Talk:Handkerchief code/Archive 1

Archive 1

Colors

There in an interesting implication here that gay men have extremely fine perception of colours in the blue-green range, even under disco lighting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.253.40.138 (talk • contribs) 09:29, 29 October 2002

Maybe they carry Pantone color chip sets along with the condoms and poppers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.173.110.21 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 29 October 2002

Dear Sir your comment is inappropriate and off topic. Hanky's were primary used in bath houses for non-verbal communication and not in dance halls--Ethan hines (talk) 05:19, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Paul Bunyan

If at all possible, I think the photograph of Paul Bunyan should be replaced with an image of an actual homosexual displaying a hanky as a symbolic offering of anonymous sexual intercourse. I find it hard to believe that the only available photograph of a man displaying a handkerchief in his pocket happens to be of an enormous statue of an American folk hero unrelated to homosexuality.

It should not be hard to photograph one of these subjects as they are clearly not averse to displaying themselves in public.

ransack (talk) 13:06, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Indeed those homosexuals are seemingly everywhere. I heard that posting notes on article talkpages makes you gay so be on alert. -- Banjeboi 05:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The image of Paul Bunyan has been re-captioned (I assume as vandalism):-

Bandanas in a rear pocket, were first worn by Simon Mundun. A man of Scotish decent who was in to fisting and sex with goats...

I'm removing it. Incidentally, the image itself links to a pic stating Paul Bunyan is gross. I think that ought to be changed, too; but I'm not sure how far back the image goes.

Nuttyskin (talk) 15:21, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

It's because the original source image at Flickr was entitled "Paul Bunyan is gross". I agree that the article could use a better photograph, but I couldn't easily find any good choices at Commons or Flickr. Tim Pierce (talk) 16:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

List

The opening section and origins are both well written and thought out, very encyclopedic. I am going to delete the long formatted list of possible meanings of each color. If you disagree, please read the following articles and see if you can justify including it. The wikipedia is not about cataloging every piece of data, rumor, past local custom or half cocked idea. The article is notable, but the specific, unverified list of colors that appears to be filled with in-jokes and errors is not. If you feel it warrants inclusion please cite your sources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.22.110.144 (talk) 06:18, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I've re-added as this certainly doesn't seem to violate Not or Verifiability. -- Banjeboi 13:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Universal Code

If there's no universally agreed apon hanky code then why try to present one?

Hanky codes are not even used any more, not at least in a notable scale. We are trying to show what it once used to be, what it meant for the LGBT community. Even then, the colors and the system weren't universal, but there were some standarts such as the different shades of blue. I think it's nice to at least mention what it once was. --dionyziz 21:41, 29 October 2005 (UTC).

Wikipedia notability standard: "Multiple non-trivial works devoted to the subject". MEETS STANDARDS.66.108.207.217 01:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The hanky code is actually making somewhat of a comeback, especially among the lesbian and queer/trans BDSM scene. Most of the 'primary' colors (black, grey, red, yellow) have always been fairly standard, and have retained their meaning. It does seem as though "unspecified" shades of green typically refer to daddy/boy play, rather than money exchange nowadays.

Problematic sentances

the following sentances should be removed

• "Additional historical research is needed to determine the exact time and place of origin."

This sentance states a matter of opinion and shouldn't be on this page.

• "(Since about 2003, the hip-hop music favored by the sagging (hip-hop) subculture has become more popular among young gays than the house music that had previously been dominant among young gays since about 1989.)."

WTF is this parenthetical sentence even doing here? It has no relevance, it has no citation, and it should GO

• "Some leather people make an erotic fetish of the bandanas themselves, and while having sex may be completely naked except they may wear a bandana around their neck, head, or arm or leg of a color indicating what kind of sex they are having with their partner, later switching to wearing a different color if they perform a different kind of sex at a later time in the sexual encounter.[citation needed]"

Yes, citation needed indeed. This sentence borderlines on "I heard someone once did this..." Unless you can PROVE that numerous (at least 5) published works have documented this practice, it has no relevance on this page.

