Talk:Vaginal flatulence/Archive 2

Recent edits
I've just reverted a batch of recent edits. First, some of them made claims to a particular movie popularizing "Queefing" in the porn world. Ignoring the incorrect capitalization in that edit, it simply wasn't substantiated.

There were also edits that inserted new terminology and were equally unsupported by citation. Such citation can be made as an external link at the end of the article, inline, or on the talk page. Until such citations are found, please refrain from introducing original research. -Harmil 12:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

AFD
I'll leave the AFD tag up for a couple of weeks, but unless the person who put it up can explain their reasoning and correctly create the AFD sub-page, or at least explain themselves here such that I can put it up for a vote for you (my vote would be to keep, but I won't block putting it up for a vote), then I'll take the tag down after a reasonable grace period. -Harmil 18:52, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Someone else had put it up without a subst so I fixed it prior to reading the discussion. Since discussion is closed on it, and I didn't actually want to reopen discussion, I removed it. Serlin 05:31, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Smell
Removed a reference to suggested erotic smell. The first section contradicts this, stating VF does not produce specific odors. Intinn 22:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Removed the word "mell" again. I assume User:68.43.140.213 meant to write "smell". Although good additions concerning odor were made, the first section keeps contradicting that VF produces a specific odor. Also, no evidence for the presumed erotic sub-genre regarding odors is presented.

Overhaul
This article has long needed an overhaul, and I've known about the link between this and colovaginal fistula for a long time. I finally decided to do something about it. I think the article is now in decent shape, and contains all of the bits and pieces that I could find about the topic. If anyone has a really good off-line resource for information on this topic, however, that would be great! -Harmil 06:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Vart
"vart" is a slang term and un-apostrophied contraction for "vaginal fart". Its use is wide-spread, though only as slang as far as I know. Still, it is not a localized pet name, and as such I think it should have its place in the slang section. For reference, here is a Google search that looks for its use (outside of Wikipedia) in English -Harmil 17:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

AFD debate link
This article has been kept following this AFD debate. Sjakkalle (Check!)  09:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for providing the link.
 * Just wanted to say I'm glad the article's been kept, and I'm actually disgusted at the people who wanted to delete it. Girls and young women, when they grow up and develop, can get so very insecure about their bodies and the changes they go through.  A great many will have feelings that there's something terribly wrong with them, that nobody else has the same problems they do (which may not even be problems, as is the case with vaginal flautulence).  It's exactly what they need to be able to come to Wikipedia and find a factual article on this normal and entirely-harmless phenomenon.  I don't want to exaggerate the case, but if there can't be an article on VF in Wikipedia, then what good is Wikipedia?  Well, I know the issue is closed, so I hope it's okay that I added my thoughts here anyway.  --63.25.239.108 (talk) 19:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Pornography?
The burden of proof in Wikipedia lies on the one who wants to keep material in the article, not the one who wants to take it out. I'm going to take out the reference to pornography. Anybody wishing to put it back should source it, but even then I don't think it's terribly relevant. I'd like to see this article stay scientific and not descend into vulgarity. I voted to keep it at AfD because I thought this could be a decent medical stub, not an attractive nuisance to juvenile perverts. Brian G. Crawford 03:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but there's quite a lot of queef-related porn out there. I'm not thrilled with having to troll the net to find examples (it's really rather ugly work), but here's an example that I got from Vivid's site (they're the largest maker and distributor of adult films in the U.S.): (note - dead link removed. Risker 23:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC))


 * If you really want lots of sources, hop on down to your local adult video store and ask how many queefing titles they have. They'll cite you some sources.


 * In fact, this article was originally created because of that sub-genre, and it was only when I moved it from Queef to its current name that I expanded it into an article with a more medical angle. -Harmil 15:24, 20 May 2006 (UTC)


 * PS: Here's one of the pages that used to be linked to from this article (but I believe was placed here as advertising, so I removed). I think this makes my point rather clearly: Amber, The Lesbian Queefer (note: that page was deleted after being referenced here -Harmil 04:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)) -Harmil 15:29, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
 * An anon removed the pornography sub-genre part again, I've put it back for now. I think above links are proof enough. Intinn | Talk 17:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The star of Amber, The Lesbian Queefer has an article: Amber Rose (porn star). --Muchness 06:08, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Good call. It makes more sense to list the star than a specific movie anyway. Thanks! -Harmil 14:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


