Talk:It Gets Better Project

Criticism of It Gets Better Project

There needs to be a section devoted to criticism of this initiative. A good argument can be made that IGB does nothing to reduce the violence and ostracism that creates suicidal feelings in LGBT children. There should also be comment on how opportunistic politicians, celebrities and others are jumping on the It Gets Better bandwagon, obviously for purposes of self-promotion. 165.173.137.47 (talk) 17:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

You'll need some reliable 3rd party sources for something like that. Seems somewhat unlikely that you'll be able to verify all of those claims. DP76764 (Talk) 17:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

While it won't be possible to find objective 3rd Party sources to say that politicians and celebrities jumped on the IGB bandwagon -- as "bandwagon" is a figure of speech anyway -- surely with the passage of time this project might be better characterized as a YouTube meme (and a book) than as a movement. Are there good articles about this being written that show what is being done about school bullying? It seems to have all but vanished from the headlines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.82.15.121 (talk) 17:18, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

This project could be characterized as a public health campaign, and typically for these kinds of things, marketing research happens in the first 1-3 years and academic research happens to measure efficacy after that. This campaign has been active for just under a year. Google Scholar has some articles about the campaign, but it is probably too early to expect statistical results tying this campaign to school bullying or meta-research about the collective efficacy of the local campaigns within this project. The reason this page looks strange on Wikipedia is because it is unusual for campaigns of this sort to make international news before they actually have any data backing. Let's wait a while; the sources still appear steadily, just not as news. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:15, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Most criticism focuses on use of the platitude to engage in drive-by activism, or its "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" mentality that oversimplifies a complex issue. Some sourcing for criticism:

• Naff, Kevin (December 17, 2010). 'It Gets Better' gets annoying. Washington Blade
• Majkowskia, Tina (2011). The “It Gets Better Campaign”: An unfortunate use of queer futurity. Women & Performance: a journal of feminist theory. Volume 21, Issue 1, 2011 pp. 163-165. doi:10.1080/0740770X.2011.563048
• Puar, Jasbir K (2012). Coda: The Cost of Getting Better Suicide, Sensation, Switchpoints. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 2012 Volume 18, Number 1: 149-158. doi: 10.1215/10642684-1422179

It's certainly worth a mention, keeping WP:UNDUE in mind. Jokestress (talk) 18:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't think "irony" counts as a valid wiki section but here goes

I think it's ironic, and worth a comment at least here on the talk page about the timing of the founding of "It Gets Better" as occurring on September 21st, 2010 and mentioning it was founded in response to a number of suicides including Tyler Clementi, when it's noted on the page for the death of Tyler Clementi that he committed suicide on September 22nd: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_of_Tyler_Clementi I'm sure that the organizing of It Gets Better was spurred by Tyler's death -- and more -- the subsequent investigation and media focus but it's odd that the group founding was timed so close to Tyler's death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.82.15.121 (talk) 15:37, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Clementi was one of several suicides occurring around the same time, and the dead are named in the lede. Billy Lucas is named as the one who spurred the founding, and his death was before the 21st. If the lede seems unclear, propose an alternative version. WP:BB and change things. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:21, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Prior Media References

I added a section on "Prior Media References", as many Wikipedia articles have Media References etc., and from an encyclopedic perspective, it makes sense to document possible/potential conceptual/historical origins or at least precursors.

Here is the section (as it was removed, twice, by another editor, discussion below)

==Prior Media References==

The phrase "It Gets Better" was used in popular media to console a teenager at least once years before the founding of this project.

• 2006-11-20 In the Heroes episode Homecoming, the character Peter consoles the teenage character Claire that "It gets better" in response to her lamenting her unpopularity in highschool.

== (end of section ==

I added this section with the edit summary of:

• 2011-10-03 "add Prior Media References section, note prior topical "It Gets Better" to console a teenager reference in popular media nearly 4 years before project founding"
• 2011-10-06 the section was removed, with no edit summary, no justification.
• 2011-10-06 I treated the removal without justification as an act of deletionary vandalism, and restored the section.
• 2011-10-11 The same editor removed the section again and this time provided the following arguments in their edit summary:
  • "removing a section that has little relevance"
    • refutation: possible/potential conceptual/historical origins or at least precursors are very much relevant from an encyclopedic perspective.
  • "... or hope of being comprehensive."
    • refutation: comprehensiveness is not a requirement for wikipedia edits, sections, nor even articles. On the contrary, via stub articles, sections etc., Wikipedia encourages additions of partial/stub content to be incrementally grown by the community.

Since I've added this section (and a second time) and the other editor has deleted it twice, I am hesitating re-adding it to avoid an edit-war, and instead have brought the issue here, to the discussion page, to request input from other editors. I'd like to re-add the section, and encourage any other editor who thinks the content is sufficiently encyclopedic to go ahead and make the addition to the article as well. Thanks for your consideration.

Tantek (talk) 20:09, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Removal of Biphobia/Transphobia references made by "It Gets Better" creator Dan Savage.