Remember, it's an encyclopedia entry-- tell us why the Hanky Code is relevant and how this relevance shaped or shapes our historical framework and collective narrative. Just cause you heard of something hanky-code related once doesn't make it suitable for the Hanky Code's WP entry. 66.108.207.217 01:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

69

What is the difference between "69er" and "69ee"? Surely there is a symmetry in 69. If we must have this sort of stuff in Wikipedia, please explain it. -- Tarquin 10:23 Oct 29, 2002 (UTC)

I just found out that this is also covered under hanky codes, but there is no list at that entry.

I think there was an old standard that the left pocket was an "active er" and the right was a "passive ee", or the other way around, but for the 69 practice, it doesn't really make sense... =S 85.226.122.237 21:25, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

That's kind of a joke, folks. Obviously 69 is the same left or right; most lists carry on the active/passive format as a joke. Scix 03:06, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

For 69, wearing robins egg blue on the left means you are on the top when you are doing the 69. Keraunos 14:03, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't make any sense at all. In mutual oral sex, the participants are effectively bottoming each other.

Furthermore, "I think there was an old standard that the left pocket was an "active er" and the right was a "passive ee", or the other way around" is an interesting quotation because it's something that the article never mentions. Originally, left was understood to be active in the UK, but left passive in the US; now it seems the British usage has triumphed ;)

Nuttyskin (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Revert Clearing?

Recent revision states: "(removed info of purely salacious value)" -- Surely the info of purely salacious value is the entire point of this subject. We should revert.

Agreed. I think that we should revert the edits, although it's been some time since they were done. Please state your opinion for or against reverting; if nobody disagrees I shall proceed in re-adding (the most important at least) parts of the Handkerchief Code colors. --dionyziz 21:17, 22 July 2005 (UTC).

Alright, then, I'm going to re-add parts of the cleaned content. If you think it should not be added, please state your opinion here, instead of cleaning it once again. Thank you. --dionyziz 12:36, 1 August 2005 (UTC).

Done. Any suggestions for further modifications are appreciated. --dionyziz 12:57, 1 August 2005 (UTC).

Many terms are puzzling. What does it mean that someone is looking for "unsatisfying sex"???

Case in point Sandalwood for "Carpenter Sex". That term realy deserves some explanation...I don't suppose it's someone's idea of a joke? It seems rather implausable, and i can't imagine what it might be if real.

Having sex while listening to The Carpenters?

Nuttyskin 10:25, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Dwarfs

What is the hanky code for a dwarfism fetish?

Spotted hanky as used in the packstaffs of the Seven Dwarfs, while singing "Heigh-Ho".

Nuttyskin 10:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

A "G-rated" code...

Although I doubt this particular example common among the sex-seeking crowd, I've seen one list of handkerchief codes with a nonsexual (or at least not-strictly-sexual) entry: a teddy bear supposedly indicates that the "flagger" prefers cuddling. Whether the bear is supposed to be a printed pattern/image or the real thing (a Beanie Baby instead of the hanky?), I'm not sure.

NOTE: the list in question was a typewritten copy with no author or copyright listing...local "Xerox-lore" is a terrible source, but I thought the one detail was worth mentioning.

--Ingeborg S. Nordén 18:12, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Get real. A teddy bear most likely indicates one is into Bears, the hairy and huskier variety of man. (unsigned)

Don't be rude. There ARE (at least in Southern California) variants that include the teddy bear/cuddling :

TEDDY BEAR cuddler cuddlee

KEWPIE DOLL chicken (under-aged) chicken hawk (likes young adolescents)

DIRTY JOCKSTRAP wears a dirty jock sucks dirty jocks clean

DOILY tearoom top (pours) tearoom bottom (drinks)

MOSQUITO NETTING outdoor sex top outdoor sex bottom

ZIPLOC BAG has drugs looking for drugs

COCKTAIL NAPKIN bartender bar groupie

KLEENEX stinks sniffs

KEYS IN FRONT has a car looking for a ride

KEYS IN BACK has a home needs a place to stay

HOUNDSTOOTH likes to nibble willing to be bitten

UNION JACK skinhead top skinhead bottom

CALICO new in town tourists welcome

TERRYCLOTH bathhouse top bathhouse bottom

WHITE w/MULTICOLOR Dots hosting an orgy looking for an orgy

That was from the VERY FIRST google hit on "hanky code" -- even though they are not hankies, technically. Scix 03:00, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Bootlace Code

