> Sorry, that's not really true. Upthread, there's this:
>>> What would an acceptable inclusion measure be?
>> Not asking.
Yeah.
Not asking about the user's gender, not the gendered style of the products they're searching for.
Do you really not see the distinction?
Here, let me clarify: If I was a trans man, this is the difference between telling the website I'm a trans man, versus searching the website for clothing styled for men.
The objection was about the former, not the latter.
Want proof? Here's AnEro's actual comment, which it appears you didn't actually read:
> What features are you bringing me that are improved cause you know my sex? What features are you bringing me that are improved cause you know I'm trans?
(emphasis mine)
> Followed by a whole lot of discussion about finding clothes by using classifications other than gender.
Yeah, because that's the question that was asked.
AnEro asked "What features are you bringing me that are improved cause you know I'm trans".
In response, deelowe asked "What should the option be when I'm searching for clothes and I want to filter out dresses and blouses?".
We answered that specific question with some alternatives ways to achieve that same endgoal that doesn't require the website to ask for the user's gender.
Sorry, that's not really true. Upthread, there's this:
>> What would an acceptable inclusion measure be?
> Not asking.
Followed by a whole lot of discussion about finding clothes by using classifications other than gender.