Jump to content

Talk:Lesbian

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 122.148.173.37 (talk) at 02:53, 15 November 2008 (→‎Kerfluffle on Lesbos). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Media portrayal of lesbianism

I have created a separate article for media portrayal of lesbianism, and gave link to media portrayal of bisexuality also.. It is a long list and table of content became too long, so i separated it from main article. If you feel otherwise please redirect that new page to here. Thanks. Vaas chan (talk) 09:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that a media portrayal section improves the article, but I have to disagree with the second sentence of the section and must suggest that it needs to be expanded or removed. The sentence reads: "Some writers have asserted this trend can lead to exploitive and unjustified plot devices." This statement fails to meet with wiki standards because "some writers" is too vague, and the opinion stated can only be attributed to a single writer whose credentials come into question. Also, I did my best to find out what constitutes an "unjustified plot device" but could not find any literature on the topic. Mrathel (talk) 16:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kerfluffle on Lesbos

The world 'Lesbian' designs the person born in the island of Lesbos. A current trial against the use for sexual orientation in the European Court of Human rights has given the reason to the inhabitants of the island of Lesbos and has forbidden the use of the word 'Lesbian' except to identify such people. For sexual orientation, the word 'Lesbian' has been forbidden and replaced by 'gay woman'.

Sources:

http://www.insaneabode.com/Articles/lesbian.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7376919.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/europe/7376919.stm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24386702/

http://www.gadling.com/2008/04/30/greek-island-of-lesbos-sues-over-term-lesbian/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080430/ap_on_re_eu/greece_lesbian_pride

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article3850185.ece

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1103ap_greece_lesbian_pride.html


--87.221.5.107 (talk) 14:23, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There has been no ruling of the kind and these sources do not support the IP's assertion of one. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There doesn't seem to be a ruling on the matter, as far as I can tell. I find it very doubtful that this case will be successful, but it may deserve some mention in the article. Anyway, I don't think you will get much support for removing the word from all of Wikipedia, and certainly not until the case has been decided. silly rabbit (talk) 14:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Good god, what is wrong with people... Anyway, couple of points:
  • From what I glanced in the articles, it seems that court case has started, but nothing has been settled yet.
  • Even if it had been settled, the European Court of Human Right does not hold dominion over the English language. It simply doesn't work that way. Lesbian is a word in the English language that refers to a type of sexuality. No court will change that, and I don't think Wikipedia is the kind of resource that tends to follow a prescriptive approach to language.
Mister Lambrou's ideas are either incredibly enraging, or profoundly silly. I'm going to stick with the latter for the sake of my blood pressure. risk (talk) 14:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Forbidden? What happens if I use it? Well, go ahead and try to forbid it on Wikipedia. Since words in English and other languages often change throughout time, this will not be a successful venture for you. But go nuts. --Moni3 (talk) 14:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The kerfluffle on Lesbos doesn't seem to be meaningful, might even be a publicity ploy coming at the opening of the tourist season in the Greek islands. As Moni3 says, the word lesbian (though even I don't use it all that much) is a widely accepted English language word which has had this meaning for at least 400 years (that we know about) and likely lots longer. Language does change and I wouldn't be started if, for other reasons, the word was dropped from English over the next 100 years but it's going to be with us at the very least for another generation. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever is wrong and insulting, it's wrong. It does not really matter for how much time it has been used. If it gets forbidden from literature, it will fall in desuse and slowly disappear. That is the idea. Because of the fact that the lawsuit was filled at European Level, it might well not apply as it is located in the states (right?). However, it will find its way there anyway. At least, for now, when searching in wikipedia for the word 'Lesbian' it should point to the disambiguation page, not to this article, don't you think? --87.221.5.107 (talk) 19:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are going to lead a crusade to keep people from using a word? What? Even honestly offensive words will still be used. There's nothing you or I can do to stop it. As the great and bisexual (who knows?) Eleanor Roosevelt said, "No one can insult me without my permission". You're allowing yourself to be insulted by the use of this word. Wikipedia in English will point to the article in which the word is used the most. In English, "Lesbian" directs to a homosexual woman. In Greek, it may not. That is a matter for Greek Wikipedia. --Moni3 (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would also say, the word is not "forbidden" in the EU and I still think this could all be a publicity scheme, Lesbos has been getting lots of attention in the English language media lately and this will only draw more girls to Lesbos this summer.[1][2] Gwen Gale (talk) 19:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would iike to see some commentary on this in this or any other article as it is quite contemporary and confess I find it both interesting (very funny). Regards, 122.148.173.37 (talk) 02:53, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

California legalizing same-sex marriages

Thursday, May 15th, 2008 California Supreme Court decision that same-sex marriage is a constitutional right.

