User talk:Masculinity

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! -- Neil N   talk  ♦  contribs  17:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

UNESCO document on masculinity
Thanks for the note you left me on my talk page. It's always better to discuss potentially problematic links than to edit war. Let's discuss the merit of the link you inserted on the discussion page for the Gay article, so that others can join the discussion as well.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 15:19, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Sexual Orienation is a western concept and should not be seen as universal
The entire idea that people, especially men, can be divided on the basis of their 'proclaimed' sexuality is a concept peculiar to the modern west, and to discuss the concept as a universal phenomena, and to judge or study sexuality, men and masculinities in other cultures or in other times on the basis of these concepts not only distorts and misrepresents their reality, but is also seen as oppressive by people on whom the west enforces these identities, often through the one-sided process of globalisation.

Wikipedia, should take into account this fact when discussing modern western concepts such as 'sexual orientation', 'homosexuality', 'heterosexuality', 'gay' and 'straight', etc., and it should clearly mention this fact, because, although it is an English site, it is meant for the entire world, and not only for the western world.

Only that will make it a truly relevant and global site.


 * Personally, I completely agree with you. The Fat Man has traveled throughout the Orient; it would seem that the gap between the constructs of male sexuality in, say, South India and the United States are miles (or kilometers) apart.  That being said, Wikipedia was not created for you and I to discuss our personal views.  So here's what I would suggest: find some statements or sections of articles that seem unduly biased toward Western notions of sexuality.  Discuss those sections on the articles' talk pages, and try your hand at rewriting these sections citing reliable sources--for example, the UNESCO publication we discussed earlier.


 * Creating citations and footnotes is fun, and it improves the quality of the article. I can help you create citations, if you show me which sources you'd like to use (be specific).--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 15:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, thank you. I'll try my best. (Masculinity (talk) 16:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC))

<>

Eventhough, I'm going to follow this advice in articles on wikipedia related to such topics, in this particular case, the problem seems to not to be what the article says, but rather what it does not say. It describes the social construction of human, especially male sexuality, as it is formally and popularly seen in the west ... assuming it to be universally applicable. As far as the article is concerned, the only difference is between people who are open about their 'gay' identities and those men who relate with sexually wtih other men but do not call themselves gay, who are described as 'closeted' (or bicurious or so). A person from the orient finds the entire notion of isolation on the basis of so-called 'sexual orientation' problematic. When almost everyman is involved in some sexual way with another man, you don't really feel different for liking men.

How do you explain this dichotomy in the article? The term 'Gay' carries with it all the negative baggages of the 'heterosexualised' society, where the pressures on men to disown their same-sex needs is so extreme, that only very few men think of indulging in male-to-male sexuality by acknowledging it. The rest either keep away totally and deny their feelings, or indulge in male-eroticism without acknowledging their own interest. The term 'gay' is based on the lots of assumptions which are invalid in a non-western, non-heterosexualised world. E.g., the very concept of their being 'gay' assumes that most men do not feel sexuality towards other men. Then, who is defined as the 'same-sex'. The western culture only considers the outer sex of an individual when deciding their sex-identity, but in most non-western cultures, the sex-identity also involves, compulsorily the Gender or the inner sex of an individual. Thus a Hijra may have a penis, but he will be a different 'sex' or rather 'gender' than 'Men', because s(he) is a woman inside a man. A man and Hijra having sex is not seen as 'same-sex' in non-western countries. Of course, the west doesn't recognise 'Gender' as a valid human phenomena, and ascribes it to a mental aberration. Then of course, there is a whole lot of conspiracies behind the very concept of 'gay' or 'sexual orientation' -- revolving around men and manhood, which is relevant both in the west and the east, but men in western countries do not have a space to address these issues, and also that their cultural mindset makes them incapable to comprehend the exact parameters of these issues. (Masculinity (talk) 17:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC))

Wikiproject:LGBT Studies
Perhaps you would be interested in joining WP:LGBT? It sounds like you could be an asset to the project, helping to fill in a gap in our expertise, as we are, without question, dominantly western. I invite you to take a look at the project, and join if you care to do so. Aleta (Sing)  16:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I will love to join.


