Talk:Sex position

	Archives
	1 2

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sex position article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 60 days

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sex position article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 60 days

Wikipedia is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.

Sex position is a former featured list. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page and why it was removed. If it has improved again to featured list standard, you may renominate the article to become a featured list.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 9, 2005	Featured list candidate	Promoted
October 10, 2006	Featured list removal candidate	Demoted

Current status: Former featured list

Sexology and sexuality List‑class High‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
List	This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Sandwich picture" in fact illustrates "train sex"

Unless the furthest-left man has an infeasibly long penis.

We should not use the word "uncircumcised"

We should use the words "natural", "normal", or "intact" to describe normal male genitalia that have not been modified or mutilated. Do we refer to people with normal oral anatomy as "untonsilectomized"? Or normal female anatomy as "unmastectomized"? Or men who have not had a vasectomy as "unvasectomized"? I would have corrected this error myself, but the article is semi-protected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.236.24.25 (talk) 12:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. 129.215.113.85 (talk) 13:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The mention of someone being uncircumcised makes no sense in-context, since to "Dock" you would need a full-sized foreskin. Obviously this means that the person in question would not be circumcised. It makes sense without the "uncircumcised" word addition, so I vote that the word be removed and not replaced. This is more a question of international POV. If we're in the US, the word "uncircumcised" seems okay, but in England and most of the world, it would seem to be a redundant phrasing in this context.98.225.230.65 (talk) 11:07, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it, guys. MaraquanWocky (talk) 21:43, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WOW! Way to go pushing your agenda, and congratulations on no one effectively blocking your POV pushing. Jersey John (talk) 08:00, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other positions - scissor

Under "other positions" the description of the scissors position should be modified to say "manual stimulation of the breast and/or clitoris" rather than just "breast stimulation." Source: From personal experience, even a previously non-orgasmic woman may reach orgasm if the male partner is inside her in the scissors position, with left hand stimulating her right nipple, and right hand stimulating her clitoris.

Rkschaffner (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Under the missionary position the possibility of the man being on top with the woman underneath but the woman has her legs together and flat seems to have been overlooked. The merit of this position is that the largest part of the man's cock engages the tightest part of the woman's cunt - which has its merits. 89.195.66.25 (talk) 17:46, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple penetration

Why isn't their any mention of urethra penetration? While not common, some women have made a name for themselves by being able to do it (the amazing Ty to name one). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.131.8.117 (talk) 21:47, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Really you are not talking about a sexual position. You are specifying a type of penetration that may or may not be achieved through a variety of means (positions), This being the case perhaps there should be a separate page for discussion of different types of penetration.
To expand this point it's my opinion that some of the discussion or imagery diverge from the page topic/title in proper. The page is supposed to be informative on "sexual positions" so there shouldn't specific discussion about penetration. For example there is an entire section for the discussion of anal penetration which is superfluous as meany of the positions described in this section are the same positions described in other sections. such as doggy style and missionary. This section appears to be included only to describe anal penetration. This section can almost certainly be eliminated by adding to the already existing descriptions in other areas that both vaginal and anal penetration can be achieved in said position. This would seem to be more concise and less distracting from that page topic.
Furthermore the subject matter discussed in the topic "other positions" seems to be inconsistent as no positions are actually described. The only descriptions here are types of penetration. these types of penetration can be achieved from multiple positions. For example the depiction of anal fisting has the man laying on his back while this depicts the type of penetration being discussed the same penetration can be achieved doggy style as well and laying on the side.
I am unsure of what article standards the things I have mentions are actually in violation of but I'm pretty sure that most of these things are in violation of one or more article standards.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to plural title, if only to not override the page history of the singular. — kwami (talk) 08:07, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of sex positions → Sex position — Unnecessary division; Sex position is currently a stubbier duplicate of this one (with the exception of the History section). Cybercobra (talk) 22:29, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there is a merge tag on this article to merge "Sex position" into the list, and I think that is a better idea. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 02:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Er, I added that tag. I'm proposing a merge and then a move. To avoid losing the contribution history, the page currently at List of sex positions should be the primary page, but that would require deleting Sex position, which requires admin intervention, hence the Requested Move. --Cybercobra (talk) 03:30, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Your proposal here didn't state how you'd like to handle things (ie. merge, move, histories, etc). Aside from that, "list of sex positions" seems like a better title. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 03:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I speak in favour of merging Sex position to List of sex positions.Diptanshu ^Talk 15:19, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have text-merged Sex position to List of sex positions. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:34, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Now it looks like Sex positions would be the optimal title (the article is more than simply a list; on the other hand it deals with the topic of (the class of) sex positions rather than the concept of "sex position" itself (I don't know if that's a good explanation, but the idea seems intuitive to me), and the title should therefore be plural.--Kotniski (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Docking

Really? Do people do this? I don't see how you could get sexual pleasure from it.--72.24.207.77 (talk) 07:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

if "admin" on "cockdockers".org says so, it must be true. I mean, who's going to admit they actually clicked the link to verify the source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.40.252.23 (talk) 07:26, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Considering how sensitive the penis is -- the way it responds to friction when aroused -- I presume so, that men get pleasure from this. Flyer22 (talk) 16:07, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another move, perhaps -- to Sex acts and positions? Or Sex acts and sex positions?

I know this article was just moved a few months ago, but it is clear that this article is just as much about the acts as it is about the positions. I believe one of the two titles suggested in my heading above would be more accurate and benefit readers more. For example, Sex acts redirects to Human sexual activity...when it would be better redirected here (in my opinion). Flyer22 (talk) 16:14, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I redirected Sex act and Sex acts to Sex positions for now. Flyer22 (talk) 18:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Phoebepuppy, 21 February 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Phoebepuppy (talk) 13:30, 21 February 2011 (UTC) SPELLING CHECK[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Please explain specifically what needs to be changed. Thanks. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:36, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Fdemers, 4 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} PLEASE CHANGE insertion of the male's penis into a partner's anus TO insertion of the penis into a partner's anus

REASON: few females have a penis

SOURCE: any book on human anatomy should do

Fdemers (talk) 18:30, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Your request is also consistent with the other descriptions (vaginal and oral) before that. Flyer22 (talk) 21:02, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomenclature

While I agree that many of the names for positions that are presented are descriptive, we should not try to stray too far into current slang usage. I can think of many now-defunct names for certain positions, but odd ones still appear on this page. For instance, with MFM double penetration: "this is sometimes called the sandwich or BigMac". BigMac? Really? At least sandwich is more descriptive. And the use of the term "Rusty trombone" for a sex act? I know what it is and I know it has an article, but I feel that this term's usage will go out of style in the very near future. 69.196.161.124 (talk) 02:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fisting

why are all the depictions hand drwan, then when you get down to fisting there is a real photo, i think that the picture has been used for shock purposes. either use all hand drawn for all depictions of positions or use real photos. 212.183.140.49 (talk) 18:55, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

agreed. that particular image should be removed or replaced with a hand-drawn version, it does not feel like it belongs on this article 123.108.110.236 (talk) 05:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]