 * For some reason it now links to Amber Rose (model) who is a different Amber Rose. Someone should maybe fix this? --Hakobus (talk) 20:09, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

It's disturbing to see how much time some of you have spent on this article. May I suggest leaving the porn references out of it and making the article based strictly on scientific grounds? Otherwise it seems doomed to end up as some sort of crude pop-culture reference rather than a function of the female body. --Nazrac 22:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not censored for the benefit of minors. In short, that means that we don't shy away from a controversial topic (like vaginal flatulence in pornography) just because it's distasteful. As for the article devolving into crude pop-culture references: first off, "crude" doesn't enter into it (see above) and pop culture is only encyclopedic where it meets Wikipedia's guidelines for notability. If we stick to the guidelines that Wikipedia uses as a whole, I think we're reasonably safe. -Harmil 22:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting censoring the article, for the benefit of minors or otherwise. I simply fail to see how porn movies depicting vaginal flatulance fits into it. If a porn movie depicts a refrigerator, does that mean it should be mentioned in the refrigerator article? If a porn movie depicts masturbation, does that mean the Wikipedia article dedicated to masturbation should list every pornographic movie that depicts such behavior? Your logic for including it in the article simply isn't very sound. I also find it rather humorous how you have such a fascination with the topic, and your reaction to my criticism even more amusing. How it is you know vaginal flatulance is distasteful I have no idea, but that kind of sounds like original research to me. --Nazrac 21:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 * First off, please refrain from making this personal. This is an article, like any other, and if you would like to improve it, I welcome your efforts. if not, then there are message boards out there that welcome discussions of whatever topic you like.


 * As to the pornography aspect. Read the discussion above. We've refrained from pointing to any of the particular movies because a) they're not particularly acceptable sources and b) there's no one particular movie which is considered seminal (no pun intended) in the genre, as far as I know. Then again, I don't know much about the genre other than the fact that it exists.


 * The refrigerator analogy is flawed. There are no porn movies about refrigerators. When you make a movie called "Queefing Squirting Coeds" (Totally Tasteless ) or "Amber the Lesbian Queefer" (Unknown studio ), you establish that there is, in fact, a fetish audience out there. I don't really want to keep surfing around for these movies because, honestly, I find them rather off-putting, so can we just drop it? -Harmil 04:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Anemogiannis
I am not sure about the new slang term being "anemogiannis." I have looked for that term everywhere else on the internet including urban dictionary and only found the Australian filmmaker Con Anemogiannis. I just wanted to draw attention to that in case someone else knows about that. this is my first discussion post, so I'm being cautious. Good page to start on, I know.

24.33.25.13 01:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Slang
I'm not sure the slang section is heading anywhere useful. Is it really nescessary or encyclopaedic to list various translations of "pussy fart" ?  Intinn Talk! 11:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I try to keep the slang section brief, but the article was originally titled Queef, and that's certainly a very common slang term, used broadly in pornography and certain sub-cultures. As you point out, "pussy fart" is also broadly used. Not including this information would be somewhat questionable, I think. That said, a LOT of the additions that people contribute are just local neologisms that are not, on their own, notable. It's a hard line to draw, and mostly I do so on the basis of (the lack of) citations and/or discussion here for new entries. -Harmil 19:23, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Now I have to agree with User:Intinn. The foriegn-language translations didn't make sense (what's more, I'm not SURE they were slang in those languages). If there are articles on other languages' Wikipedias, then we should link to them using the standard interwiki linking scheme. Othewise, translations that don't impact English should probably be removed. -Harmil 13:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Sarah Silverman
Turns up as an element of the Humanitarian of the Year episode of The Sarah Silverman Program, should a cultural reference section be added. Laszlo Panaflex 05:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It should now that there's also an entire episode of South Park about it. --Buddy13 (talk) 02:03, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

CO and other gasses
The following text was added:



Sadly, that link doesn't exist and the information in this section would really need to be cited with a verifiable source in order to add it (plus the language would have to be cleaned up a bit). -Harmil 17:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

We need a diagram!!
I'm serious. I'm thinking like a cartoon or something, like they have for mastubration. But with smelly lines coming out, or something.