 * You're welcome! You'll notice that the bottom section of WP:LGBT is where you can sign up for the project. Aleta  (Sing)  16:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I joined the WP:LGBT, but I have no idea how to get involved and share my concerns. Can you help me?
 * I'm putting the official welcome to the project below. It has several links you can use to get started.  Of particular note is the talk page for the project, at WT:LGBT. Aleta  (Sing)  17:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I too appreciate your comments on "homosexuality" that Aleta copied to WT:LGBT, and if you need me I'd be glad to help out with getting your concerns properly referenced and added to the appropriate main pages. (BTW: it'd probably help if you put some introduction about yourself on your user page. See WP:USER) Welcome! William P. Coleman (talk) 18:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you William. I'll need all the help I can get. Its late at night at my end, so I'll go to sleep now. Tomorrow have an exam. Probably, will get to the computer tommorrow night. (Masculinity (talk) 19:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC))


 * Notice that when you sign your name to a post it appears in red, whereas Aleta's and the others' appear in blue. Just click on "Masculinity" in your signature and you'll be taken to a blank user page where you can create whatever you want. William P. Coleman (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Aleta (Sing)  17:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Using references, sandbox
Hi Masculinity, I notice you recently made additions to Homosexuality that have been reverted as original research. I suggest you read through WP:NOR thoroughly. I appreciate the perspective you are trying to bring, but it is absolutely imperative that you cite any additions to articles with reliable sources. If you don't, people will revert your changes. All material should be cited, but material that is likely to be controversial, as yours is, especially has to be well cited. I know you have at least one source for some of it, but you need to find some more before trying to add it to articles, and include the references when you make the additions. I noticed there was a placeholder saying "insert footnote here" in your previous edits. If you are working on something, but don't yet have all the reference material handy, you might want to build your work in your sandbox, which you can create by clicking on User:Masculinity/sandbox. Then, when your edits are actually referenced and ready to go in an article, you can transfer them there. Aleta (Sing)  00:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Aleta,

I have three references, as of now. And I wanted to add them. But I was not being permitted to add it, for some reason. That is what I want help on.

Also, don't you think that even if there is one valid source -- and too as important one as UNESCO, it shoudl be enough at least to mention that there is a divergence of view.

regards (Masculinity (talk) 17:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC))


 * Hi Masculinity, I'm not sure what you mean. You obviously have been able to edit the article, because you did edit it.  There is not a separate references page. The references should be incorporated right within the text you create. There's nothing else I can think of where you'd have been prevented from adding a reference. Take a look at WP:CITE and WP:FOOT for specifics on how to cite references in your text.  If you still have questions then, let me know! Aleta  (Sing)  21:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Aleta, thanx ... I think I was doing it all wrong. I clicked the edit button of the reference section to put in text, and there were no references there. I think in a previous article I had done it that way.

But I think now I can do it. But before that I'll put my text and the references up for others to see at the discussion page. (Masculinity (talk) 15:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC))


 * You're welcome! Putting everything on the talk page first sounds like a very good idea. :) Aleta  (Sing)  22:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

March 2008
Hi, the recent edit you made to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Steve Crossin (talk) 12:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot (talk) 17:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 04:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

oops! I usually sign it, but sometimes, when I'm in a hurry, I do forget. (Masculinity (talk) 05:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC))

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.  Neil N  <sup style="font-family:Calibri;"> talk  ♦  contribs  16:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Click the history tab up top at the Gay article or click here. By the way, the removal was not sabotage. Edit summaries were provided and reasons were provided on the talk page. -- Neil N  <sup style="font-family:Calibri;"> talk  ♦  contribs  16:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You will usually receive a notice on your talk page if your edit was reverted because it was against wikipedia policies or guidelines. If your edit was undone for other reasons you should check the edit summary or the talk page. Do you want some links to guidelines on how wikipedia works? -- Neil N  <sup style="font-family:Calibri;"> talk  ♦  contribs  16:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding original research, you were given a link to wikipedia policy above. Do you have any questions? -- Neil N  <sup style="font-family:Calibri;"> talk  ♦  contribs  16:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Civility
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Queerudite (talk) 18:53, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Discussing with other editors
Hi Masculinity, I realize you have frustrations with some of the reception your contributions have been receiving. I'd just like to suggest, however, that tossing around terms like "strong gay lobby" and accusing editors with whom you have a disagreement of bias is not a very productive strategy for building consensus. Even if they are biased (and I am not saying that - you won't get me to address that either way), those sorts of comments tend to alienate people and make them less likely to work constructively with you. It also either violates, or at least comes close to violating the no personal attacks policy. <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 00:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

