Talk:Drone

There's no mention of swarmgenders or hivegenders in this article, even though they're closely related

You are, of course, welcome to edit the article. I removed a big chunk of the previous context because it wasn't directly related to the queer/gender part of the term, that's all.

Why did you remove the line *Swarm-based gender systems are common in the insect world and in science fiction, but they can also be found rarely in humans and otherkin*?

The reference was a random Twitter post without direct relationship with the statement (beyond the fact that it's about the same topic).

This claim has no sources, and seems offensive. Reducing a gender identity to a fetish is something that ought to come with plenty of evidence. I've never heard of any drones who based their identity on a fetish, and I know plenty of drones

This could actually seriously harm the image of dronegender people if someone who isn't educated stumbles across the enry. I'm going to remove the line for now until it's sourced.

Sure! I added that given that it sounded like the implication you were making in the queer section. It started as a fetish -> it's now a gender, therefore there is a relationship. But I might have misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying!

I'll clarify so you know for next time. Dronification is to drones, as force-feminisation is to women. Lots of cis men enjoy force-feminisation fetish despite not identifying as women. But the fetish wouldn't make any sense if the gender of woman didn't already exist. The existence of dronification also doesn't make any sense unless a drone is something that already exists.

If you said that "trans woman" is a gender that's based on force feminisation, that would be silly.

Inclusion of the Borg and the Zerg as examples of the gender with no explanation is strange. Shouldn't there be context to their involvement in the article?

Article is very short and doesn't explain much of the history of the term. Can we get some more detail?