Talk:Gender and sexual minorities in the Ottoman Empire

Captions
The captions of the illustrations are incorrect. The second illustration is later (turn of the nineteenth century) and the third illustration is from the Khamsa of Atai. 108.26.180.106 (talk) 16:08, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Women and Gender in the Middle East
— Assignment last updated by EmPatch (talk) 03:31, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Western perceptions
The statement "the view of the Ottomans as addicted to the "filthy pleasures" of pederasty is, if not constant, at least a leitmotif in Western discourse from the time of the Crusades ..." is attributed to Stephen O. Murray. This seems unlikely. The last crusade was in 1272, the first Ottoman state appeared in 1299. So even if Murray did write it, it's not true and shouldn't be mentioned. Maproom (talk) 16:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Well, later crusades did happen, see for example the Crusade of Varna. Uness232 (talk) 16:12, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The quotation is accurate; if you have Wikipedia Library access, the full article is available to read. If people wish to unlink the Crusades article to avoid confusion, or remove that part of the comment or otherwise reword the statement, I have no objection. GnocchiFan (talk) 16:41, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I have access to https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/users/my_library/ and have tried searching there. What should I put in its search box to find the relevant pdf, please? Maproom (talk) 08:53, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It's available through JSTOR, which should be accessible through the Wikipedia Library (link to the article). I had to click through to JSTOR from the main page and search there as it wouldn't let me search through the main library search. Hopefully this makes sense. GnocchiFan (talk) 23:39, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hopefully I've re-phrased this so it makes more sense. Feel free to comment further here or on the Peer Review for this article. Thanks. GnocchiFan (talk) 21:27, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I know that a peer review is under way and so the article may look a lot different now. Just want to check if the current wording is better. (The previous wording was a direct quote, but may have been confusing). GnocchiFan (talk) 17:19, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * At the start of the "Western perceptions" section I read "European concepts of Ottoman Turks being addicted to pederasty and sexual perversion pre-date the Ottoman Empire; Stephen O. Murray says that it goes back to the time of the failed Crusades". I click on Ottoman Turks and read the dates (c. 1299/1302–1922). I click on Crusades and read "military expeditions ... in the period between 1095 and 1291".
 * Ok, it's all a bit more complicated than that. There were Ottoman Turks, an Ottoman dynasty, and an Ottoman Empire. There were later crusades, mostly failures and mostly not directed against Ottoman territories. But that sentence still gives the impression that Murray was mistaken. Maproom (talk) 21:42, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand the concern. If you want to remove this from the article entirely to avoid any confusion, I will not object. If you wish to rephrase it in a way that you think is better, let me know also. Thanks. GnocchiFan (talk) 22:02, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I've removed the sentence. Whether or not it reflects what Murray said, it's misleading. If I had access to the source, I might find that there's something useful there. Maproom (talk) 22:36, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * If you have access to the Wikipedia Library, you should have access to JSTOR and search for the article through that way (that's how I have access to the article). GnocchiFan (talk) 17:40, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 6 December 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 00:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

LGBT in the Ottoman Empire → Gender and sexual minorities in the Ottoman Empire – As has been pointed out in the peer review, "LGBT" may be an anachronistic term for the era. Gender and sexual minorities in the Ottoman Empire may equally be a modern formulation, but seems to be an improvement. If anyone has anything better, please let me know. GnocchiFan (talk) 22:05, 6 December 2023 (UTC)