--121.7.250.12 (talk) 14:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * And that would be funny, if queefs stunk, which they typically don't.
 * Oh, wait . . . No, it wouldn't . . ..
 * --63.25.239.108 (talk) 20:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

"Pornography" becomes "Eroticism"
I changed the title of this section to "Eroticism", and added a second paragraph. Didn't touch the first paragraph. Here's the whole section as it stands now:

So-called "queefing" can also be considered erotic and is the subject of a pornographic sub-genre, as for example in the movies of Amber Rose.

Some men may find the sensation of his partner "queefing" during intercourse to be pleasurable, as it causes vibrations, and can create a sensation of vaginal tightening.

I'm concerned that my statement might be considered "original research", but what "research" would be done on such a strange topic? And isn't my statement just a reasonable supposition? Flatulence by definition causes vibrations and expansions/contractions of the orifice in question, so it's logical enough to suppose some men would really enjoy this happening during intercourse. But it's true enough that I learned this from personal experience.

Any objections to this addition?

I hope it's agreeable that I changed the section title to "Eroticism"; this way the section can be kind of a clearinghouse for any sexually-oriented information about the topic. I would think that would make the whole notability thing less debatable. --63.25.239.108 (talk) 20:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

We need a picture of an open vagina queefing (much like the one on the goatse article!

More serious...
I reverted an edit by 207.172.135.54, the edit changed the text to "During pregnancy..." yet the more serious conditions are not exclusively inherent to pregnancy but more harmful because of pregnancy, which is actually in the refrenced text.  Felis Leo Talk! 09:05, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

air embolism
"Air which is forced into the vagina, especially by blowing in order to cause vaginal flatulence during cunnilingus, can cause an air embolism"

I seriously doubt this statement. how can enough air to produce an embolism get into the bloodsysthem via the vagina?

explanations?


 * Have none of you had children? According to my wife's doctor, women who have recently given birth (this also applies to recent miscarriages or terminations) should not have sex or insert anything into their vagina as air may be pumped into the placental site and then may migrate into the blood stream causing an air embolism.  Sorry, I can't really site our doctor, I don't know that he would want his name plastered across a wiki article about vaginal flatulence, but it sounds like a pretty reasonable answer to me, and I'm sure anybody who really wants to know for sure could do a little searching and find out.--Intelinside123 (talk) 06:40, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, but that's a "little" different than just ordinary, non-post childbirth scenarios. You probably just terrified any young girl reading this into wearing a chastity belt :) 144.223.18.102 (talk) 14:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC) (Shipton, not logged in)


 * The embolism part is totally untrue, and needs to go. After childbirth or abortions, the risk related to sexual activity is due to bacterial infections, not air embolisms. (Similarly, an open wound anywhere on the surface of the body obviously does not need to be shielded from wind due to danger of air embolisms.) Also, how does one apply the amount of pressure necessary to force gases that are not very soluble in water (in this case, blood), to enter in such quantities? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.202.81.121 (talk) 09:47, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Adding to this, I saw the source, but this is not verified anywhere else, as far as I can see. Conclusion: This is questionable at best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.202.81.121 (talk) 09:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

More important than any of the above about this insertion, it is not appropriate for the page. Air insertion is not related to air expulsion, and moreover I think that the original poster of these "facts" has an ulterior motive. Hint: obviously, the statement concerning abortion has NOTHING to do with Vaginal Flatulence, so: Can't we just delete the entire section?

fanny fart
In Australia the fanny is slang for the ass, not the vagina, so there is no slang term fanny fart. pussy fart is commonly used —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.159.2.31 (talk • contribs) 03:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Mate, i'm from australia, we do use fanny as another word for vagina. Fanny is slang for arse in america.

Twitter and queefing.
The website Queeffr tracks cases of vaginal flatulence and allows for people to post comments on what they think of them.

Not done: Please read the policy on external links. This sort of link falls under WP:ELNO10. Celestra (talk) 14:55, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Pre-intercourse queefing or vaginal flatulence
In my experience, queefing or vaginal flatulence can occur pre-coital, merely as a result of sexual arousal and nothing more.