One outgrowth of the hanky code was the bootlace code, on very similar lines, initially prevalent from the mid-80s onward in the still largely underground gay skinhead scene. The keynote was simplicity, with most of the broad colour categories which obtained for hankies also being true for the laces. This was however complicated somewhat by the scene also intercutting with the straight skinhead scene, not always Nazi but often politicised in one way or another. Consequently, while yellow in the gay bootlace system meant watersports, in the straight system it meant Scooterboy. Nuttyskin 10:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

This is quite interesting, a wikipedia page on this would be worth doing I think ? Jaruzel (talk) 14:01, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Other reading

The Leatherman's Handbook (Second Edition at least) by Larry Townsend. Nuttyskin 10:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

"Flagging"

How might one create a redirect from "flagging"? It seems like a good idea to me. Scix 03:04, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. For your reference: to make a redirect, create the article and then add #REDIRECT [[Destination article]] to the content. - BalthCat 14:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

thankee! Scix 05:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Hanky Code Cards Available at Leather Fetish Stores

The hanky code is still used by many gays over 40, and still by some younger gays. Leather fetish stores in gay neighborhoods give out free cards with the meanings of the colors, and have the various colored bandanas for sale at about $2-$3 each. Keraunos 13:59, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Chalk torture?

Dare I ask what in the hell is chalk torture? -- AvatarMN 07:03, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm thinking fingernails and blackboards... I'm thinking I'm probably wrong. 144.32.126.15 00:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Scraping chalk on a blackboard as a sexual fetish? Now I've heard it all. -- AvatarMN (talk) 07:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Nor have I, till now. But, I'd imagine, as part of a spanking/caning and/or school fantasy.

Nuttyskin (talk) 17:38, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Worldwide view

Is there any evidence hanky codes were in widespread use outside North America? Exploding Boy (talk) 04:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

How could there possibly be a worldwide view of a practice (hanky code) limited to the Western world and a specific subculture of the West? Kinkyturnip (talk) 19:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

That's more or less what I was getting at. I'm removing the worldwide view tag. Exploding Boy (talk) 15:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Actual colours

Wouldn't it be useful to include the actual colours on the page, and to group them in the correct spectrum order? There are some comments above questioning the ability to differentiate, which seem to merit it. Nick Cooper (talk) 08:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

The chart as is lacks clarity and accessibility so I agree that improvements should be made. Unsure what the best way to introduce the actual colors would be. My hunch is that since there are so many it should be kept clear and concise with added content moved into prose and footnotes as appropriate. -- Banjeboi 17:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

More common practices?

"There is general agreement upon the colors for more common practices, particularly those with an intuitive relation between the color and the practice, such as yellow for watersports; brown for scat; and black for SM, but no absolute consensus for less common practices."

I don't know what it's like for the people who are writing the article but what about, you know, kissing and intercorse? How long has scat been more common than these? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.77.17 (talk) 01:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea, but we could use WP:RS to answer your question and to ensure the article is accurate. ~_{Teledildonix314}~^Talk~_4-1-1~ 01:55, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I see the language has been tweaked[1] and it generally makes sense to remove POV. -- Banjeboi 20:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

If, by "intercourse", you're referring to anal sex, it's already in the list. As for kissing, that's not a "kind of sex" per the definition in the lead paragraph (the code was primarily used by people seeking more than just kissing, which can be included in virtually any of the other scenes). HalJor (talk) 22:28, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

No, but it's worth mentioning that a great many bisexual guys, MSMs and even a sizeable number of gay men do not kiss their casual partners. So someone who was positively "into" kissing might want to advertise the fact. Note also that (radically unlike straight porn) in gay porn, kissing is a specific erotic act, which the camera usually lingers upon with pointed emphasis.