 * support though i would prefer 'Gender and sexual diversity'—blindlynx 22:28, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * As nom, I would also support this proposed title. GnocchiFan (talk) 07:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Support, although a redirect should definitely remain at "LGBT in-". I also support @Blindlynx's formulation, but don't have a preference one way or another; while "minorities" does look more modern, they were, still, minorities back then. Uness232 (talk) 00:27, 7 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:11, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. Scholars working in this field overwhelmingly avoid the usage of the contemporary and anachronistic term, LGBT. I would suggest that the article be renamed simply to "Gender and sexuality in the Ottoman Empire" over the previous two suggestions, per WP:CONCISE, and also because the more specific term 'sexual minorities' does not seem to be prevalent in the literature. See, for example:
 * Miller, Ruth A (2007), Rights, Reproduction, Sexuality, and Citizenship in the Ottoman Empire and Turkey
 * Murray, Stephen (2007), Homosexuality in the Ottoman Empire
 * Schick, İrvin Cemil (2004), Representation of Gender and Sexuality in Ottoman and Turkish Erotic Literature
 * Additionally, 'minority,' in the context of Ottoman studies, commonly refers to recognized (and unrecognized) religious and ethnic minorities in the Ottoman Empire. yaguzi (talk) 18:44, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Gender"
The title used here is rather awkward. It reads as though the article is about two somewhat related but also quite distinct topics, gender and sexual minorities.

Is it supposed to be understood as "gender minorities and sexual minorities"? Peter Isotalo 10:38, 5 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi - yes, it is understood to be the latter. I understand your point, but "gender and sexual minorities" is a standard term in this field (see Google Scholar results).
 * I wouldn't object to a potential move to Gender and sexuality in the Ottoman Empire (as suggested in the above discussion by ) if this would help clarify things. GnocchiFan (talk) 11:10, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Supposed "decriminalization" of homosexuality in 1858.
I have made some changes to the article as it still seemed to perpetuate the myth and misunderstanding that homosexuality was decriminalised. This has been considered a western-centric and colonial view of Ottoman law pre-1858. See: Ozsoy EC. Decolonizing Decriminalization Analyses: Did the Ottomans Decriminalize Homosexuality in 1858? J Homosex. 2021 Oct 15;68(12):1979-2002. doi: 10.1080/00918369.2020.1715142. Epub 2020 Feb 18. PMID: 32069182. DutchManfromtheEast (talk) 08:08, 14 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your contribution,
 * some of the edits needed to be reverted. It is not said that Ottomans legalized homosexual practises, therefore, there is also nothing to be "debunked". Similiar issues can be found in the recent changes, especially in the lead section. Please make yourself familiar with MOS:LEAD for further inforation. Since this article is ranked GA, low-effort edits are more likely to be reverted.
 * with best regards VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 10:45, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I apologise for not following the proper style and procedures. DutchManfromtheEast (talk) 11:14, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @DutchManfromtheEast I would like to chime in here; more so to offer an additional explanation for your future editing than anything else. The major problem with your edit, in my opinion, was not style necessarily (though MOS:LEAD was an issue); and rather was WP:TONE and WP:NPOV.
 * The article already included what you wanted to add, at least in some capacity. From the lede:
 * The 19th-century ushered in transformative changes marked by Westernization; these changes largely stigmatized homosexuality. the 1858 Ottoman Penal Code is a pivotal moment, often cited as signaling private decriminalization. However, previous laws against homosexuality were rarely invoked by the Ottomans, and this liberalization came amid heightening heteronormativity and anxieties about open same-sex expression among men, leading many scholars to question the validity of the 'decriminalization' paradigm used for the Ottoman Empire. (emphasis mine)
 * One of the 'many scholars' cited in the article is indeed Ozsoy, and their opinion is presented in a neutral, encyclopedic way. Instead of using loaded words like 'myth' or 'misunderstanding', the article talks of shifting and unstable scholarly consensus. There are still many WP:RS claiming that the Ottomans decriminalized homosexuality in 1858 (though by now this is thought of as somewhat outdated); there are also newer challenges to that view arguing instead that homosexuality was largely de facto legal since the very beginnings of the empire, and that the 19th-century actually stigmatized homosexuality. Therefore the article tries to represent shifting academic views, instead of endorsing one conceptualization (or worse, one individual author's conceptualization) in a way that would not be WP:NPOV. Uness232 (talk) 16:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)