In response to this question : https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/1088987/guidance-for-modern-illegitimate-children
I had no idea, until seeing that question, that such a category even existed.
I question WHY we would need this category at all. Children born outside the bounds of recognised "lawful" marriage have always existed, but do we need to stigmatise them forever? The CHILD was not illegal. The CHILD just was.
By the social mores of their time, the parents may, or may not, have acted outside the bounds of what constituted proper behaviour - but there were always exceptions to what was (and is) considered a "lawful" union. If one was betrothed, that was often seen as even more binding than some ceremony held OUTSIDE the church (because until you were "lawfully" married in the sight of the people, you could not enter the building) on the verge, or the steps.
Yes, I understand that illegitimacy carried legal connotations, especially regards inheritance, but that can be explained in biographies. It does not require a category to link together every. single. (so-called) illegitimate child ever born.
No child should ever carry a label seen as something that (in the words of another Wikitreer) "carries too much judgemental baggage with it".
Thanks for reading.
(If I have mis-categorised where I placed this, please move it.
If I have misunderstood how to make a proposal, I apologise and ask for a more correct way to be explained.)