Talk:Lori and George Schappell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jokes[edit]

The number of jokes can be reduced.

For example, George is still female and no doctor has said otherwise. As far as I know, they do not maintain privacy, and "respecting privacy" is just empty words. For example , they smell each others farts — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.175.62.241 (talk) 13:37, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Transgender people identify as having a different gender from the role that might have been assumed from their birth anatomy, and both public acceptance and the law are catching up with this reality. There are many kinds of gender identities, and they have nothing to do with anatomy (see also Sex and gender distinction and Gender role). It is unclear how you would know of the opinions of George and Lori's doctors, since you provide no references for your statement of fact. George and Lori have ways to respect the other's privacy, such as draping a sheet over oneself and remaining quiet; this is clearly shown in their documentaries. How you would have any knowledge of what they might or might not smell is similarly unclear. Commenters here would do well to make some effort to research their subject before committing to statements of fact. David Spector (talk) 10:36, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Gender is not a role that someone plays and gender has everything to do with anatomy. For example, when was the last time you heard anybody getting an animal a sex change because some human disagreed with what the Vet or owner said? Would you actually ask the owner of a horse the following question, "Are you sure that your horse is a male? I believe it to be non binary." Nosehair2200 (talk) 20:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Education[edit]

Is there a citation or reference for the assertion that one or both attended the University of Pennsylvania? I could find nothing.

Avocats (talk) 08:59, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I could also find nothing. Page http://enc.tfode.com/Lori_and_Reba_Schappell and one other contain this claim, but they self-identify as having been copied from Wikipedia. I have removed the information. We don't know in which college they "attended classes" and if they graduated. WP tries to be accurate, so a reliable reference is needed. David Spector (talk) 11:00, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BBC quote[edit]

This is from Chuck Shepherd's "News of the Weird" column, October 23, 2005:

"Reba Schappell, of Reading, Pa., a professional country music singer who is also a conjoined twin with sister Lori, was profiled in a September segment of the BBC radio series "Who Runs Your World." Said Reba, "When I am singing, Lori is like any other fan, except she's up on the stage with me (covered in a blanket to reduce the distraction)." Said Lori: "I do not ask for anything from Reba. I don't get in to her concerts free just because she's a conjoined twin. I have to pay, just like every other fan that comes to the concert." [BBC News, 9-21-05]"

George?[edit]

Did Reba really rename herself, or is that vandalism? Eastend 12:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I actually found a news report somewhere that said she had renamed herself George. --Amandajm 12:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Although not really a source, but when featured on Dutch television on Tuesday 26 July 2007 she admitted renaming herself George while her sister explained she's more into "boyish" things than "girlish" things and therefor renamed herself. Of course, George is more of a Country-song name. Very interesting broadcast it was, impressive to see these two people have their own life although they are conjoined.
I had never seen them until I recently downloaded a clip the other day. There is an interview, (I can't remeber which one, offhand,) in which George, as we must now call her, says that she is gay and Lori is straight. --Amandajm 12:26, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone confirm this?? Is 'George' really gay now??? --KpoT (talk) 18:30, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lori has had boyfriends, but I thought Dori/George always claimed to be asexual, did she come out as lesbian? NukeIt2Bdone (talk) 20:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe someone could do a search through the online material and find out where she says this, and reference it. Amandajm (talk) 12:46, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, George[edit]

On 21st June, 2007, they were billed at Ropley's Believe it or Not as Lori and George Schapell. I have cited this in the article,, but notwithstanding, someone nameless went through like the proverbial stuff through a goose and changed every George back to Reba. Ther was a sentence that said "By 2007 Reba preferred to be known as George". This was erroneously changed to "By 2007 Dori preferred to be known as Reba"...And then, not to be outdone, another nameless editor altered the statement to "Dori changed her name to Reba in 2007." Totally blinking incorrect, despite the fact that there is discussion on this page, and a reference to the name change.

