User talk:Masculinity

External links

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Gay. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 15:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Masculinity, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style
• Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help. SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Satyr. I will take your help as and when needed.(Masculinity (talk) 05:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC))

UNESCO document on masculinity

Thanks for the note you left me on my talk page. It's always better to discuss potentially problematic links than to edit war. Let's discuss the merit of the link you inserted on the discussion page for the Gay article, so that others can join the discussion as well.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 15:19, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Sexual Orienation is a western concept and should not be seen as universal

The entire idea that people, especially men, can be divided on the basis of their 'proclaimed' sexuality is a concept peculiar to the modern west, and to discuss the concept as a universal phenomena, and to judge or study sexuality, men and masculinities in other cultures or in other times on the basis of these concepts not only distorts and misrepresents their reality, but is also seen as oppressive by people on whom the west enforces these identities, often through the one-sided process of globalisation.

Wikipedia, should take into account this fact when discussing modern western concepts such as 'sexual orientation', 'homosexuality', 'heterosexuality', 'gay' and 'straight', etc., and it should clearly mention this fact, because, although it is an English site, it is meant for the entire world, and not only for the western world.

Only that will make it a truly relevant and global site.

Personally, I completely agree with you. The Fat Man has traveled throughout the Orient; it would seem that the gap between the constructs of male sexuality in, say, South India and the United States are miles (or kilometers) apart. That being said, Wikipedia was not created for you and I to discuss our personal views. So here's what I would suggest: find some statements or sections of articles that seem unduly biased toward Western notions of sexuality. Discuss those sections on the articles' talk pages, and try your hand at rewriting these sections citing reliable sources--for example, the UNESCO publication we discussed earlier.

Creating citations and footnotes is fun, and it improves the quality of the article. I can help you create citations, if you show me which sources you'd like to use (be specific).--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 15:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, thank you. I'll try my best. (Masculinity (talk) 16:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC))

---

<<find some statements or sections of articles that seem unduly biased toward Western notions of sexuality. Discuss those sections on the articles' talk pages, and try your hand at rewriting these sections citing reliable sources--for example, the UNESCO publication we discussed earlier.>>

Eventhough, I'm going to follow this advice in articles on wikipedia related to such topics, in this particular case, the problem seems to not to be what the article says, but rather what it does not say. It describes the social construction of human, especially male sexuality, as it is formally and popularly seen in the west ... assuming it to be universally applicable. As far as the article is concerned, the only difference is between people who are open about their 'gay' identities and those men who relate with sexually wtih other men but do not call themselves gay, who are described as 'closeted' (or bicurious or so). A person from the orient finds the entire notion of isolation on the basis of so-called 'sexual orientation' problematic. When almost everyman is involved in some sexual way with another man, you don't really feel different for liking men.

How do you explain this dichotomy in the article? The term 'Gay' carries with it all the negative baggages of the 'heterosexualised' society, where the pressures on men to disown their same-sex needs is so extreme, that only very few men think of indulging in male-to-male sexuality by acknowledging it. The rest either keep away totally and deny their feelings, or indulge in male-eroticism without acknowledging their own interest. The term 'gay' is based on the lots of assumptions which are invalid in a non-western, non-heterosexualised world. E.g., the very concept of their being 'gay' assumes that most men do not feel sexuality towards other men. Then, who is defined as the 'same-sex'. The western culture only considers the outer sex of an individual when deciding their sex-identity, but in most non-western cultures, the sex-identity also involves, compulsorily the Gender or the inner sex of an individual. Thus a Hijra may have a penis, but he will be a different 'sex' or rather 'gender' than 'Men', because s(he) is a woman inside a man. A man and Hijra having sex is not seen as 'same-sex' in non-western countries. Of course, the west doesn't recognise 'Gender' as a valid human phenomena, and ascribes it to a mental aberration. Then of course, there is a whole lot of conspiracies behind the very concept of 'gay' or 'sexual orientation' -- revolving around men and manhood, which is relevant both in the west and the east, but men in western countries do not have a space to address these issues, and also that their cultural mindset makes them incapable to comprehend the exact parameters of these issues. (Masculinity (talk) 17:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC))

Wikiproject:LGBT Studies

Perhaps you would be interested in joining WP:LGBT? It sounds like you could be an asset to the project, helping to fill in a gap in our expertise, as we are, without question, dominantly western. I invite you to take a look at the project, and join if you care to do so. Aleta (Sing) 16:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I will love to join.