Wikipedia links: Same-sex marriage [20]news.yahoo.com, California's top court legalizes gay marriage & [21]nytimes.com, Gay Couples Rejoice at Ruling] Main article: Status of same-sex marriage (Kitchwidder (talk) 19:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

def. of lesbian @ the top of LGBT page

does it jive w/ this article? (not necess exclusively toward females?!?!) FzzQuizzl (talk) 02:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've tried to tidy that up. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute over term "Lesbian"

Recent studies proved that Sapfo was NOT gay, she had a family and died - committed suicide out of her desire for a man. This should be communicated and the community should reconsider gradually the usage of the term for gay women. Perhaps the term ¨goman¨ /(gay woman could be established.

Following this, the Lesbians (i.e. the inhabitants and diaspora of Lesvos) feel humiliated by the use of their homeland name principally as a definition for sexual orientation. They demand to claim back the property of the name, a name bearing a long historical tradition and culture since ~1000 BC.

mikisv

You said: "Perhaps the term ¨goman¨ /(gay woman could be established."
OK, that's retarded. I was following you at first, but I, for one, would not enjoy being
called a "goman." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frisky porcupine (talk • contribs) 19:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

21:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Could you please cite some reliable sources? Thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a source for the controversy on the island of Lesbos. I think this is noteworthy, perhaps in a one-sentence summary in History or in the very first paragraph. 24.177.128.131 (talk) 16:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Lesbos islanders dispute gay name" from BBC
This more balanced take from the Guardian notes it's not being taken seriously. Truth be told, it could have been a ploy to get Lesbos in the news and draw more tourists there in the spring and summer seasons. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose. I'm not a lesbian, in either sense, so I'm not really concerned. 24.177.128.131 (talk) 16:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that means we can end this thread then. Thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

update

They lost the lawsuit in a Greek court (Three residents of the Greek island of Lesbos have lost an attempt to ban the use of the word "lesbian" to describe gay women) and must pay a few hundred Euros in court costs. Whatever they may have had in mind, the outcome is they seem to have gotten some amazingly cheap publicity for the island in the run-up to the tourist season. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:43, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gwen,

Thanks for letting me know.

Lizzie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lizzie Brookes (talk • contribs) 08:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the whole thing does not belong in the article after all. Move along. Nothing to see here. WP:WEIGHT and all that. siℓℓy rabbit (talk) 23:46, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to confirm, the consensus appears to be that this article is about lesbianism in its most common sexualized usage of the term lesbian, not the Greek island, nor any alleged "controversy" surrounding the sexual use of the term. I think the section on "history of the term" is a thinly-veiled WP:COATRACK for an apparent agenda to trump up this so-called controversy. I think it should be removed (once again). The lead sentence should also be adjusted (reverted) accordingly. siℓℓy rabbit (talk) 00:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:47, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. the guardian is not an authority on adjudicating what is and what is not of relevance to Greek. Lesbians don't come from england. 2. There is the section redirect to lesbian sexuality "Sexual activity between women..." which, in esscence talks about the the identification and whateverelsehaveyou. Now see the article for russian, serbian, american, kenyan, etc, etc. And if you want to go beyond states see Gujarati, Texan, Maharashtrian, bengali, sindhi, etc, etc. In that same vein, there is no re-direct for the Lesbian inhabitants. Now we're not asking to completely take over this article, because there is another usage (albeit less popular with the west, in which case adding a globalize tag would be more fitting), however, there is still controvery outside the west. and a clear mention that the word lesbian refers to both.