Nuttyskin (talk) 02:23, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

possible sources

• [2] about 7 articles that may help. -- Banjeboi 05:53, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

North and Springstein

220.253.85.243 (talk) 12:57, 5 August 2009 (UTC) JAMES BOWERMAN 220.253.85.243 (talk) 12:57, 5 August 2009 (UTC) Can the bit about Aaron North be amended - there is information on his wiki detailing firstly that he wears black and red as part of the image of icarus line (before NIN) and there are more suitable quotes etc... on his wiki that could be used on this page instead. Also what about bruce springstein - born in the usa album cover had him posing with a red hanky in his back left pocket and I've been told the song was used in some way by the government in relation to vietnam propeganda (make the connection?)

Hanky code is about sexual hook-ups so no to the Springstein. -- Banjeboi 23:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Green

Just from personal experience, it seems that nowadays green (regardless of shade) typically means 'daddy' play, rather than money exchange. Genderhack (talk) 21:17, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Hunter green is daddy play; Kelly green is money exchange. Keraunos (talk) 06:47, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

General comments

In practice, the hankie color code is very rarely used these days. About the only color seen with any frequency is red (fisting), and even that is uncommon. It may be that the rise of online sites to facilitate connecting with sex partners has rendered the gay bar (particularly in its specialized form, the leather bar) an endangered institution in most cities. With the fading of the gay bar scene, the color code no longer has much utility. You also have to bear in mind that the color code was originally devised specifically for gay s&m enthusiasts to communicate in the darkened confines of old-school leather bars and was never used, nor intended to be used, by the general gay population.

As for the various hankie color codes to be found on the web, most of them are jokes (possibly unintentional). They contain endless minor variations in colors that would be difficult to distinguish with certainty in broad daylight, never mind a darkened bar. Is that kelly green or hunter green in that guy's pocket? Moreover, most of the colors listed in the online flights of imagination are simply unavailable as bandannas.

As someone who's been there and done that, this article impresses me as placing entirely the wrong emphasis on the hankie color code. Instead of recording its actual use, what we have is a rehash of a tired extended joke. Only a very few colors were used even in the code's heyday, and the repetition of a long list of variants gives the reader a false impression of what really went on. A much shorter article with only the core list of colors would be more appropriate for an encyclopedic context such as Wikipedia. There's really not much point in using Wikipedia to sustain a rather elaborate joke.

I've extracted the hankie code as given in Larry Townsend's The Leatherman's Handbook, which is as good a documentation of the code's actual use as any. This is given as a table in the last section.

Would anybody be horribly offended if I further edited this page to remove that lengthy table currently on it? I can appreciate that someone went to a lot of trouble to set it up, but it is, in effect, a lie - and Wikipedia is really a place for the truth.

Floozybackloves (talk) 18:31, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

While I'm familiar with a few colors that are in the longer list but not the shorter one (hunter green and white, for example), I agree that many on the longer list appear to be fabrications and it encourages vandalism. Also, most of the "references" are actually footnotes that do nothing to support the case. I'm all for paring the list down, but we should start with the less "classic" ones. (This isn't a valid reference because it's a (NSFW) commercial site, but it includes some of the colors I would choose to keep: [3]). HalJor (talk) 17:44, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

The colors are NOT fabrications. I have lived in San Francisco all my life and I have been involved with BDSM since 1973. I have seen every single one of these colors on both the short and the long list worn by someone at one time or another. A number of people continue to wear the colors on both the short and the long list today at events such as the Folsom Street Fair. Keraunos (talk) 00:16, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

To Floozybacklove's obversations about the difficulty of distinguishing three different shades of orange or green in a dark bar, I would add -- Why the heck would any man going into a gay bar need to advertise a willingness to engage in oral sex? It has always seemed to me that fellatio is the Sara Lee snack cake of male homosexual acts: Nobody doesn't like it! So just by walking into the bar in the first place, you're implicitly "wearing a light-blue hanky".