As for whether anyone can go and edit the article without asking your permission, yes, they can do that. You may be the original or main author of an article, but you don't own it. It is, of course, a good idea and polite for people to discuss major changes, but adding tags doesn't generally come under that heading. <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 00:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

This advice is meant to be friendly and constructive. I hope that's how you take it. :) If you have any questions, I'll try to help. <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 00:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Another editor (I don't recall whom at the moment) suggested filing a request for comment as a way of getting additional opinions about the article from a wider spectrum of editors. I think this is a good idea, and I encourage you to pursue it. <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 00:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Proper formatting of talk page contribution
Given that you are having several protracted discussions with other editors on various talk pages, I think that it would be valuable for you to learn how to properly format your contributions for maximum readability. The two most important things: (1) you should stop putting extra spaces between your paragraphs (one carriage return is adequate to mark a new paragraph); (2) when you are replying to a previous comment, make sure to use an indentation (a colon preceding each paragraph). Add extra colons for extra indentations as needed. Consult WP:Talk page for your reference. Also, please stop using ALL CAPS to make important points. It comes across as WP:Uncivil. Thanks.--Agnaramasi (talk) 19:01, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

new message
<b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 18:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

<b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 18:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * And again. P.S. Please indent your messages on talk pages using colons. <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 19:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Slow down!
Hey Masculinity, I think it would be a good idea to slow down adding information on the same topic to different articles. At least wait a bit and see how the RFC goes at Talk:Gay, and discuss proposed changes that are likely to be controversial on talk pages. OK? <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 03:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Aleta, I have observed that at each article I have to fight it out with a different set of people to get the information included. At each article, they refuse to go by the discussion of what was arrived at discussion at another talk page, and want me to take up the discussion afresh. It is becasue of this that I decided to carry on several parallel discussions at the sametime. Since, they seem to be independant of each other.


 * What do you think?(Masculinity (talk) 03:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC))


 * Well, they are separate, but inter-related. You do need to have a conversation at each article's talk page. <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing  04:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

<b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 04:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Space for discussion
Here is a place you can ask questions, tell us we're part of "a segment of the LGBT community, the chauvinists who don't want the non-Western voice to be heard", suggest changes to all of the articles you want, etc. Your back-and-forth loooooong debates where you insert quotes and references makes the pages hard to read. Talking on the discussion pages is fine, but for the very long references and quotes, try adding them here first and ask people to take a look by linking to this talk page. I'm not going to let you drag me into another pointless argument on these talk pages because I don't know if that's your goal on Wikipedia, to argue, but most of us are here for more than just these articles that you're concentrating on. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 15:17, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your suggestion. But here we are talking about changes to a specific section, in this case the article on Gay, and I don't think how discussing things on my talk page would help people reach a consensus on what is to be included in that article. (Masculinity (talk) 15:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC))
 * I give up on you. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 15:32, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Masculinity. I agree with some of the proposed changes but I do wish that you were a bit more patient. When you are forceful people are quick to be offended. Also, don't allow them to take you off topic, as when the discussion morphed to the femininized male in western society. That's an argument you won't win and it waters down the more important points. It gives your critics something to bite at. Otherwise, I think you'd be wise to clean up the "Non-western masculity" page you created. Add the new information you've been gathering... with lots of great examples. Add that information about Japan... And then see if you can get it added to the See Also section at the bottom of the gay page. A lot of people seem to have been fighting a fight for so long they forget that theirs isn't the only way to see things. I also desperately wish that they would broaden their thinking, but it's a Utopian idea that needs to be massaged, not forced. It will happen sooner than you think. I think you managed well to get what you've gotten on there right now. Given someone doesn't come along and delete it all again! DEZnCHRIS (talk) 21:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 15:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

my RFA
Hello, masculinity. I am kenvbk, you know me already. You are certainly posting up a storm here on wikipedia. I only hope that you do no alienate people and end up getting banned. That would be a shame. Feel free to add more comments on my page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taeda (talk • contribs) 19:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

So, since they are bent on tearing apart the UNESCO resource... what else do you have? You seem to have been quoting various other things over the last while. Can you just pass me the sources for those and I'll investigate a bit, too. Thanks. DEZnCHRIS (talk) 18:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I will do what I can. What are the main thrusts of the project right now? Taeda (talk) 20:41, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Taeda

which page needs a RFC?
Which page needs to link to the "non-western" page?? gay? Taeda (talk) 22:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Taeda