I have acquiesced to certain calls because you were right and it was fair, however, to remove it altogether is quite another matter. verging on censorship perhaps. I have agreed to put the term seperately as the sexualized lesbian is more common these days, however, the other lesbian should still be mentioned. For the case, I have added something about the controversial semantical differences. Lihaas (talk) 01:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are several issues with this article. First, it references the English use of the word according to the majority of reliable sources. That means, without any doubt, that in English "lesbian" refers to female homosexuality, and has for about 80 years. There is a disambiguation for other uses of the word at the top of the article.
Lihaas, I suggested you bring this to the talk page so those who watch the article can discuss the changes made, rather than make them rapidly in reverts that may cause an edit war. Please be respectful. The article was not a link farm before you began deleting links to lesbian organizations.
Clearly, however, languages change. This is evident in the article for Gay. Gay has meant several things throughout its use in English, including prostitute, happy, and homosexual. If we use Gay as a model (which is not a given), and consideration is given to other uses for "lesbian", under no circumstances should the terminology reflect anything but what the majority of reliable sources say - again, that lesbian refers to female homosexuality. Placing other uses for it above the use for homosexuality, or inflating the amount of space dedicated to other uses distorts the accuracy of the article. --Moni3 (talk) 01:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You were right, so I have not added back. Yes, clearly languages do change that's why it is a legitimate word in the sexual concept. I'm not advocating removing that definition. But it also has another meaning, as that should be here. It will be a smaller part because of conventional usage, I'm not denying that. However, that shouldn't mean there is no room for the other term that is non-westernized. Unless you want to diverge both articles to include the inhabitants and the sexual lesbians. That's fine too, because then it can cover both topics in it's own domain. The words of inhabitants may originate from other languages, but they are still used in English. For example what is someone from China, the USA, Brazil, Senegal, etc called? They too have terms in English that are Chinese, Americans, Brazilian, Senegalese, etc. And as you just elucidated, gay does mention the various meanings on the page. Likewise, the other (not even various, just one alternative) variation must be here too. It can't be absent.

See gay and homosexual both have different web pages. One goes into detail of the sexual phenemenon and the other is more generic (although it does mention current conventions). See the whole history part under gay (which is the same thing I did here), and also see the lead. Lihaas (talk) 01:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article Lesbian is not about Lesbos. The term lesbian is thoroughly disambiguated through the link at the top of the page. Wikipedia articles cannot be cited as to content for other Wikipedia articles (WP:WAX). The lawsuit failed and was likely notable only as a publicity stunt to draw tourists to Lesbos last spring. Perhaps it should be included in the Lesbos article. See WP:Weight, WP:Coatrack, WP:Soapbox, WP:3rr and WP:Consensus. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:00, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've just come into this, so I don't know what the recent history of the current section was, but I saw that the article curently says that "The word lesbian dates back at least to 1732". Of course it dates back much further than that. Milton wrote that Orpheus's head floated "down the swift Hebrus to the Lesbian shore" in Lycidas (1637). Of course he meant the shore of Lesbos, but that shows that the word does not date to 1732, only the word with the meaning "homosexual female" may date to that moment. We need to clear this up - if the dust has now settled. Ideally we should have a discussion like the one in the "gay" article, indicating when the modern usage came to be more common than the geographical meaning and how the term Lesbian was used with sexual implications before the 20th century (was it 'code'? Was it in specific explanatory contexts?). Paul B (talk) 10:38, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1732 has to do with earliest etymology sourced by editors of this article as to use in English. I agree the section could use ever more cleanup and sources. Gwen Gale (talk) 11:49, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are telling me what I've already said. It does not alter the fact that the statement is inaccurate as it it stands and that accuracy and full information are desirable. Paul B (talk) 11:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, you mentioned an unsourced use of the word in Greek. The article statement The word lesbian dates back at least to 1732 is sourced and reasonable, so far as it goes. If you could give us some verifiable sources of earlier uses in English, that would be very helpful. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please can we have a reasonable discussion. I did not mention "an unsourced use of the word in Greek". Milton did not write in Greek, he wrote in English, and it is not "unsourced" since there are any number of books on Milton. If you mean I did not immediately provide a footnote, this is the talk page for discussing the content of the article. I am doing just that. The accuracy of the quotation can be verified at the click of a mouse. A note can be found easily, and earlier references can probably be found using the OED. I raised the point here rather than just adding it because I see there has been a recent edit war. Paul B (talk) 12:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I was needlessly snippy and I wasn't at all clear in my reading of your post or my answer, which is wholly my botch. I think the pith may be that we need to discuss and source on this talk page both meanings in English: Of Lesbos and Sapphic. Then come to a consensus as to how to deal with these two etymologies in the article. Until now, since the article is about the Sapphic meaning in English, only the Sapphic meaning has had consensus for inclusion in the text. My own thinking is, noting Milton's use of the word as an adjective meaning of Lesbos wouldn't be notable to the topic. However, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe a wider discussion of the word in this article would be helpful to readers. If this was done, even the little Lesbos lawsuit could be noted, since it would be in a wider, historical context. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I've had a look at the OED and other sources. I can't see where the assertion that "the word lesbian dates back at least to 1732" comes from. It's not supported by any of the footnotes here. The very recent book Carnal Knowledge (2007) by Charles Hodgson states that "the word lesbian comes from the Greek. In 1601 it appeared with the meaning "from the island of Lesbos, which is now Lèsvos [! I thought it was still Lesbos]. The connection between homosexual women and the word lesbianism appears first in 1870" (p113), which seems to refer to the OED source also given here. He says nothing about any timeline difference between the words "lesbian" and "lesbianism", though "ism" coinages are typically 19th century. Earlier uses of the word "lesbian" with a sexual meaning would probably be adverbal or adjectival, but we'd need to know the verb or noun to make sense of the context. Paul B (talk) 07:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Other sources also state that the term lesbian became established with the modern meaning in the late 19th century, but that there were scattered uses beforehand. The most detailed discussion appears to be in The Sleep of Reason: Erotic Experience and Sexual Ethics in Ancient Greece and Rome, by Martha Nussbaum and Juha Sihvola (University of Chicago Press, 2002), in which there is an account of the terminology used by ancient authors and its replication in post-medieval medical literature. The standard teerm before Lesbian became established was "Tribade", could mean either a masculine woman, or a woman who has sex with another woman, and this was used in medical literature in Europe. There are scattered uses of "Lesbian" (not necessarily in English - since latin was used for textbooks, so it was "lesbiai", meaning "like the women of Lesbos"). Paul B (talk) 11:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly see the article gay, "article is about "gay" as a term. For the sexual orientation, see homosexual orientation. For other uses, see Gay (disambiguation)." The same overarching concept as this page.