Pending changes
This article is one of a small number (about 100) selected for the first week of the trial of the Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Pending changes/Queue  are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

However with only a few hours to go, comments have only been made on two of the pages.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially.

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 20:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC).

Edit request from Thered99, 11 November 2010
edit semi-protected

In the "Popular Culture" section, please change "The term queef was featured in 17th episode of season 3 of the cable television series South Park "World Wide Recorder Concert." [10] and subsequently adopted by popular culture." to "The term queef was featured in the 17th episode of season 3 of the cable television series South Park "World Wide Recorder Concert." [10]"

The South Park episode mentioned was originally aired January 12th, 2000. I graduated high school in central Missouri in 1999 and the term "queef" was well known to us throughout our high school years. If "queef" was well known to us in middle-America before 1999, it is very probably it was well known to others before that.

Taking personal experience aside, the requested change should still be made, as the sentence now ends with (erroneous) information unnecessary to the article and causes needless argument. Stating that "queef" was mentioned in South Park is proof enough that the term was used in popular culture.

Thered99 (talk) 20:53, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yellow check.svg Partly done: Removed the whole section as it wasn't sourced reliably. -Atmoz (talk) 21:12, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 98.163.70.126, 29 December 2010
The last paragraph of text in this article is incorrect and misleading; the error is clearly visible by reading the author's cited reference, which is Reference Number 8. The last paragraph of Wikipedia text contains additional wording which is not contained in the Reference source; also, this author-added verbiage promotes a misinterpretation of the original Reference/Source because the added words convey a different meaning than is contained in the Reference text.

Please change text in the last paragraph to remove specifically the words "in order to CAUSE vaginal flatulence". The cited Reference reads: "If you have oral sex, tell your partner not to blow air into your vagina. This could force air inside you, which could cause an air embolism. Air embolisms can cause permanent brain damage and even death to a pregnant woman and her baby." You may note that the author adds the words "in order to CAUSE vaginal flatulence". These words are not contained in the referenced source, and they convey a different meaning to the reader.

Reference Source: Wright, Janis (2004). Pregnancy: Prenatal Care. American Family Physician. http://www.aafp.org/afp/20030915/1165ph.html.

Samski476 (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2010 (UTC)samski476
 * Yellow check.svg Partly done: The text has now been deleted because it had nothing to do with the article's subject. Shearonink (talk) 05:44, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request
I want to resurrect the following request. The entire section was deleted instead of only the phrase "...and subsequently adopted by popular culture." More recently, that edit was undone. The end phrase should still be deleted, not necessarily the entire section. The term was frequently used long before South Park. I heard it occasionally back in the 80's - well over 10 years before the episode first aired.


 * In the "Popular Culture" section, please change "The term queef was featured in 17th episode of season 3 of the cable television series South Park "World Wide Recorder Concert." [10] and subsequently adopted by popular culture." to "The term queef was featured in the 17th episode of season 3 of the cable television series South Park "World Wide Recorder Concert." [10]


 * The South Park episode mentioned was originally aired January 12th, 2000. I graduated high school in central Missouri in 1999 and the term "queef" was well known to us throughout our high school years.  If "queef" was well known to us in middle-America before 1999, it is very probably it was well known to others before that.


 * Taking personal experience aside, the requested change should still be made, as the sentence now ends with (erroneous) information unnecessary to the article and causes needless argument. Stating that "queef" was mentioned in South Park is proof enough that the term was used in popular culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beaveman (talk • contribs) 02:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Yet another edit request
I went to high school between 1985 and 1988 in southern Alabama, and Queef was in popular usage back then. There's no way that South Park introduced it into popular culture in 2000. I agree with the prior poster that the final part of the sentence regarding popular culture should be redacted, but that the rest of the section should be left intact.

99.194.154.147 (talk) 04:27, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Duplicate edit request
I was also familiar with the term queef in the 1980s.

Cabazap (talk) 03:57, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Ridiculous
Now, I'm as big a fan of the queef as the next guy, but when an article's talk page is many, many times longer than the article itself, there's a problem. The article is basically a stub and the talk page had to be archived! So much time and energy wasted here talking about queefs when we should be out making them.--172.190.228.64 (talk) 08:32, 5 February 2012 (UTC)