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #CC9966; text-align: center;" |The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter  {| The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter! Issue XV: June 11, 2008
 * style="border: solid 1px purple;"|
 * style="border: solid 1px purple;"|
 * colspan="2" valign="middle" style="width: 60%; border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; background: #ffe4e1" |
 * valign="top" style="border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 75%; " |
 * valign="top" style="border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 75%; " |

Hello, members and friends of WP:LGBT! I'm not one to be writing newsletters, but I miss our cruise director, Miss Julie, and our project is drifting along with a few leaking plugs in the bottom of the boat. Hey, it happens. Every group we join goes through changes. If Wikipedia weren't so interesting it wouldn't also be so frustrating sometimes. And vice versa. More than one Wikiproject has tumbleweeds blowing through it, but this is one that can't afford to let that happen. Even if you pop in to the talk page of the project, you can let us know you're still around.

{| style="font-size: 90%;"
 * valign="top" |
 * valign="top" |

WP:LGBT's Role in HIV / AIDS articles
It wouldn't be a proper gay community without a li'l bit o' drama! That's right. If we aren't arguing about something, then we should be asking if we're still queer. Maybe that's for the best, since we know we're still kicking. Our most recent topic is how far the role of our project should go in dipping our toes into HIV/AIDS articles. The main AIDS article was delisted as a Featured Article last month, sadly. (Sending a swift kick to WP:Medicine.) A spirited discussion is available for your entertainment on the WP:LGBT talk page about just how much of HIV and AIDS should we take on. As ever, we'll take your opinions under advisement. We're going to have to, because it doesn't seem to have been settled.

Is Pride POV?
We have a pretty cool sidebar that identifies core LGBT articles. Its symbol is the iconic gay pride flag, much like other Wikiprojects have iconic symbols denoting the topic is a core subject in a series of articles. However, a question recently arose asking if the symbol itself is not neutral. Should a pride flag show up at the top of the article on Conversion therapy? How else would anyone know the article is about queer issues? Is there another symbol that is as widely recognized and that includes all our many splintered facets? At what point do we stop asking ourselves all these questions and just go have a mint julep on the verandah and stop caring?

Harvey Milk and Jim Jones
For the love of all that is holy, no Kool Aid jokes. However, an editor involved in pioneering San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk's article has included a section about the late supervisor's support of Jim Jones and the People's Temple. While it may be accurate, there is a Request for Comment regarding how much emphasis the section places on Milk's support in light of his overall political influence on the city, and indeed the rest of the United States. Milk's article is a sad one in more ways than one. It lacks the detail and heart that honors its subject. Anyone want to do a barter with me? I'll bring Harvey Milk to featured status (give me a month or two so I can read stuff), if you do something of equal value to WP:LGBT?? Make me an offer...

Queer Studies is offensive!
The established branch of study known as Queer studies was brought up as an category for deletion because an editor was offended by the use of "queer" in the title. It was overwhelmingly rejected mostly by the usernames I see here on our Wikiproject page. (A clue that I know you are out there, hiding...biding your time...) So, I wish I could congratulate you, but now I'm all confused by my sympathy for the editor who was offended. So, if you're reading this, Moni has a short memory and can't remember your username. Don't be put off by our demonstrative pushiness. Join us. We can always use involved editors.

Lambda Literary Awards
What can you do to help the project out? Be a wiki-fairy, on many levels. There are all kinds of articles that need help. Why, just this morning I removed those ugly wikify and cleanup tags from four articles at random. If you can put  around stuff, you can clean up articles. There's a list of articles that need attention at the top of the WP:LGBT talk page. Or you can start with the Lambda Literary Awards, where the goddess of my altar received a pioneering award, and was "reduced to rubble" by Katherine V. Forrest's wonderful speech. The 20th ceremony of the Lambda Literary Awards, which celebrates LGBT literature, took place in West Hollywood on May 29th. The page needs to be updated with the new winners, to be found on the official website.


 * valign="top" |

Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Arthur C. Clarke and Bernard Montgomery
Why on earth would someone want to delete material about homosexuality? 'Tis truly a mystery. But these embattled articles have some random evil gnomes removing information that places these folks under our queer umbrella. Help us keep an eye out for the deletions. Take a peek at the articles, familiarize yourselves with the info, and be handy with the undo function in the article history. If tempers flare, take it to the Hall monitors and let them sort it out. Best solution is to make sure your sources are immaculate.