Verifiable sources have been repeatedly put into this section, including Huffington Post, Bilerico Project, Queerty and The New Human Rights Movement. What I have added also includes DIRECT REFERENCES to where Savage has done/said these things himself too. Also it raises questions as to why Savage didn't include ANY of the Trans-youth who were murdered or committed suicide at the same time or just before Clementi. Stop reverting my additions as you should be able to see that what I am doing is improving the accuracy of this article, Fae. Ditto anyone else. Kate Dee (talk) 23:08, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Opinion statements by bloggers are not reliable sources for assertions of fact. Your desired addition is a statement of opinion, not a statement of fact. I know that you are new to Wikipedia, but please be open to the possibility that you do not yet understand the rules- Wikipedia is only for statements of fact, and not for our own opinions and analyses. You are welcome to participate at Wikipedia if you are willing to help write encyclopedia articles, and don't remain determined to write opinion articles. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:11, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

In addition to the above, please read WP:SYNTH to understand why the material you added is not acceptable. --Conti|✉ 23:13, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

This article is about the It Gets Better project, lengthy criticism of Savage (or a general life history) are off-topic. You are already attempting to add the exact same text to Dan Savage, and I suggest you stick to gaining a consensus there rather than having the discussion in two places of which this one is far less likely to result in a section being added due to being an obvious failure of weight. --Fæ (talk) 23:14, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

These are links directly from Journalists, NOT Bloggers. Also they contain articles directly from Savage himself, where he has openly abused people out of spite in his Savage Love column. Given that Savage was the creator of "It Gets Better" and not a single reference was made by him to ANY of the Trans-youth deaths that occured during that period, verifiable sources like the ones I posted are valid. If you guys weren't Transphobic, you would also see that there has been debate about this on Dan Savage's wiki page too. ie Biphobia/Transphobia. Try doing some research via the links I put in, and you will see that I am correct. Kate Dee (talk) 23:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Calling me transphobic when you know nothing about me, seems a poor start to establishing a consensus here. Fæ (talk) 23:29, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

You have not added anything that would make your desired edits anything other than violations of the neutral point of view policy. However, you have violated the rule No Personal Attacks by calling me "transphobic" simply for not allowing you to use Wikipedia as a platform for opinions. I invite you to withdraw that attack immediately. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:31, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Am I? There is verifiable evidence from the Huffington Post that Savage did do and say those things. To say that he didn't means that you should remove the other Huffington Post reference in article, as it is clearly from a blog and "unreliable" then, using your previous logic. Not allowing verified references to where a wikipedia subject has done/said hateful stuff is Transphobic. If Savage was a conservative & wasn't gay, would you let such comments slide? Not including references to them actually degrades the accuracy/neutrality. Kate Dee (talk) 23:39, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

This article is not about Dan Savage. A criticism section about him would be off topic. If you think the IGBP is transphobic, I suggest you supply sources for that. In the meantime you need to step back from calling other contributors here hateful names when you know nothing about them. Continuing in this way will get you blocked for making personal attacks. --Fæ (talk) 23:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I am not making any personal attacks, just making an observation. Given that Savage is the creator & organizer of that particular project, it isn't unreasonable to include factual material that shows he is a hypocrite. The fact that I provided accurate information that is from respected sources only to have it hurled back at me is infuriating, because as a young transperson I find Savage's behavior even now to be obnoxious and offensive. If "It Gets Better" is going to have him as their leader/organizer, then they are responsible for what he says. Not including valid criticism of him during his tenure as leader of this particular project is Transphobic, as it doesn't reflect what is truly going on while it also lets savage get away with the type of actions "It Gets Better" is supposed to help prevent. Kate Dee (talk) 03:18, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I've read the sources, and they are most definitely not enough to justify your additions. Heck, half of them are from Savage explaining how his words are being distorted by the other half of the sources you use. --Conti|✉ 09:20, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I am not seeing sources which verify the proposer's assertion. I would call for the proposer to make a direct quotation from a source. The changes being considered seem like WP:OR / WP:SYNTH to me, but perhaps I do not understand. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:33, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok then. Lets get back to basics.

Do you think that being called a "Bad Tranny" is Transphobic? Yes?/No?/Why? http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=13054

Do you think that being called a "Shemale" is Transphobic? Yes?/No/Why? http://www.avclub.com/articles/march-25-2009,25624/

Is it transphobic to say the following, where Transsexuality is used as demeaning insult? "It's staggering that Rob McKenna, a female-to-male transsexual, is making it harder for other FTMs (and MTFs) to access the life saving sex-reassignment surgery that allowed Rob to become the man he is today." (McKenna, who is married with four children, is not actually transgender). http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2010/03/23/transgendered-washington-state-attorney-general-rob-mckenna-betrays-his-community

Do you think that castigating a person for transitioning ie "Selfish Tranny" and "Stupid Tranny", transphobic? Yes?/No?/Why? http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=13054

eg "Perhaps I'm a transphobic bigot, but I honestly think waiting a measly 36 months to cut your dick is a sacrifice any father should be willing to make for his 15-year-old son. Call me old-fashioned. Unfortunately, your ex wasn't willing to make that sacrifice (selfish tranny!), or it never occurred to him to make that sacrifice (stupid tranny!). So what do you tell your son? Tell him his father can do what he likes--suck dick and flaunt it, get his dick cut off and flaunt that." <--- Directly from the link above.