--Amandajm 06:16, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

Per discussion above, page should be moved to Lori and George Schappell with the names "Reba" and "Dori" clearly noted in the text.--Tim Thomason 21:45, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, on one level. But having been known professionally as Reba, it would need the appropriate redirect.
Also, I wonder whether George is going to stay George or if it may change again!
Do you want to sort out the move, Tim-Tom?
--Amandajm 09:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty lax when it comes to my Wikipedia-time, so you (who seems to have a stake in the fate of this page) can deal with it (or whoever reads this convo that wants to). I requested the move on WP:RM, because I thought it might be "controversial" what with your other "level" and the occasional IP wanting a "Reba" page. I'll move it myself if no one objects and it isn't moved in a few days (and I remember, i.e. check my recent contributions). It could always be moved back if need be (easily only once).
As for redirects, Lori and Reba Schappell should stay for now, for the ease in the links. Lori Schappell, Reba Schappell, and George Schappell should also be redirects (possibly also George and Lori Schappell, probably not "Reba and Lori Schappell" nor "Dori Schappell"). Those redirects should be enough to cover searching and linking contingencies. They should stay (and this page as redirect) should either change their legal or professional name again.--Tim Thomason 23:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been renamed from Lori and Reba Schappell to Lori and George Schapell as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 06:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The move was un-done on 13 November 2007, but it appears to be legit so I have re-done it. --Icarus (Hi!) 04:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photo caption[edit]

The photo is captioned as it being George performing and Lori with the mike but it looks like its Lori on guitar and George singing (ie. "holding the mike"). You can just about see that the twin holding the mike is sitting on something (- that would then have to be George, on her barstool wheelchair). I didn't know Lori accompanies George's singing - maybe that's a recent thing? But I am sure that its Lori on guitar...I changed the pic cap but then changed it back and thought I'd get consensus first. Thoughts? Plutonium27 (talk) 14:53, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's George at the front, singing and playing. The picture was taken in a concert. So natuurallu the person who is performing is the one whose face is seen and who has her mouth open. You can't see what George is sittin on. It's hidden by her red skirt. Amandajm (talk) 01:02, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I added "(then known as Reba)" to the caption to help clear the confusion. The photo info refers to 'her' as Reba, perhaps the pic predates her name change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.148.99.161 (talk) 02:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV violation, blatant ablism[edit]

One of the benefits of having a high wheelchair is that, unlike most people in conventional wheelchairs, the user is raised to about the height of a standing adult, which better facilitates normal communication.

I believe that this claim violates NPOV and is ablist. It is also lacking a citation. If it is to remain in the article, it should be altered to say "According to..." and proceed to indicate who has expressed the opinion. It should not be stated as a fact with the authority of Wikipedia to back it up. If someone else said it, fine, but it should be quoted and cited appropriately. --N-k (talk) 01:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I should also add that "the height of a standing adult" is also blatantly ablist and does not represent a global perspective. Human height varies greatly, and there are many adult humans who are much shorter than average height. The amount of prejudice and normative judgement here is despicable. I am deleting the sentence; if someone would like to replace it with an appropriately cited/quoted one, they should do so. --N-k (talk) 01:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
N-k, Adults who use wheelchairs, and who live their lives mostly among people who do not use wheelchairs often suffer severely from the same sort of isolation that people with dwarfism suffer from. A person of low adult height (5 feet tall) can generally communicate with someone who is tall, (say 6 ft 2") but the tall person will often focus on people who are also tall. It's a fact of life. When you 3 ft 6" to 4 feet tall, the vast majority of people are communicating literally "over your head". They glance at you in curiosity, and then talk to the person pushing the chair, if there is one. And as for you statement that "there are many adult humans who are much shorter than average height", yes, this is certainly true, but I notice that you have linked it to the smallest adults in society, the "few" not the "many" i.e. the people for which small stature constitutes a "disability".
I'm sure that the sentence can be deleted without any loss to the article whatsoever, but, believe me, spending ones life sitting down and looking up the nostrils of the "average" adult does nothing to aid communication. To suggest that stating this fact is "ablism" is carrying Political Correctness to a ridiculous degree.
Think about the word "disabled" and whether or not it ought to be used at all, in the light of "ablism" and Political Correctness. It is the replacement for "handicapped" which is the replacement for "crippled", "blind", "deaf" "mentally retarded", "insane" and "frail". All of which described a condition that affected an aspect of the person's functioning, but not necessarily others. I'd rather be referred to as "crippled", "deaf" and "crazy" than "disabled" but that is entirely POV. Amandajm (talk) 03:29, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We're both entitled to our own opinions. Thankfully neither of us can insert them into Wikipedia articles without saying something along the lines of "According to..." and providing a citation. --N-k (talk) 12:41, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He / Her / His[edit]

In the article, George is referred to sometimes as "he / him", while in others ie "her sister", George is referred to as "she / her".