This month's Wiki stars
This is what I get for opening my big fat mouth and suggesting the newsletter should be revived. Here I am writing it. So, to pat self on back (*cough*) Mulholland Dr. became a featured article in May. This is A Good Thing since it is my personal declaration that there is no such thing as lesbian porn. I don't care what Benjiboi says about the video collection at goodvibes. Instead, we have hot women who connect on a deep, personal, soul-touching level, so this film should qualify as some of the skankiest porn available for lesbians. Plus, it's completely confusing and surreal! D'you think Laura Harring would care that the article is featured? I don't think so either... (Call me, Laura!)

Compulsive hoarding of templates
Once I saw a harrowing episode of Animal Planet's Animal Cops where this guy had, like, 250 cats in his house and it freaked me right out. I'm drawing a parallel between 250 cats and, well...three, really, templates in articles involving LGBT issues. Can we stick to one, maybe? In the aforementioned Harvey Milk's article there's a core LGBT template, a link to the LGBT portal, and a sidebar for LGBT rights. Jiminy! You'd think we weren't the folk to set industrial grey carpeting and track lighting in vogue. An LGBT footer was designed to link to articles of interest that aren't the aforementioned core articles. What do you think, can we have either an LGBT template for core articles, a footer for LGBT articles that are high profile but not core, or an LGBT rights template? As ever, anything's up for discussion on the WP:LGBT talk page.

The Violet Quill and magazines
Zigzig20s suggests we create an article on The Violet Quill, as it seems such a milestone in the advancement of gay/queer literature. Members of the Quill all have pages of their own (Edmund White, Christopher Cox, Robert Ferro, Michael Grumley, Andrew Holleran, Felice Picano, and George Whitmore). We need to find more info on the Quill per se to reference the page that we create. Perhaps Google Books - and libraries? - can help.

A number of magazines also need articles, perhaps most notably QW, LGNY, and Lesbian Feminist Liberation.

Mom's nagging for Pride Month
It's June, Pride month. Wear sunscreen, stay hydrated, get a designated driver, then go half-dressed in the streets find a girlfriend or boyfriend, or some homo who's standing there looking lonely and kiss 'em up real good. Remember, it all started 39 years ago when a bunch of drag queens just got fed the f*ck up by the cops raiding the bar and dragging them all out to the pokey again. Rock on, queens! Enjoy your celebrations. My town's is in October, and 200 people attend. I miss Denver.

Fresh faces to brighten our pages
Hey, I've seen you around! Sorry there seem to be so many—it's been a while. But we welcome you all: Cheezisyum21, Taineyah, Dustihowe, Avesta69, RachelSummers77, Vivekgopinathan, AMK1211, Staffwaterboy, Ted Ted, Joe5150, Leahtwosaints, Robapalooza, Arthomure, Confusionball, Affinity likely, PrinceOfCanada, Yobmod, Npd2983, Neagley, Bvlax2005, Bvlax2005, Rhullsf, Textorus, Kieran.casey, Tyciol, Meojive, Sappho'd, Bookkeeperoftheoccult,  Gaywarrior, Aujourd'hui, maman est morte, and Balin42632003.

It looks like we've picked up a lot of talent lately. We have no doubt you'll be making your indelible mark on LGBT knowledge as we know it, here at Wikipedia.

- In the immortal words of Miss Julie, "May all your Wiki days be bright, and may your Love Boat never turn into a Poseidon."
 * }

We miss you, Miss Julie, as well as all the others who have graced our project and are on wiki-breaks or just got fed up with all the nuttiness and went to live their lives. Get your stupid houses built and hurry up and come back. --Moni3 (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC) To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.
 * valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |
 * valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |
 * }
 * }

This newsletter was delivered by §hepBot around 16:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC). ShepBot (talk) 16:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter (July 2008)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  13:11, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Avoid soapboxing
Hello.

You've been adding, repeatedly and despite warnings not to do so, inappropriate external links to articles such as sexual orientation and gay. They way you're going about this makes it appear as though you are grandstanding for a particular point of view&mdash; something which is very much inappropriate in an encyclopedia. You need to gather consensus for changes on the articles' talk pages if you feel that they are not properly neutral, or show systemic bias (that is, are centered on a specific culture and not adequately representing a universal outlook).