In contrast, if you're into golden showers, or fisting, the reality is that most other gay men aren't likely to be interested in those activities. So it makes total sense that people with "non-vanilla" interests would want to fly a flag in order to spot each other in a crowd. 72.66.51.72 (talk) 00:07, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

(Raises hand) While I do appreciate oral sex performed on me, I have no desire to perform it on others. I am hardly alone in this opinion, and it would be foolish to assume that every person in a bar (particularly a leather bar) would actively want to perform it on anyone. Further, oral sex is far from the primary activity I would be looking for anyway -- in most cases, it doesn't factor into the scene for more than a few minutes, if at all. You are correct that many gay men aren't interested in heavy kink so it would be to their advantage to flag vanilla colors, to avoid attracting the attention of those interested in (only) more. The purpose of the flag is to indicate primary interest(s), not a checklist. HalJor (talk) 15:22, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Kleenex

It was my understanding that a kleenex in the right hand pocket is masturbation in front of a sexual partner and that a kleenex in both pockets signified an interest in mutual masturbation.

--86.16.194.235 (talk) 19:50, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Commentary

There are a number of references in the table of hanky codes that seem to just be general commentary. For now, I've simply grouped them out for easier reading, but I would support paring them down to those that really deal more with the hankies themselves, rather than things like "double-fisting is possible...", which really has nothing whatsoever to do with the hanky code. Does anyone else have any opinions on what can stay and what can go?

Also, where do all these colours come from? If these are being cited solely from blogs and similar sources, it probably constitutes unnotable material or at best something that should be linked to as "Further Reading". I know the list has evolved over the years, but some of these seem really...well...to be polite, let's say "unlikely" colours to be seen in practical use. – RobinHood70 ^talk 06:34, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Strictly gay

The term "strictly gay code" in the 1970s is misleading, pointless, wrong, and contradictory especially since later in the sentence it says that it's used by bisexuals and gay people. Bisexuals also used the hanky code in the 70s as well I was around then and I remember bisexual men using the hanky code. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.47.133 (talk) 08:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. Anybody can change Wikipedia, so next time, feel free to change the sentence structure as you see fit. I'll go have a look at it now and see what I can come up with. – RobinHood70 ^talk 16:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to trim unsourced and apparent jokes

Many of the codes in this article look like jokes made up for this page. I propose that all codes without reliable sources are trimmed from the list until someone can provide a credible reference. --Fæ (talk) 22:50, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Looking over the extended table, by and large it's the last bunch that I find questionable. Most of the first 3/4 of the table constitute reasonably common practices in the gay BDSM community, so it's not difficult to imagine that they might have developed hankies to go with them. Nevertheless, as is stated in the text itself, the entries in the second table seem to be an amalgamation of web sources, are most likely not commonly used/known colours, and are not reliably sourced at all. Rather than trimming selectively, which no one can really authoritatively decide on, I'd suggest we remove the entire second table and any related text for the time being. I'm sure there's something more recent than The Leatherman's Handbook II to use as a source, which may list a few more colours/patterns that have come into common use. I'll ask around and see if someone can provide a recommendation for a modern reliable source. – RobinHood70 ^talk 03:17, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Having now asked a large number of gay BDSMers, the general consensus is that anything more than the older ones are unreliable at best and generally unused or minimally used in real life, and for that reason, anything "authoritative" is probably out of the question. There are numerous websites devoted to the hundreds of wild ideas that everyone and their dog has had since the advent of the Internet, but besides the Leather Man's Handbook II, already mentioned on the article, only one book was mentioned: Leatherboy Handbook by Vincent Andrews, which apparently has a list of 41 hanky codes. All the other recommendations were websites, most or all of which were self-published or otherwise non-authoritative. As such, I would recommend that we remove the entire second table (which appears itself to have come from two different websites) and reduce it to a small blurb that says something to the effect of there being a wide variety of more expansive lists available on the web. – RobinHood70 ^talk 03:52, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Support the suggestion. I see no harm in going ahead. If anyone has a beloved code to keep in, they should substantiate it with a new source. --Fæ (talk) 04:02, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

