Jump to content

Talk:Erotic lactation

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by House Centipede (talk | contribs) at 07:14, 4 December 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Today I tried to add the following links:

MaxSem deleted these links with the hint we should first discuss to add the links. OK, let's do this. Both links go to one and the same survey which asks the generic attitude about Erotic lactation. The survey has a direct relationship to the article Erotic lactation and it's current result (You can have a look at them) is as much interesting as the british survey just mentioned in the article. OK, question: Add the links or not? --Fritz Bollmann 12:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, after about 2 weeks of no contradiction I have finally added the survey links to the link section. BTW: Have a look at them, it's quite interesting. --Fritz Bollmann 14:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Founding Erotic lactation and merging from Milk fetishism

Please see Talk:Milk fetishism for discussion regarding the renaming and merger of these articles. Robotman1974 21:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Founding

I have made this page as a direct replacement for the Milk fetishism page. The term reasons You can read in the article. But above the quality of the "Milk fetishism" article isn't the best, especially the explanation attempts are often speculation. It's better to stay descriptively and to mention explanations only, if halfway verified.

Because I'm not a native english-speaker the initial article may be full of spelling mistakes: Please help to correct it.

--Fritz Bollmann 11:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have modified the ANR paragraph to convey your message in a more precise way. I hope the edit it acceptable. I support the founding of "Erotic Lactation" as a better alternative to the term "Milk Fetishism" which many women find offensive. Mlklvr 14:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!

The article Erotic lactation has now been re-edited in its entirety. Hope it will communicate its message better now. Amarcora 03:08, 12 October 2006 (EST)

Former article "Milk fetishism"

Many thanks to all authors of the "Milk fetishism" article. Unfortunately it was necessary to move fast from "Milk fetishism" to "Erotic Lactation" because some people don't read the articles and their discussion pages, but make gashing counterproductive hints. In this case it was the wish to change from "Erotic Lactation" to "Mik fetishism" while we are on to change in the opposite way. Reading the article content whould help, but...

Special thanks to TerminusX, The Honorable, CloudedIce, Mlklvr, Anon!, David Ruben, tregoweth, Andrew73 and all nameless authors and discussing people.

Some of You know me and my research from the SNCLIST. The "Milk fetishism" article had some bigger quality problems not only in the term but both in content. One of the problem was the use of speculative statements ad explanation.

Therefore I have rebuilt the new article completely. Currently the article is relatively short, but will expand in next future.

--Fritz Bollmann 20:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page move

I have moved the entire Erotic Lactation article to Erotic lactation to conform with naming conventions. I have also removed the "merge to" tag from the top of this page as it is now likely that Milk fetishism will be merged into this article. In addition, I have added Erotic lactation to the Paraphilia template, and added that template to the article. Milk fetishism has been left on the template until the merge of articles has been completed. Robotman1974 21:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Robotman1974: Little by little it becomes a usefull article ;-) Here are some ideas for the next steps:

  • The question is, which part of the Milk fetishism article we can adopt. The true content of the different paragraphs are just included - although in a different way. The rest are (am I right?) some explanation attempts which I whould like to avoid. For example psychoanalysis theories such as the mentioned "Madonna-whore complex", "object transformation", "archetype" are highly problematic and there's no way to prove or confute such a theory.
  • The lesbian dimension is mentioned in a good way now, so that we don't need the according part of the Milk fetishism article.
  • The Oxytocin and Prolactin questions should be discussed either detailed (there are good researches) or not to avoid "esoteric" theories. But this is a good subject for later article expansions.
  • Paragraph Experience: We should notice to describe the different (!) feelings more detailed. But we should do this directly in the context of the different (!) practices. Might be this way is shorter and more exact at the same time.
  • Citations and verifications are difficultly here. Most existing researches are mentioned now in the article, but I will revise this in a better way and will see, what I can do more.
  • --Fritz Bollmann 10:36, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I don't know enough about this topic to say what content should be merged and in what way. You could try getting in touch with the people who contributed to the Milk fetishism article. I do have a suggestion though. If there is information on the Milk fetishism article that you feel is presented better in the Erotic lactation article, then go ahead and remove it from Milk fetishism. Be very sure to leave a detailed explanation of your edit on Talk:Milk fetishism so people watching that page will know right away what has happened. Sometimes, removing a lot of text from an article is seen as vandalism, so explaining that deletion (maybe even over-explaining it) is crucial. Hope that helps. Robotman1974 11:01, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Appropriate naming

I wonder if the subject of Adult Nursing or Adult Nursing Relationship should be its own article. The reason is that there appear to be people who don't consider it erotic or sexual in nature, but primarily a relationship nurturing type thing. Of course, I don't buy that, but if there are reliable citations out there that assert it is not sexual, I think it should be split from this article. Thoughts? --Ars Scriptor 14:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The greek word "Eros" means "love" or "sensual love". Therefore "erotic lactation" isn't most bad I think - it can mean either the relationship or the feelings... --Carlo

Image

That is not an image, it is a garbagy icon. The goddamn anus article has better shit than this. 07:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)