Template talk:LGBT
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| WikiProject LGBT studies | (Rated Template-Class) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||
 |
Note: Template talk:LGBT sidebar redirects to this talk page. This is the centralized talk page for Template:LGBT (appears at bottom of articles) and Template:LGBT sidebar (appears at side of some core LGBT articles). Except for the sidebar containing less content, changes to one template should be reflected in the other as well. If your message only relates to one of the templates, please specify sidebar or footer. |
 Archives |
|---|
[edit] Additional articles
I would like to add four articles (the last one still a bit of a stub) to the template, as they jointly constitute an important part of LGBT history. Specifically, they are Pederastic relationships in classical antiquity, Historical pederastic relationships, Pederastic couples in Japan, and Egalitarian same-sex relationships in classical antiquity. Any thoughts? Haiduc (talk) 11:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- The size of this template is getting ridiculous, even with the minimised sections. I think these would be better placed in a Template:Pederasty. Rebecca (talk) 12:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - Even the one article on pederasty that's there is one too many when it comes to the LGBT Template. "Pedarasty" as defined in those articles has no historical link to LGBT anything, that is, unless you have the "homosexuals-are-child-abusers" myth in mind. In other words, just because homosexuality as a behavior is what's shared, does not require it to be included under a LGBT rubric of any sort. Remember, the word is still commonly and directly associated with child abuse in most of the Western world. What's more, the topic is already covered under homosexuality, which goes beyond identity politics. Besides, not only is pederasty pre-LGBT anything, it also constitutes a relation of power, i.e. far from both the struggle for LGBT equal rights and the striving for LGBT well-being. I, therefore, suggest someone create a pre-LGBT category, template, etc. should they deem it that important and provided that they realize that it's not an LGBT topic in its own right. --CJ Withers (talk) 17:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- I've made a note of this discussion at WT:LGBT as these template talk pages aren't generally on people's watchlists. I'll also point out that there is a difference in pederasty and pedophilia. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here 18:24, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose, purely for space and utility reasons. The current template is already too bug and performs its function poorly imo, by trying to include too much. A separate template would serve readers and editors better in this case (and in many others). But i do think pederasty has very strong historical and cultural links to LGBT, and anyone who has read up on the suject would agree, so that link should stay.YobMod 20:17, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Here, try this. I have created Template:Pederasty; by adding {{Pederasty}} you can insert template
 |
| Part of a series on Pederasty |
| Ancient Greece · Classical relationships · Greek philosophy |
| Historical relationships · Rennaissance |
| Albania · Japan · Middle East · Shudo |
| Pederasty in film |
to the relevant pages. I have tested it on a couple. If there are more pages, or you want to reorganise the listing, just edit the template. If you want it broken into sections, let me know. Mish (talk) 09:10, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Identities
Sorry to have to revert, but the correction of "sexual identities" to "sexual orientation identities" was justified, if not overdue.
- sexual orientation identity = identity based on sexual orientation: homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual
- sexual identity = identity based on sex: physically or biologically male, female, intersex, transsexual
- gender identity = identity based on gender: socially male, female, in-between, gender-free, transgender
The fist sentence or paragraph of these articles is very clear on the differences. --CJ Withers (talk) 20:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
- This is not supported by sources, and is due to a recent non-consensus edit of the sexual identity article. It has been referred to as 'sexual identity' for years. Mish (talk) 23:27, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
- I have reverted the edit to the Sexual identity page, and provided evidence of the established usage here:
- To avoid replicating discussion, I have opened up discussion of this issue here:
- I have also notified the other relevant project here:
