The "Double Standard" Of Wikipedia

Recently, I was reading an article on Wikipedia about the newest Star Trek series called "Discovery." When I got to the bottom, I noticed the category section and one category in particular: "American LGBT-related television shows." That got me to thinking that I didn't remember seeing a category for "American Straight-related television shows." When I added that exact category, because Wikipedia is after all an online reference source that strives to be accurate, it was removed and the response I got was: "The category you added does not exist and should not exist." That category "should not exist!?" Why would that be? To me, it smacks of an agenda somewhere. At the very least, gays and straights are equal and should be treated as such, shouldn't they? And they should be referenced as such, especially on an online reference site. I'm so fed up with "gay this" and "lesbian that" being shoved down my throat all the time. Straight people don't seem to feel the need to shove their "straightness" down everybody else's throats alla time. There are "gay pride" parades alla time, but I haven't heard of any "straight pride" parades. Do you think straights would be able to get a permit to hold one if they wanted to? To me, the whole thing smacks of an agenda by the LGBT people for some purpose. It's time the laws on equality were enforced both ways. Here is a link to the Wikipedia talk page in question where I raised this issue. The particular point is entitled "Why Was This Category Removed?":

"Why Was This Category Removed?"

Is anybody else getting tired of hearing about the sexuality of one group of people over another? And getting your opinion quashed just because you fit in any particular group that's not seemingly pushing an agenda? All I want is to be treated equally. As an American citizen, I thought that I had the legal right to equality.

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind
It's time the laws on equality were enforced both ways.

Except this is a private company and not the government. They can add or remove any category descriptors they want.

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind

There are actual teams of workers for ShareBlue, Correct the Record, the ACLU, ADL, and the SPLC who actively edit Wikipedia with a liberal agenda.

They literally attempt to rewrite history.

....they also try their hand at conspiracy theory forums, but oh, so poorly.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind
It's time the laws on equality were enforced both ways.

Except this is a private company and not the government. They can add or remove any category descriptors they want.

Except when the private company is a bakery in Colorado!

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind

Always take Wiki with a grain of salt. There is a reason most schools will not allow you to use Wikipedia to cite anything, it can be easily changed!

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind
It's time the laws on equality were enforced both ways.

Except this is a private company and not the government. They can add or remove any category descriptors they want.

Sure they can, but the government interferes with private industry all the time, ESPECIALLY when it comes to "discrimination." If government can demand private corporations have X number of women on their boards, they could surely take Wikipedia's policies to task if they wanted to.

originally posted by: Oaktree

Except when the private company is a bakery in Colorado!

Your reply shows you haven't really followed the nuances of that case.

originally posted by: schuyler
Sure they can, but the government interferes with private industry all the time, ESPECIALLY when it comes to "discrimination." If government can demand private corporations have X number of women on their boards, they could surely take Wikipedia's policies to task if they wanted to.

And private industry can file suit if they feel the laws are onerous. The Original Poster mentioned 'equal rights', what equal rights are being infringed by Wikipedia?

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind

Is anybody else getting tired of hearing about the sexuality of one group of people over another?

TBH, not particularly... Cause as far as I can tell, no ones forcing me to listen.

That got me to thinking that I didn't remember seeing a category for "American Straight-related television shows." When I added that exact category, because Wikipedia is after all an online reference source that strives to be accurate, it was removed

Just out of curiosity mate... What shows did you actually include in your list of "American Straight-related television shows"?

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Just out of curiosity mate... What shows did you actually include in your list of "American Straight-related television shows"?

The Cosby Show, he obviously likes the ladies.

The real crime here is done by big companies.
Big pharma frequently delete posts about pharmaceuticals side effects and suppress natural treatments.
I don't have the links to hand but there is evidence for this.

originally posted by: Dr X
The real crime here is done by big companies.

Wikipedia is not a big company, they are a not for profit.

I don't see a double standard; your exchange with the people on Wikipedia explains it to you very well.

The vast majority of TV shows today are "straight-relatied" there is no helpful reason to go around and add this category to all of them. It should be commonly assumed that a TV show is "straight-relatied" unless it is specifically stated otherwise. That is why the category is not neede; it is redundant and there is no need for the extra overhead to added to almost all TV shows.

This is not currently true for "LGBT-related" TV shows. Its in fact the opposite. It should be commonly assumed that a TV show is NOT "LGBT-related" unless it is specifically stated otherwise. And that is why the category is needed.

The real question is why do you care about categories on wikipedia? What got under your skin enough to not only edit a wikipedia artical but than argue about it on two different websites?

----------

On the topic of Star Terk Discovery adding a "LGBT-related" plot line ... I'd be more upset at how badly they incorporate it; than about wikipedia categorizing it.

Simply put the plot line was way overblown; to the point that it was comical and cringy. Star Trek has always had elements of sexuality, but never about sappy love affairs. Their have been important "couplings", but never was a good 10 minutes spent with the couple brushing their teeth to make it very very very clear that they where a couple. The show chose to make the gayness of the couple a very important part of the show; when it should have just been a back ground element. "Yes these two men are a couple ... so what? isnt that so normal that we dont need to have a ten minute tooth brushing seen to make it very clear?"

Lots of Sifi shows are doing this. Example Supergirl's adopted human sister is a lezbian in the current adaptation of "Supergirl"; which is great except for the fact that they spent to much sappy time dealing with it. Like Star Trek I have to fast forward through these parts because they are just so boring and dont further the main story in anyway.