Is it acceptable for a person at the head of a movement to make comments that belittle people who are already vulnerable? Yes?/No?/Why?

Is it accurate that "It Gets Better"'s leader got glitterbombed twice for using abusive language towards Transpeople, that he doesn't want used against gay kids? Yes. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/15/dan-savage-glitterbombed-irvine-_n_1095354.html

If Dan Savage is going to lead this organisation, then "It Gets Better" has to take responsibility for the comments he makes or has made in the past. He's a leading figure in "It Gets Better", so if he's going to use it as a bully pulpit, the organisation needs to be held accountable for his views for better or worse. Kate Dee (talk) 03:56, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Is being called "gay" homophobic? Yes and no, it depends entirely on the context. A lot (if not all) of the quotes above are entirely taken out of context. Hell, from the quotes above you could just as well interpert that Savage is homophobic ("Tell him his father can do what he likes--suck dick and flaunt it"). Whatever the case may be, what you are doing here is original research and has no place in Wikipedia, even if you are right. --Conti|✉ 12:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I would say no, as "Gay" is a harmless, regularly used word. "Bad Tranny" and "Shemale" aren't, as they can only be used in an offensive and degrading manner. Furthermore, I doubt you would ever see Savage saying that a gay man shouldn't come out, even if they had a son doing their final high school exams, so what gives him the right to say that about Transpeople? I also disagree on the "Original research" claim, as two of the links I presented are from "Reliable Sources" such as Huffington Post and NYT, while the others are predominantly secondary sources (or in the case of the savage articles themselves, primary). If Huffington Post and the New York Times aren't "reliable sources", then I'm sure that you'll have no qualms with me deleting all paragraphs within both the Dan Savage and "It Gets Better" articles, as by your reasoning they are "original research". Kate Dee (talk) 13:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

1. When did you use the New York Times as a source? I searched here and on the article page, but I couldn't find any link to the NYT related to this.
2. The Huffington Post source[1] basically says that Savage was glitterbombed and his explanation of the event. No relation or mention whatsoever to the It Gets Better Project.
3. Your argument below as to why Savage did not include transkids as an example in this project is, again, a perfect example of original research. We might as well ask why Savage didn't include lesbian suicides (he must be a lesbianophobe, I suppose), etc. If you find a reputable source saying what you're saying ("Savage did not include transkids because he doesn't like them") we can talk about including this. If it's just your opinion, we can't. That simple. --Conti|✉ 16:32, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Agree with Conti. Criticism of Savage not specifically in the context of It Gets Better should be at his bio, not here. There's criticism of It Gets Better that can be used instead, covering a range of political positions. Jokestress (talk) 17:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I disagree. Savage purposefully excluded transkids who committed suicide or were murdered during the same period as Clementi. What made him do that? Was it that is was a "too complex and confusing"issue as a lot of gay rights groups have been saying about Gender Identity recently, or was there something else at play when the organisation was setup? Like it or not "It Gets Better" is Savage's baby, which means his perspectives have a large influence within the organisation. Hence the need for a criticism section of Savage on the "It Gets Better" wiki, plus Savage's bio wiki. Kate Dee (talk) 13:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Could you point to some evidence that the IGBP excludes transsexuals from the project? A statement on their website would be useful and this could be part of the article.

Please take more care with claims about Savage, you do need to source comments such as "purposefully excluded transkids who committed suicide or were murdered". Discussion pages such as this must also comply with the policy on biographies of living people, see WP:BLP. If such claims remain unsourced then they should be removed. --Fæ (talk) 13:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about when the project was started & the kids that Savage used to justify starting it. There were Transkids who died at the same time as Clementi and the others who were covered in the news. (Jokestress should be able to attest to that one given her contacts.) Savage didn't reference them at the time in any media release/appearance or material. He still hasn't, which as I mentioned earlier raises questions as to why. Kate Dee (talk) 13:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I agree that Savage's repeated use of "Tranny" (in this case in reference to a transsexual, not a transvestite[2]) is offensive and appears entirely intentional based on the sources provided, but this is still a topic best taken up at Dan Savage rather than here. Fæ (talk) 14:03, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

What's wrong with the Citation Ref Tags?

There are at present 238 citations in the article, according to the final "Book" section, but only 214 of them are showing up in the References section. I tried clicking on a bunch of the footnotes in the Organizations and Groups section, but the first ten listed there (Adobe Systems to Ernst & Young) don't work, even though the ref tags and the reflist template in under the Ref section heading appear to be formatted correctly. Neither do Jesse Spencer to Olivia Wilde in the S to Z subsection above it. Does anyone know what's wrong here? Nightscream (talk) 14:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)