With nobody else having opposed the suggestion, and someone going so far as to Prod the article, as you noticed, I've gone ahead and removed the web-sourced table and made what I think are appropriate changes to the rest of the text. – RobinHood70 ^talk 04:49, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Object I STRENUOUSLY AND VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE the deletion of the longer color list. I have lived in San Francisco, California all my life and have been involved in BDSM since 1973 and I have seen people wearing every single one of the colors on the first 3/4 of the original list over the past 29 years. I have been to everyFolsom Street Fair since the first one in 1984 and people have continued to wear them there. People still wear the colors today on the annual leather march from The Castro to Folsom Street one week before the Folsom Street Fair. As sources, besides the websites, there is also a printed reliable source, the recent 2009 book Leatherboy Handbook by Vincent L. Andrews Las Vegas:2009 Nazca Plains, Corp., that mentions 41 colors congruent with the list. I deleted colors in the last 1/4 of the original list that had dubious colors (as mentioned by RobinHood) that I have never anyone wearing or seen on the color code cards or in printed sources such as the Vincent L. Andrews book. Keraunos (talk) 13:50, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

The various leather stores in San Francisco today as of 2012 still give out the printed color code cards mentioning the colors on the longer list and their meanings and they still sell all the bandana colors on the longer list. Keraunos (talk) 13:55, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Obviously, it is true that the colors are worn much less often today, because a lot of gay people today cruise through the Internet instead of going to bars, so they can just state their preferences on the website rather than wear the colors to a bar. However, the even if it were the case that the bandana colors were no longer used at all, the longer list would definitely still be worth preserving if only as a historical artifact. However, as I mentioned people still do wear the bandanas today, but less so than in the 1970s. A sentence could be added simply saying that the colors are less used now because a lot of people cruise over the Internet instead of going to bars. Keraunos (talk) 13:55, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree that the extended list should be restored. The code is used by multiple members of the community in Portland ME ~ including some of the ones on the secondary list (I rock a lavender one from time to time). They are usually worn out to the clubs/bars and are most often worn by members of the lesbian/queer community, so the idea that they are primarily used by cruising gay men is an anachronism. My two cents - restore the code!Punkrockgrrl (talk) 15:46, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

If we can limit it to the ones present in the Leatherboy Handbook (which was one of the sources I mentioned above), I have no objections to the restoration. If you have the book, Keraunos, it would be great if you could go over the 41 mentioned there and see if the various notes correspond to things mentioned in the book. If the notes can't be substantiated, they should be removed.

Nobody's saying people don't flag at all any more, just that a lot of the more imaginative colours that were listed were not widespread. On the other hand, what do we consider to be reliable given that the list of colours has changed over time and continues to change? That's why the table was removed originally, because it had no reliable source behind it, just self-published websites like the two you restored. The problem with colour cards and websites is that they tend to simply follow the trends, and can vary from site to site, and store to store. A book tends to have more research behind it and will generally cover a broader area, while excluding those that are more local phenomena. I tend to put a lot more stock in something that's gone through a writer who has hopefully done some research and talked to various people in the international community, then gone through an editor, and has probably had at least a few others at the publisher's review it as well—though this is by no means guaranteed (witness the recent debate over The Leatherman's Protocol Handbook).

I'm fine if we go with just the Leatherboy Handbook list, but if we do, we should remove the two websites as sources and ensure that the information we're presenting is only derived from printed material or any other truly authoritative, reliable sources. – RobinHood70 ^talk 18:01, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, there are currently 50 entries on the list, so it should either be trimmed to the 41 in the LBH or something more reliable than a handout or website should be found. – RobinHood70 ^talk 18:06, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I was concerned that practices such as "experiences intense sexual pleasure by having their face or eyeball licked by the top" seem so unusual as to be a joke. A quality reliable source would be needed for any such odd sexual practice, or we run the risk of people adding "enjoys watching people eat gherkins" and then spending six months talking about it before anyone is bold enough to delete it as rubbish. --Fæ (talk) 18:36, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Agree with RobinHood on this one. Anything that is not backed up with a reliable source goes. WP policy is quite clear on that. The websites and cards handed out at shops are clearly not reliable sources. Anything sourced solely to them goes. As for Leatherboy Handbook, I personally wouldn't consider it a reliable source. Granted, it is far superior to the websites and the cards, but I'd like to see some evidence that its authority on this subject matter is widely recognized outside of the BDSM community. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 22:41, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

What happened to the full list? For example, mustard meant size queen. And there were about 7 or 8 different shades of magenta/pink that all looked similar but meant different things. I thought that was interesting. Who was the dipshit who thought it'd be cute to, well lets face it, censor the list? --RThompson82 (talk) 05:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Please refer to the discussion above. You will find calling everyone that does not agree with you a dipshit and supporters of censorship a poor starting point for establishing a consensus. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 06:15, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

is it possible someone is playing with the direction?

