Talk:Sexual stereotyping

Untitled comment
Hello, I am pleased to present to you all this article on sexual stereotyping! Hopefully this will contribute to worldwide sexual tolerance education. I have added various aspects from the world of logic, but I believe this article could use analysis from psychology. Also, please check the categories for this page. --Wykypydya 00:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion -- (Resolved)
To User:Jerry lavoie, the nominator of this article for Speedy Deletion: So, it seems that this article is subject to the repressive hostility of intolerant Wikipedians. This article has an entirely notable and meritable purpose, as it documents a very sensitive and substantive issue in society very related to other Wikipedia articles (i.e. homophobia, gay rights, prejudice). I can see why you suggest this article to be merged with Stereotype as this topic is a subset of that topic. But why, after I just put all this effort into writing about this topic in the most objective and non-POV way, and even multiply acknowledged the shortcoming and need for sources and references, do you take this extreme and irrational step of demanding this article simply be deleted, and make the accusation that this article is POV? If you feel it should be merged, why don't you USE THAT TEMPLATE INSTEAD?? I've nothing against it. If you feel that some parts are POV, then why don't you USE THAT TEMPLATE as well? I'm sure the Wikipedia community will be glad to pitch in, collaborate, and perhaps fix the POV issues, as happens on many WP articles. But to go so far, so impulsively, nominating this piece for deletion? That's uncalled for. I am progressively seeing where the people are coming from who say that you can hardly write anything new on Wikipedia anymore without it getting censured and blacklisted. I can confidently say that I wrote this article as objectively as I could, and focused on the facts rather than the opinions. Perhaps YOU are the subjective/biased one, going around and discrediting legitimate articles, possibly because you have a dissenting viewpoint. Let's some opinions on this, including positive alternatives to deletion. --Wykypydya 00:44, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, just to show you how cooperative and understanding I am, I added a POV-check template to the page following your suggestion that this article is excessively POV. --Wykypydya 00:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have removed the speedy. This article appears to be comprised of nothing but original research and really either needs to be cleaned up, deleted, or merged into homophobia.  However, none of those problems are criteria for speedy deletion. --BigDT 03:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I acknowledge that the article may have such problems; could these templates please be added?  --Wykypydya 03:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

This article could be very informative and useful, but it's a real garbage-heap when it comes to NPOV problems. For the record, I'm a supporter of both gay rights and encyclopediae. Pygmypony 12:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

This page is not dealing with the topic of the title
This topic deals specifically with Stereotyping based on Sex. Such as, "females all know how to cook", and "all men crave red meat". As such, this article has been ussurped into "homosexuality stereotyping", which I agree can carry into sexual stereotyping. For instance, "men don't wear pink" is a sexual stereotype. "Men who wear pink are gay" is a homosexual stereotype.

I really don't like this article, because it essentially dismisses the most common form of sexual stereotyping, which is stereotyping against females, and males without making any inference about their sexuality. --Puellanivis 00:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't agree, as I learned in health class that sexual sterotyping is ascribing a sexual orientation to someone based on their behavior. Perhaps I used one example too greatly (I know there is a template for that), but you are talking about the semantics of the title.  The issue you discussed and the issue I wrote about are distinct yet connected.  Actually, looking closer, the issue you discussed, in a way, is the converse of the one I discuss.  One issue is the ascribing of sexual orientations based on behavior/clothing, etc., and the other issue is the ascribing of clothing/behavior, etc. to certain sexual orientations.
 * However, I appreciate the topic you have brought up, as it is relevant yet I did not think of it originally. I think this idea probably merits incorporation into this article if not its own distinct article. :) --Wykypydya 01:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that this one article should be able to incorporate both. I think both are quite well attached to this idea.  Frankly, when I read the title "sexual stereotyping", I thought of the position presented originally here.  I understand better now the idea that it is described more fully as the "stereotyping of/by sexual orientation".  Which is a bit different from, I guess what would be "sex stereotyping", which is what I was thinking of when I read the title.  Perhaps, we could make the title a little more clear that this deals specifically with stereotyping of/by one's sexuality, and not their sex, and add perhaps a link to the Gender roles article with the wording suggesting that if you're here looking for stereotyping based on sex, that's where you should look. --Puellanivis 18:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Acknowledgement to SatyrBot
Thanks to the bot User:SatyrBot for categorizing this talk page as "WikiProject LGBT studies" "stub-class"! --Wykypydya 01:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion (2nd) (resolved)
There has been some concern expressed that the article's title may be a misnomer or that the article does not fulfill its intended purpose or answer its title. Perhaps an expert on the topic would be helpful to verify this article?

I would also like to mention that, although not everything you learn in school is always textbook-correct, in my health class we received some ditto or maybe saw an overhead transparency about "sexual stereotyping", which described "sexual stereotyping" as something along the lines of ascribing a sexual orientation to someone based on behavior or dress. That is where I got the idea for the title. The ditto/transparency may have been designed by the teacher, or it may have been part of a textbook-teacher series. --Wykypydya 17:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

This article doesn't measure up to what wikipedia should be. Pygmypony 08:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Searching for the right tag ...

 * Hi friends, I was wondering if there is a tag for "this article has too many tags." ;)
 * This is an important subject.
 * Thanks to everyone who is making contributions.
 * Peace. Alastair Haines 11:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, instead of just poking the finger, I had a bash at introducing the article.
 * Err, but I did add two more tags. Alastair Haines 11:26, 9 July 2007 (UTC)