Talk:Judy Singer

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thank you for creating this article on a notable Australian sociologist! Please always remember to provide proper attribution for any translated pages (you noted it, but the acknowledgment should include a link; I've added the edit summary). Also, there seem to be some useful sources that you can consider adding, including two articles published by Forbes Magazine which I found after a quick Google search, to provide more context for her work and notability. It would also be a good idea to look for reviews of her 2016 book in research journals or other reliable news outlets. Please let me know if you have any questions!

Ppt91^talk 22:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

This is Judy Singer

I've just come back to see the page about myself. I am absolutely appalled!

It is factually incorrect to the point of being libellous and Northocentric. And sexist as well, spending more time on American Journalist, Harvey Blume, who I mentioned it to in passing. Blume was just a freelance journo who knew nothing about disability activism or disability politics, let alone the Disability Rights Movement. Not until I educated him about it all, and even then he wrote one article without citing me, nd then he moved on to chase other topics.. However we continued to communicate by email, phone and briefly in person for many years after. Not that I minded at the time. Never did I imagine that anyone would ever read my academic thesis, let alone that it would ever become such a huge issue,.

The incursion on this page by Botha et al,

They identify as 6 "International" Scholars but are actually 6 Northern Hemisphere scholars. They include my two major competitors in the Neurodiversity field, Robert Chapman and Nick Walker. They are responsible for an "open letter:" published by Sage Publications which is riddled with falsehoods, confirmation bias, lack of citation of original documents and reliance on social media scuttlebutt, which is now under legal scrutiny for defamation. Given Botha et al's lack of documentation - much of which I obviously possess - would make it an easy win. I'm not a lawyer, but surely the fact that these undocumented claims are made by my closest competitors must be a major issue. Fortunately for them, as I am an age pensioner, formerly both a disability/ carer pensioner due to my autism d x for my more autistic family members. I cannot afford to embark on court action.

Please remove this piece immediately

I have corrected the article offline, but I will not edit your page until I hear back from you.

I have to tell you, that the concerted efforts of Botha et al to discredit me have caused me huge emotional distress and months of my time.

Unlike them I am no longer affiliated with any institutions who can give me either practical or moral support, having retired long ago as a septuagenarian

As a retired independent Australian scholar, I don't have the clout of this Northern Hemisphere pack who can write what they want to dream up, knowing that they don't have to look me in the eye, And knowing that a "simiple lie will go around the world 10 times in the time it takes the truth to ties its shoelaces.

They are trying to reduce me to having "coined" just one word, "Neurodiversity", and then not even satisfied with that, they are trying to find a previous coinage, (without success, I'm happy to say, because part of due diligence for my research thesis was a complete literature review, and there was no previous coinage, let alone any guide to how the term should be used, which I provided) On the contrary, I have been an active scholar, advocate and disability rights, welfare and social housing advocate since the early 1990s, and as a University student in the late 60s and 70s, a dedicated supported of the Women's and Gay Liberation Movements. It is thus upsetting that one intemperate slur, which I rapidly amended then deleted when I realised that it conveyed a different message than I intended, has now been weaponised against me by my competitors. Jsinger (talk) 01:25, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Translate from Portuguese? Surely she had an entry before?

Didn't she? Why was it deleted, if so? Oolong (talk) 22:33, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

The article was deleted here on the wiki-en in 2007 and has never been recreated (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judy Singer). Since I created the version on the wiki-pt in 2021, I decided to create the translated version here. The article only existed on the wiki-fr. Fronteira (talk) 11:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Transphobia

During autism acceptance month, many were exposing Judy singer as being transphobic. I think a section can be added in this page to mention it (along with the pushback from autistic rights advocates). here’s an article for reference: https://www.sportskeeda.com/pop-culture/news-who-judy-singer-autistic-pride-day-controversy-explained-transphobic-tweets-go-viral SomeGuyNamedOliver (talk) 00:46, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I think it is important to re-phrase the "transphobic comments" entry to say that Singer made tweets that were "interpreted as transphobic". Otherwise, Wikipedia is endorsing the opinions of some vocal critics without stating that they are opinions. Not everyone would agree with the characterization. User1890 (talk) 22:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Judy Singer again.

Thank you User1890 for your mediation.

I cannot blame anyone for interpreting my post as "transphobic". Transsexual people have been horribly oppressed by Western Christian Binarism, in which moral choices seem to be limited to "Good", "Evil" or "Worrying" (at best)". My offending post was that I retweeted J.K.Rowling, and added that TransWomen are not Women, and should find another name for themselves.

I was thinking with my Anthropologist hat, rather than my Sociologist hat. Sociologists study their own societies. Anthropologists compare the beliefs and practices of a range of cultures or ethnicities. But I did not make that clear. So it is my fault if my Western critics blame me, since I did not explain that sexual binaries are a feature of Christian culture, while other cultures recognise many different genders, which is what I had in mind. Even the Talmud recognised at least 6 genders!

I am linguaphilic, I believe that words are important, as in "say what you mean, and mean what you say". I hope to show that does not make me "transphobic". My work is based partly on the belief that nothing is nothing more powerful than naming our identities as they evolve. That's why I coined Neurodiversity to name the new movement for people who were oppressed by the purely negative "disorder" definitions in the Diagnositic Statistical Manuals (4 and 5) of the American Psychiatric Association. We needed our own name, not one owned by the Psycho-Medical professions. For the same reason, I believe Trans people should take their own power by naming themselves. I then suggested the possible term "Femoid" as a candidate for the new term, but I quickly realised that the "-oid" suffix did not simply mean "Female-like", but sounded derogatory, as it can be interpreted as "less than female" or even "less than human": Thus I quickly removed it. However, the internet never forgets.

It was impulsive and rash of me to blunder in to such such a complex topic in 240 characters. My only excuse was that I had just recovered from jetlag after returning home to Sydney from my UK presentations, where I caught a viral infection on the plane, which lasted a couple of weeks. Then I woke one morning with a massive rush of energy and disinhibition, went on Twitter, which as fate or destiny would have it, fed me a tweet from J.K Rowling first up. The rest is history.

However I want to make what I believe quite clear:

. In the English language, the word "Woman" refers to an adult human with XX chromosomes. There may also be a very few people who are intersex, with more female characteristics than male, which is an issue outside the scope of this article. The word "Woman" is herstorically (sic) :-) reserved and not for appropriating.

. Linguaphilic does not equal "Transphobic". XY people can never be XX people. However, XY people can call themselves whatever names that they choose or coin, (except "Women"), dress however they want, and enter women's private spaces, if they are invited. The aims of Transsexual Politics might start with architectural improvements: transexual toilets and change rooms

Watch my blog https://www.neurodiversity2.blogspot.com for my upcoming definition of "Who is a woman?". Jsinger (talk) 09:35, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

. Jsinger (talk) 08:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)