If you continue to make unilateral additions to articles, no matter what your ultimate intention is, you will be viewed as disruptive and might end up being blocked. Please take the time to read and understand the policies and resources I've provided you. &mdash; Coren (talk) 22:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * To back up what Coren has said above: please note that links to blogs are not considered appropriate as external links except when they are the official documents of the subject of an article. Obviously, abstract concepts don't write blogs; thus those links are not allowed on Wikipedia. Please review carefully WP:EL. <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 03:55, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Heterosexualization
I predict someone will delete or try to delete this article. Why don't you draft in in your user space first--and make sure it has references and reflects a neutral point of view; that way, it will be much more difficult for an admin to delete it. It's easy to create a subpage for this purpose. Let me know if you need help.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 16:17, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I did nominate it for deletion. If you want to work on it in your userspace though to try to get it into shape as The Fat Man suggests, I have no objection whatsoever. <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 16:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

the replies below were copied from User talk:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 16:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I would like your help. I was expecting this... but nevertheless, its always worth it to try. :-) (Masculinity (talk) 16:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC))

How can i create a 'rough' page and put it up for discussion? (Masculinity (talk) 16:38, 9 August 2008 (UTC))
 * I'm checking with others if we can literally move the article from the mainspace of the encyclopedia, to your more personal userspace, where you can work on it (with others, if you like) until it is ready to be moved back into the main article area of Wikipedia.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 16:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Just give your consent here, or on the AfD page, and we can move it for you.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 16:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Before i agree, are you sure we cannot work upon it where it is, without it being deleted summarily... I mean can't it stay there with all those "warnings" (that it is unsubstantiated and all), while a discussion upon it goes on on its discussion page.


 * if this is not possible then by all means go ahead and do it.
 * Well, it can stay while the deletion discussion is going on - maybe a few days. Once that is concluded, it will either be kept (where it is) or deleted (from mainspace, but we could put it in your userspace). <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 16:59, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, in that case, please let it stay here, this way a lot many people can give their feedback, before a decision is taken. Meanwhile, hopefully someone will come and make an encyclopedia article out of it that is accordingl to the Wikipedia policies.
 * An AfD discussion usually lasts several days, especially if there are signs the article-creator is taking steps to improve the article. However, since as Andy points out here, the Heterosexualization article violates a multitude of fundamental Wikipedia guidelines. If we move the article to your userspace now, you can address these concerns at your own pace. If you leave it where it is, it will almost certainly be deleted, unless you completely overhaul the article and rewrite it from a neutral point of view.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 17:05, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well im open to it being totally rewritten, but i may not be able to do it myself, so i'd appreciate if someone else takes the pains to do it.(Masculinity (talk) 17:09, 9 August 2008 (UTC))


 * I won't rewrite it myself (and doubt anyone else will either) but can give you a few general suggestions on how to make the article more encyclopedic. It's your essay, so you're the best candidate to rewrite it.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 17:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The Fat Man is right; it doesn't seem likely that anyone else will rewrite it. If you want this to be a viable article, you're going to have to make it so. I'll help you if you like, but I'm not going to rewrite it for you, and - like TFM, I doubt anyone else will either. <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 17:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, then help me rewrite it. Though, i still feel, someone may come forward in the coming few days and offer to do a better job of it.
 * Meanwhile, i had a look at the heteronormative article, and i don't think i am talking about the same thing. I am talking about a specific process about which there has been a little attempt at documentation, whereby traditional spaces are 'heterosexualised'. This goes against the basic presumptions of heterosexualised societies. However, heteronormativity is a concept that doesn't necessarily question the basic assumptions of heterosexual spaces. While heteronormativity talks from the point of view of 'gay' people, heterosexualisation talks about what the west terms 'straight' people and their heterosexualisation. So, please keep them different, and see if it is possible to rework them.
 * ... and your suggestions please!

AfD nomination of Heterosexualization
I have nominated Heterosexualization, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Heterosexualization. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 16:30, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Heteronormativity
Hi Masculinity, check out the Heteronormativity article (not our best article, but at least it makes some attempt to follow wiki-guidelines). Consider contributing to that article instead--it overlaps very closely with the concepts you discuss in your Heterosexualization article. If I were you, I might add a section to that article (with inline references!) that talks about how Heteronormativity is especially prevalent in Western societies.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 17:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Masculinity/Heterosexualization
That's where you can now find the article and clean it up at your leisure. You should get some other opinions about whether or not it's ready before you put it back in mainspace again. <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 17:38, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * How are other people going to find me here in order to help me? Also, what about your help. You said you would give suggestions to make it wiki appropriate. (Masculinity (talk) 07:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC))

A couple suggestions to start out:


 * Firstly, is Heterosexualization even a word, or is it a phrase you personally coined? Try a Google books and a Google Scholar search.  If no reputable scholars or published sources have used the word, you will need to pick another title for your article.