Secondly, gwen, your comment "was likely notable only as a publicity" is synthesis and subjective opnion. There is no substantiated corroboration about the intention of the Greek case.

Paul, that is simply what I am saying. I don't want to make it an article only about Greek Lesbians, but something along the lines of gay would be better. Both terms have ambigous meanings (that are, albeit, less ambigous in certain parts of the world). Unless of course the best choice is still to split off Lesbian (Greek) and lesbian (sexuality) (which is already a redirect here, it can simply be made into a page of its own (not a bad idea now that i think about it)) Lihaas (talk) 01:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any point in having a separate article on the islanders, but there's no rule against it. We have articles on French people for example. The equivalent title "Lesbian people" would seem rather weird to the average English speaker, so some clarification would be needed. But if you think there is enough material on the cultural identity of Lesbos to merit it, go ahead. I think this article should focus on the dominant mening in modern English. If a word has two different meaning we don't have a single article about both of them. In fact even the article on Lesbos recognises that, since there is one on the island (Lesbos Island) and one on the modern administrative prefecture of the same name (Lesbos Prefecture). This article should certainly explain the history of the term and link to the articles on the island and prefecture. Paul B (talk) 07:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. So where do we stand now?
We agree the need to include both (in the lead) and thus the inclusion of the controversy merits placement too. Is this a consensus?
Something, again, on the lines of gay, where both meaning are mentioned, but details can be added to homosexuality. Or perhaps lesbian sexuality can redirect to a section on the same homosexuality page? Lihaas (talk) 22:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well,I've waited several days for any comments,so I will go ahead and add material based on the sources I've identified. Paul B (talk) 16:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Improving article

One of the reasons this article is assailable is because it is poorly written and constructed. I attempted to improve it or inspire others to do so some months ago, but things happened and I didn't get to do what I wanted to do. Maybe one of the reasons I don't really want to take this on is because it's too close and I do a lot better working on articles that are a bit distanced from me. However, I'm willing to plug along and work on it here and there as necessary.

