Talk:Lesbian

• Moved debates from 2003-4 to /Archive 1

---

Contents

1 Image 2 Recent Changes 3 One reason 4 Lesbian definitions 5 Men and Pornography 6 disambiguation

Image

Are these women really typical of lesbians in general, thus, is this the best image to represent lesbianism? Dysprosia

I doubt that they are typical at all - the photo was taken at a BDSM event and the subjects are very out about their sexuality. Thus they represent a stereotype. More typical lesbians unless celebrities might make for a rather dull photo. Pretzelpaws 04:09, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well, we aren't looking for pictures based on their excitement value ;) It's not quite NPOV to show a stereotype as being somewhat representative of the whole, with its placement, it does imply this. It may be more suitable alongside a description of lesbian stereotypes which we don't have right now... Dysprosia 04:37, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I see what you mean about NPOV. However unless we have a picture of a famous lesbian (say Ellen DeGeneres)

what other kind of picture could we have at the top of the article that wouldn't appear generic? I have some

pics from a gay pride march but the participants would still be at the very 'out' end of the spectrum.

You have a point though. I'm not sure what would be the best sort of situation/subject matter that would typically be "lesbian". Dysprosia 07:24, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I've moved the original pic further down the page and added a new one at the top that might fit the bill. Pretzelpaws 09:01, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That's a great image. Kudos! :) Dysprosia 09:02, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I think it's silly to put a bunch of images. How the hell are you going to find a picture of "a lesbian"? What's the point? They look like women. They walk among you. This isn't a damn field guide. -Montréalais 04:54, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Of course, if one were to judge by our article on woman, three out of five women have visible genitals. But I suppose that's a side issue<g> - Nunh-huh 04:57, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Granted, but at least the first image is somewhat relevant, and provides a bit of visual interest to the article too. It's a pretty good image for the subject matter.

I'm less keen on the second, but that's something we can discuss amongst ourselves. Dysprosia 05:12, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Does the article need "visual interest"? I repeat myself: you can't provide an image of "a lesbian" because lesbians come in a variety of shapes and sizes. We can't just show two random women, even though I'm sure they'd be thrilled to know they were chosen to illustrate the encyclopedia article on lesbians.

Maybe something like the National Lesbian Conference, or Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon, or an ensemble shot of the Toronto Dyke March or something, would be more appropriate; appropriately captioned and positioned so that the photo means something more than, And now, lesbians. - Montréalais 05:20, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

All articles need visual interest of some kind. Y'know, "a picture is a thousand words", and all that. An article just looks a bit more complete with an image.

And, those suggestions are great also. Dysprosia 05:33, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Dysprosia -- How about "couples of any sexuality"?; I think the current form of "regardless" is a bit wordy. Feezo 11:46, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Then we have "like any couples of any sexuality" - too many anys. Dysprosia 12:01, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Mmm..agreed. I suppose wordiness is the price we pay for precision, which is very important in this case. Feezo 12:07, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• The photograph supposedly illustrating lesbians' support of women's suffrage is of a bunch of men outside an anti-suffrage office. Isn't this just a trifle odd? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:26, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's been taken off Feminism, as far as I can imagine. Feel free to remove it, if you wish. Dysprosia 10:51, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

OK, I have. I kept the long caption, tidied it up (it was difficult to see when it was small, but it was a bit of a mess), and included it in the section. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:03, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Recent Changes

I'm following the wake of a recent newbie (or possibly a vandal). There have been several recent changes. The most recent change may actually be an improvement in some way. Is somebody watching this page who can go over the recent history and straighten things out? P0M 04:09, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

One reason

The male viewing the lesbian pornography has a gender related issue. While maintaining a sexual preference for females, he prefers to think of himself as one of the females in the pornographic depitcion. See transgender for further deails.

This seems a little dodgy or reaching to me. Even if the reason has validity, it sounds rather esoteric. I hardly think this article should become a compendium for reasons why heterosexual men enjoy lesbian pornography... Dysprosia 10:03, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

The issue of why some heterosexual men have an interest in lesbian pornography is an interesting question. However some lesbians may feel that this is assuming a disproportionate amount of attention, this is not of importance to the lesbian experience. Should we shift this to a seperate article e.g. "Lesbian pornography"? PatGallacher 20:17, 2005 Jun 9 (UTC)

Perhaps, but I don't know what research and established information one could make to an article -- it may be all mostly speculative? Dysprosia 03:08, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I disagree with the first statement. I like what I see on this picture (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/d/df/20050618233517%21Compass_in_a_wooden_frame.jpg), but I definitely do not want to be a female. → JarlaxleArtemis 23:22, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Lesbian definitions

A woman who is primarily attracted to other women, could be consider bisexual or lesbian, right? Such a woman is technically bisexual, but since she's primarily attracted to women she could be considered lesbian, which is a looser, not really official definition of lesbian. There's sometimes an overlap of opinion as to whether a person is homosexual(gay/lesbian) or bisexual or straight/heterosexual or bisexual. Their technically bisexual, but since their primarily attracted to the same or opposite sex, they could also be considered straight or gay.

Men and Pornography

I have removed the "four possible reasons" why men generally accept pornographic images with "lesbian" sex. If there is no reliable source, then it does not belong. If there is a reliable source, then it needs a citation. It sounds entirely speculative. "Men find images of lesbian sex to be completely non-threatening". Was every man alive polled about this? Is it a-priori true? What kind of a claim it it? It doesn't have much to do with lesbians anyway.

disambiguation

I may be hooted from this talkpage, but I do think Lesbian should as a generic adjective (due to Wikipedia being initial-letter case-insensitive) be a disambiguation page. Lesbian in classical literature is often used as simply referring to Lesbos, and the Lesbian language. We could have

• Lesbians (the people, possibly redirecting to Lesbos) — I see it's already a redirect; it would have to redirect to the dab page, then.
• Lesbian (homosexual)
• Lesbian language

so neither usage gets the right of the "default" article. That's just 'how I would do it'. I can live with the present solution. dab (ᛏ) 18:10, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

From the article,

In modern Greece, the island's name is pronounced and usually transliterated Lesvos and its inhabitants are thus called Lesvonians or Lesviots (rather than "Lesbians").

I am guessing that Wikipedia should use the Modern Greek rather than the Classical? If this should be the case, should not lesvian be the adjective? Dysprosia 04:42, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)