 * Statements like "Heterosexualisation is an oppressive, particularly anti-man process" are so far removed from our concept of neutral point of view that they will have to be completely written. If you said, "according to scholars such as XYZ and ABC, Heterosexualization is..." that would be an improvement.


 * You placed a link to the UNESCO document at the bottom of your article, but this is not enough. Try to include specific citations (including page numbers, etc.) for as many specific claims in your article as you can.  I can help you with footnote formatting, if you like.

In short, this article will only be allowed back into the mainspace if you can demonstrate that Heterosexualization is a previously identified and studied phenomenon and not a new construct that you have identified yourself.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 20:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Voices against the Western concept of Sexual Orientation
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Voices against the Western concept of Sexual Orientation, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. andy (talk) 10:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I have taken care to put the references from which I have taken the material for this article. Have you even gone through the references? Although I am still working on the article and have lots of further references to give.


 * Can you please tell me, which parts do you find constitute original Research or POV, so that I can immediately work on it? (Masculinity (talk) 11:11, 16 September 2008 (UTC))


 * The policies at WP:OR and WP:NPOV are pretty clear. But for starters, note the statement in WP:OR that articles should not contain "any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position" - in particular see WP:SYN. andy (talk) 12:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you saying in other words that its ok to advance the position of the dominant western viewpoint but not the others? Have you gone through the list of published references that I have provided from which I have quoted?
 * I'd appreciate if you could give me specific portions from my article that you think is not supported by published references. Or are you saying that I must use exactly the same words as in the published material? Surely, I don't see that for other articles.
 * Are you going to just accuse me of having original research, without even reading the stuff or without bothering to tell me where you think is original research?(Masculinity (talk) 18:37, 16 September 2008 (UTC))

Proposed deletion of Differences on the Concept of Sexual Orientation
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Differences on the Concept of Sexual Orientation, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 18:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD of Heterosexualization
Hi Masculinity, another user has nominated that article for deletion. You can comment in the deletion discussion at Articles for deletion/Heterosexualization (2nd nomination). <b style="color:#990066;">Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing 02:55, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Non-westernized concepts of male sexuality
You seem to be struggling somewhat with your editing of this article, in particular, your use of sources and images. It would be very useful, if you can go away and study the problems that you are having with your editing before filling the edit history of this article with non-constructive edits and thus burying counting changes for other editors. You should also be making use of the preview function before editing an article and making yet another mistake. I hope you take this well, as most of your problems span from a lack of technical understanding when it comes to MediaWiki. It appears that your intentions are good, but action has been and continues to be taken against editors who are seen to be disruptive.

Your starting point should be the welcome message posted t the top of this page. Good luck. forestPIG(grunt) 18:45, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Point well taken. And thanks for the advice. I was really struggling to upload pics.(Masculinity (talk) 19:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC))

Copyright problems
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Dude you're a fag, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, Dude you're a fag appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Dude you're a fag has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Dude you're a fag and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Dude you're a fag with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Dude you're a fag.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. Kpjas (talk) 21:32, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Men's spaces
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Men's spaces, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * Already covered by sexual segregation should be deleted or merged.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Adam in MO Talk 09:45, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism on you talk page
I reverted this hateful personal attack on you talk page. I assume this to be ok. Good job on the LGBT articles, btw --Adam in MO Talk 09:50, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I was wrong about this.--Adam in MO Talk 17:43, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Men's spaces (20 December 2008)
Hi, the Men's spaces article was recently prodded as noted above. I removed the prod in objection (though it may go through a AFD/Articles for Deletion nomination if nominated at a later date) and did some minor cleanup (minor edits and tags). This article (and the Non-westernized concepts of male sexuality one) have interesting concepts (speaking as a westerner) and it would be great if they could be salvaged (and expanded and clarified, etc), but if they don't make more progress toward a WP:NPOV tone (more neutral-reading language, balanced opinions, more fact less opinion, etc) they may end up deleted in the future. It would also be very helpful if you would list actual cultures/societies in examples instead of stating that the entire non-western world is such and such way. Thanks, Outsider80 (talk) 22:01, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello Outsider, and thank you (a) for appreciating the articles as well as to have done your bit to salvage the article on Men's spaces. I appreciate. And I could definitely do with your support on Wikipedia to salvage my contributions from being sabotaged by a powerful section of the LGBT editors on Wikipedia.