Along with the etymology of the word, other sections should be improved. If we can come up with a list of ideal changes (and the best sources possible), I can work on researching and writing it. Or, really, we all can. Writing, as well as content, should be improved. --Moni3 (talk) 12:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and same here, by the bye. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar Error

"Calling an historical figure" should not use "an" but "a," "the" etc. Just wanted to point it out since the page is locked and I can't edit it :] Maggie 3:17AM PST 06/08/2008

Nevermind I fixed it.- Magsxemail (talk) 05:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a grammar error at all, but a usage thing which is swayed mostly by pronunciation. Either an or a is ok in front of histor.... Gwen Gale (talk) 14:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Faceless photo

Having a lead image of two headless women from behind holding hands isn't very impressive. This is a media cliche used too often to show same sex couples, usually employed because of concerns about 'outing' those photographed. As hiding the women's faces suggests shame and depersonalisation can't this image be replaced by a new one - or one of the far better images further down the article? 92.12.208.70 (talk) 09:45, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've addressed this. Banjeboi 14:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

I'd suggest that, since it's of greater historical interest, the picture of the bust of Sappho be shifted to where the picture of Ellen DeGeneres currently is. Skoojal (talk) 09:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fertility Ruling

On August 18th, 2008 the Supreme Court justices rejected a San Diego County fertility clinic's attempt to use its physicians' religious beliefs as a justification for their refusal to provide artificial insemination for a lesbian couple. The ruling, based on a state law prohibiting businesses from discriminating against customers because of their sexual orientation, comes three months after the court struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage. HuskyMoon (talk) 01:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EL "Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links, or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links."

"Wikipedia articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the subject's official site, if any." This is not about any organizations to link to their sites. "Any site that does not provide a unique resource" "Links mainly intended to promote a website" --> of which the community websites certainly do. "Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject" --> advocacy sites "Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising" --> all things lesbian

And finally, "Due to the rising prominence of Wikipedia and the amount of extra traffic it can bring a site, there is a great temptation to use Wikipedia to advertise or promote sites. This includes both commercial and non-commercial sites."

As per WP: Silence, I have edited the links out. If someone wants to question it now come to discussion BEFORE additions. Lihaas (talk) 06:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just 2 q's

1. (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lesbian&diff=248017358&oldid=248016285) In this edit you say "...always still directly linked to the women of Lesbos" but the quote doesn't end up "always" linking the word to Lesbos. Perhaps it would be better to say, "dominant meaning...rather than any sexual identity. Despite this, Pierre de Bourdeille, seigneur de Brantôme, the French 17th century writer on sexuality..." 2. (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lesbian&diff=247954066&oldid=247953903) With this your edit summary says "there was no 'corresponding conventional orientation.' Ancient writers have virtually no concept of sexual orientation." But this is precisely why the phrase is correct. Simply because they didn't have these terms, that is why it is the corresponding convention and not the sexual orientation. Lihaas (talk) 05:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response:
1. The passage from the book says that Brantôme always links the uses of the word lesbian to women of Lesbos. In other words when he says lesbians he is using the word to mean women of Lesbos, as exemplified by their sexual practices that other woman also adopt. It's comparable to saying "the people of New York are notoriously brash and pushy, but there are many of these "NewYorkers" in France too. In fact Paris is now full of "NewYorkers"". That is in fact what the quotation says. He always links it to Lesbos, but he is extending usage to use Lesbian woman (woman of Lesbos) to exemplify a type of person. Check the passage in the book. However an addition to the beginning the sentence seems reasonable to make the links less stark.
2.No, that's why I think the phrase is unhelpful. Firstly "'corresponding conventional orientation" is, to me at least, an almost unintelligable phrase, because it is far from clear why you are using the word "conventional". I can't even understand your last sentence. There is no "convention" in any sense that I can make of the word, so I don't even know what you mean by "corresponding convention". Paul B (talk) 07:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1. I agree you here. Just tweaking the sentence a little would match the quote. i'm not questioning the quote
2. Fair enough...how about contemporary? Lihaas (talk) 08:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

correction in the section entitiled "health"

In the section on health it is said that lesbians have higher rates of Hepatitis C and HIV behaviors, and that they have higher rates of suicide than the general population. In actuality lesbians have LOWER rates of Hepatitis C and HIV behaviors and are one of the social groups (in the U.S.A) with the lowest rates of Hepatitis C and HIV. With regards to suicidal behavior- homosexual teenagers do not have a higher rate of suicide than the general population, but have reported more suicidal contemplation and thoughts than the general population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.245.192.21 (talk) 02:14, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lesbian&oldid=251894027"