I don't know whether it's correct to follow the biological fact that George is female, or describe George as male, as he wishes to be called. Is there a policy on this for people with different gender identities?

Regardless, it needs to be one or the other. The current state seems to be a result of mixed edits.

188.29.153.14 (talk) 10:52, 13 September 2011 (UTC) Greenaum[reply]

Does anybody on Wiki actually know that George wishes to identify as male? We've got into a grey area here. In many case, where a person has their gender identity clear, and their biological sex is not a matter of significance to the article, then it is very easy to identify the person by their gender preference.
In this case, the biological gender of George is the same as that of her conjoined sister and it seems to me to be extremely confusing and quite pretentious to refer to her by the male gender, within this article. The reason for that is that the physical identities of the twins is the feature that has brought them to fame. If anyone got the idea that George was a biological male, conjoined with a biologically female sister, it would be extremely confusing. I think that we ought to revert the personal pronouns to "she" unless George's wishes are made absolutely clear. Amandajm (talk) 13:23, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lori and George (usually a boy's name!) were interviewed on This Morning on British ITV on the day I posted. They made it clear George thinks of himself as male, Lori calls him "him / he". Lori mentioned all the stereotypical "boy things" that George liked, and said he was a boy. George himself doesn't like to talk about his personal life, Lori does that for him.
George changed his name, first to Reba, since he didn't like his rhyming name (Lori and Dori, and who wouldn't!?), then to George, because he identifies himself as male. I don't know if me seeing a TV show is a good enough reference, but something more concrete might be out there. It's not a matter of being pretensious, just respecting George's choice. I can agree it might be confusing, but a short sentence explaining his gender status will do to handle that.
188.29.36.227 (talk) 23:25, 14 September 2011 (UTC) Greenaum[reply]


Here, I had a quick Google...
From Interview with George and Lori .
quote -
The twins not only had to deal with their birth defect but George was hiding a secret torment from his sister. He says: "I have known from a very young age that I should have been a boy. "I loved playing with trains and hated girly outfits. I kept my desire to change sex hidden — even from Lori — for many years." George came clean about his desire four years ago. He changed his name from Dori and began living as a man.
endquote -
The Sun is a bloody awful "news"paper, but it should be good enough to cite from, right? The words are straight from the twins' mouths, George self-identifies, in interviews, as male. Obviously it's an important issue to him.
--188.29.36.227 (talk) 23:37, 14 September 2011 (UTC) Greenaum[reply]
The article has been adjusted accordingly. Thanks for the reference. It doesn't seem sensationalised. Amandajm (talk) 02:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Sun is one of the biggest selling newspapers in the UK. They don't sensationalise everything. They're not overall a very good newspaper, but in a simple case like this story, there's not much they could get wrong! Thank you for doing the work. 188.29.43.249 (talk) 15:29, 22 September 2011 (UTC) Greenaum .[reply]

Separate pages?[edit]

Would it be nice if both of these people had their OWN page in addition to this one? George especially. It's quite noteworthy to go through life as a conjoined AND transgender person. Might be worth a mention. I would think the same would go for the Hensel twins. Jfulbright (talk) 19:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Transgender people don't get separate pages, just for being transgender. It might cause curiosity to some, but it isn't noteworthy of itself.
The Schappell twins are notable, and have had media attention primarily because of their conjoined state. George's success as a singer has been acknowledged; it hasn't led to sufficient notability to warrant an article, because it would take only a line or three.
Likewise the Hensell twins are notable for only one thing- their conjoined state.
If any of these four women achieve a degree of success (or significant notability) in some field, then the person who achieves it will get an article, just like any other notable individual.
If you want to know more about their personalities, or have more insight into their private lives, look elsewhere.
This is an encyclopedia, not a chat page.
Amandajm (talk) 13:42, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lori and George Schappell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:04, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As of 2022, they were the oldest living conjoined twins in the world.
Wanted to correct this, but didn't want to edit the article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_and_Donnie_Galyon
Ronnie and Donnie, the oldest set of conjoined twins ever, died, in 2020.
So this line should say, As of 2020... 216.209.190.91 (talk) 16:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lori_and_George_Schappell&oldid=1220298392"