You're welcome! You'll notice that the bottom section of WP:LGBT is where you can sign up for the project. Aleta (Sing) 16:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I joined the WP:LGBT, but I have no idea how to get involved and share my concerns. Can you help me?

I'm putting the official welcome to the project below. It has several links you can use to get started. Of particular note is the talk page for the project, at WT:LGBT. Aleta (Sing) 17:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I too appreciate your comments on "homosexuality" that Aleta copied to WT:LGBT, and if you need me I'd be glad to help out with getting your concerns properly referenced and added to the appropriate main pages. (BTW: it'd probably help if you put some introduction about yourself on your user page. See WP:USER) Welcome! William P. Coleman (talk) 18:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you William. I'll need all the help I can get. Its late at night at my end, so I'll go to sleep now. Tomorrow have an exam. Probably, will get to the computer tommorrow night. (Masculinity (talk) 19:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC))

Notice that when you sign your name to a post it appears in red, whereas Aleta's and the others' appear in blue. Just click on "Masculinity" in your signature and you'll be taken to a blank user page where you can create whatever you want. William P. Coleman (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome

Hi, Masculinity, welcome to WikiProject LGBT Studies! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles regarding lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) and intersex people. LGBT Studies covers people, culture, history, and related subjects concerning sexual identity and gender identity - this covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated! Some points that may be helpful: Our main aim is to help improve articles, so if someone seeks help, please try to assist if you are able. Likewise feel free to ask for help, advice or clarification. Many important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it. If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign LGBT topics. The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as article quality assessment, peer review and a project-wide article collaboration, all of which you are welcome to take part in. We also have a unique program to improve our lower quality articles, Jumpaclass, so please consider signing up there. If you're going to stay awhile, please create a square in our project quilt! You can put anything you want in it. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. And once again - Welcome!

Aleta (Sing) 17:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Using references, sandbox

Hi Masculinity, I notice you recently made additions to Homosexuality that have been reverted as original research. I suggest you read through WP:NOR thoroughly. I appreciate the perspective you are trying to bring, but it is absolutely imperative that you cite any additions to articles with reliable sources. If you don't, people will revert your changes. All material should be cited, but material that is likely to be controversial, as yours is, especially has to be well cited. I know you have at least one source for some of it, but you need to find some more before trying to add it to articles, and include the references when you make the additions. I noticed there was a placeholder saying "insert footnote here" in your previous edits. If you are working on something, but don't yet have all the reference material handy, you might want to build your work in your sandbox, which you can create by clicking on User:Masculinity/sandbox. Then, when your edits are actually referenced and ready to go in an article, you can transfer them there. Aleta (Sing) 00:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Aleta,

I have three references, as of now. And I wanted to add them. But I was not being permitted to add it, for some reason. That is what I want help on.

Also, don't you think that even if there is one valid source -- and too as important one as UNESCO, it shoudl be enough at least to mention that there is a divergence of view.

regards (Masculinity (talk) 17:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC))

Hi Masculinity, I'm not sure what you mean. You obviously have been able to edit the article, because you did edit it. There is not a separate references page. The references should be incorporated right within the text you create. There's nothing else I can think of where you'd have been prevented from adding a reference. Take a look at WP:CITE#HOW and WP:FOOT for specifics on how to cite references in your text. If you still have questions then, let me know! Aleta (Sing) 21:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Aleta, thanx ... I think I was doing it all wrong. I clicked the edit button of the reference section to put in text, and there were no references there. I think in a previous article I had done it that way.

But I think now I can do it. But before that I'll put my text and the references up for others to see at the discussion page. (Masculinity (talk) 15:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC))

You're welcome! Putting everything on the talk page first sounds like a very good idea. :) Aleta (Sing) 22:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Steve Crossin (talk) 12:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot (talk) 17:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 04:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

oops! I usually sign it, but sometimes, when I'm in a hurry, I do forget. (Masculinity (talk) 05:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC))

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Gay. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. NeilN ^{talk ♦ contribs} 16:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Click the history tab up top at the Gay article or click here [1]. By the way, the removal was not sabotage. Edit summaries were provided and reasons were provided on the talk page. --NeilN ^{talk ♦ contribs} 16:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)