I have little knowledge of the subject except for the first hand experience listed below so consider this real life testimony and adjust as required

late seventies I was a naive overweight kid, i knew ZERO on the subject. I was window shopping at a local mall and the call of nature came upon me. so i walked into one of the three Anchor stores of the mall (J.C Penny's should it have any bearing) and entered their public restroom. (I repeat i was naive concerning the goings on of public toilets in addition to the subject at hand) Upon entry i observed i was alone but still was shy about open urinals so i walked into the handicapped stall and proceeded to urinate when I felt a tug at my pants leg (it was my left pants leg in case it makes a difference) While still urinating I looked down to see an "ugly man" (see full description later) reaching from under stall wall tugging at my leg.... when i turned to look he started pointing to his mouth. again i was still urinating in the toilet, i automatically went into defensive attack mode and started kicking at the intruder and likely saying/yelling "leave me alone" or similar verbal objections. "ugly man" quickly left the restroom and i took another minute to restart my stream and then left (and no, I doubt i washed my hands, i was too upset) no longer in the mood for window shopping i perceded about 200 feet to exit the store and another 400 or 500 feet to the mall exit where the local public bus stop to town. the bus arrived about as soon as i did so i queued up and a "natty man" (desc later) walked up behind me and told me to turn my pocket in. checking, i found my jeans back pocket inside out showing as a distinctive white flag. i turned it back in and "natty man" disappeared (I don't think he boarded the bus although i have no memory for or against)

after i saw The Minnesota Connection (movie based on the book) (may have been a TV movie or a TV airing of a theatrical release) upon seeing the movie was the first encounter with the flag system and i quickly remembered the encounter retold here thus I am sure they both thought my pocket was a flag until my reaction. plus the likely hood that "natty man" knew of my supposedly lone encounter of a couple minutes earlier makes me wonder if they wernt both undercover cops since by rumors that i heard much later, that particular restroom sounds like it is the east sides "meet-up" location

MY POINT HERE IS THAT THE POCKET WAS MY RIGHT POCKET NOT MY LEFT POCKET. thus the aggressive would have been me urinating, (had i known about flagging) making the right side aggressive/top not the left mentioned in the article.

further descriptions of the players: I was a 6 foot fat kid at the time, well over 200 pounds (probably 250) and a youthful, clean-shaven "Baby" face (i always looked younger than my age which is added weight to why i always have a beard now)

"ugly man" had rough stubble as a beard, uncombed hair and dirty clothing... he likely would have been quite handsome, man next door type, had he cleaned up but "ugly" fits his appearance quite handily.

"Natty man" was overdressed even for a businessman with the slightest hint of a "dandy" added to his appearance. think of "Mister French" on TV show family affair but with body type of "Uncle Bill" or even slightly thinner than Uncle Bill. the man might even had a hat at a time when they were rare but not yet reserved for pimps....

I only now connect the two men due to the white pocket liner possibly being thought of as offer for "white rain". Let's face it, the possibility that the two encounters so close to each other being a coincidence is astronomical (i had been "out and about" for hours and supposedly the pocket had also been out just as long yet the incidents took place about five minutes apart, definitely less than ten minutes. Qazwiz (talk) 08:28, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

List of colors

Are we really still pretending the list only has 10 colors? I remember it being at least 20 colors long, including mustard (size queen) and plaid (into red heads, a reference the British Isles have a higher ratio of them), etc. --RThompson82 (talk) 03:12, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

If you're asking if anything has changed since the last time you asked (over four years ago, two sections above this one) the short answer is "no". HalJor (talk) 14:45, 7 September 2016 (UTC)