The name I removed was not even the name commonly mentioned in RS. Rab V (talk) 07:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I see: I didn't notice that one of the middle names was incorrect. (My brain sometimes stumbles on germanic names.) But there are sources for Einar Magnus Andreas Wegener  and there are sound policy reasons to include it, in both the infobox and the lede.  -Jason A. Quest (talk) 14:30, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original name 

message: although I refrained from making extensive changes, and now I find that more than one person has come along and changed it so much that it's unrecognizable from the version I started with (which was within the last week). For one thing, someone insists on referring to the male infant who became a female in adulthood as "she" and "her." That's unnecessary. When the child was born, he was male. I left the birth name, Einar Wegener, where it referred to Einar before he became Lili—for example, in discussing his marriage to Gerda. Someone has been so obsessed with "correctly" referring to this transgender person that they have lost all perspective and common sense.
I understand that the "anyone can write and edit Wikipedia" sounds very fair and equitable, but what's happened is that it makes Wikipedia a MESS. The volunteer "editors" are so concerned with their own personal hobgoblins--political, personal, or grammatical--that they allow horrible writing that makes no sense to stand, as long as no one refers to someone's birth gender "incorrectly" or gets some formatting wrong. WORDS MATTER. THE ORDER IN WHICH WORDS ARE STRUNG TOGETHER MATTERS. It seems to me also that some of these microeditors do not go back and read the whole article after their edits to see whether they have introduced errors or made detrimental deletions.
My pride is not wounded. I am not going through all the edits and reversions, because it's a waste of time. I just wish, if anyone reads this and gets my point, that that person would try to spread these ideas at Wikipedia. If you're going to replace the encyclopedia as the go-to reference for all the world, it's worth trying to be as accurate and clear as possible.
In my own writing these days, I am using britannica.com as a reference whenever possible, and I am encouraging others to do the same. 2601:5C2:201:7C90:B582:549F:73A2:6DC5 (talk) 20:46, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm encouraging you to read MOS:GENDERID, especially the first sentence of it. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

text: In terms of the main issue you are raising here, please note that MOS:GENDERID governs, among other things, the use of pronouns in relation to gender identity; it has been arrived at through repeated discussions involving hundreds of editors over many years, and has achieved a high level of consensus within Wikipedia. Individual editors of course have their own opinions, but those individual feelings do not override project-wide consensus. Of course, projects outside of Wikipedia represent different values. Newimpartial (talk) 20:53, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

text: As a professional writer, I share your conviction that words and the manner in which they are combined matter. Granted, collaborative writing is often clunky and artless, and I share your frustration with that. But in my well-qualified opinion, the article as it reads today is at least clear. A person might have more than one name at various points in their life. They might even have different visible sex traits at various points in their life. However, the contemporary understanding of gender identity is that this person was always intrinsically female – regardless of what she looked like or what she was called – and to refer to her in places as "him" or to describe her as "male" would be simply inaccurate. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 22:03, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  I was a professional editor for 30 years. I spent a lot of time cleaning up this article . . . 

message: — Assignment last updated by Rgxo (talk) 16:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: History of Sexuality