 * As far as the article on "Non-Westernized concepts of male sexuality" are concerned, I think I should update you as to what has gone on about the page since the last one and a half years. In the beginning, I wanted to make some changes to the pages on 'gay', 'homosexuality' and 'sexual orientation' to bring in non-western viewpoint, but met with severe opposition from some very aggressive LGBT editors. Then I decided to create another page for this viewpoint. They again made it almost impossible for me to put up this page, inspite of giving several references, and in the end, in exasperation, I left wikipedia.


 * When I returned after six months, I found to my pleasant surprise that some western editors had not only resurrected the page but had improved it tremendously, apparently, these people were as powerful as the LGBT editors who just went beyond the Wiki rules to sabotage the page because the information did not gel well with the powerful LGBT lobby.


 * What you're seeing here is the page that has been vastly improved and 'wikified'. In fact, one of the prominent members of Wikipedia seems to have given his support to the page, and that is why it is still there, otherwise the LGBT lobby will just not let me be.


 * Therefore, may I kindly request you to remove the objections and tags that you've placed. If you have particular concerns we can discuss them openly under the discussion page and make changes accordingly.


 * I hope to get your support in future as well. I am going to need it very much.


 * regards. (Masculinity (talk) 11:35, 27 December 2008 (UTC))


 * Hi, Masculinity, I hope you continue to contribute in these areas — having multiple viewpoints and different perspectives being brought to the table helps Wikipedia. Would like to touch on 2 things you brought up:
 * (a) the cleanup tags are part of Wikipedia, and are intended as positive constructive requests, and not negativity. Having specific cleanup tags about specific issues can help various people contributing to an article improve it past being a candidate for PROD/deletion nominations. person A might not know how to fix a certain problem (or what a previous editor meant by something), but the next editor to come along to the page might be able to fix the issue. (in summary, the tags are not to "piss on your parade" (to use a crude expression lol), but to facilitate improvement to the article.)
 * (b) Not all editors who are LGBT share the same viewpoints and opinions (just like with any other demographic group of editors). I strongly recomend checking out WP:SPIRIT (especially the first part) if you are having issues with editors of other viewpoints. Even if you believe that other editors are not acting in good faith, it is in your best interests to continue to "AGF" (assume good faith) or at least carry on as if you were assuming good faith. Taking an adversarial/defensive posture actually is counterproductive to contributing information you are passionate about and knowledgable about to Wikipedia (whatever the topic is). Some people have likened Wikipedia to a massive online multi-user role-playing game (even though it is not a game, per se) - some aspects of that analogy actually are true. It helps if you "play the game" instead of taking on a me against the world stance. (which just results in the world seeing you in a combative posture and themselves becoming defensive.) This advice is not intended as condescending or attacking, just something I have learned myself (and read) as well, in my experience here at Wikipedia. Hope you stick around, more viewpoints and perspectives are a good thing. Outsider80 (talk) 17:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Queer heterosexual, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NPervez (talk) 14:00, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Queer heterosexual
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Queer heterosexual, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Neologism

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Ryan Delaney talk 14:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Just so you know, I have done some work on trying to improve this page with the limited knowledge at my disposal. I suggest that you revisit the page and flesh out some more. Mish (talk) 10:46, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You've done a wonderful job Mish. Thanks. Right now, I do not have any further information on the subject to add. But, I'll keep adding it as and when I get them. Meanwhile, can you add this page to the various portals, and the template on Gender/ sexual identities? (Masculinity (talk) 08:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC))

WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  17:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Your contribution to the Homosexuality page
I thought the material you brought in was very important and would fill a major gap in that article. I would encourage you to find a couple of sources to back it up and to return it to the article. Let me know if you need a hand with the final editing. Haiduc (talk) 11:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you, however I've had a pretty negative experience with this page. Almost anything I add, with all the relevant sources are just struck down. I am reduced to a minority that cannot do anything. But, I'll try.(Masculinity (talk) 20:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC))


 * It's not the what, it's the how. Your last edit, for example, was well intentioned but perhaps not on point. You tried to insert your argument into a paragraph that talks about about closeted people. I do not think that you can talk about people without a homosexual orientation being closeted. On the other hand, you can talk about people hiding their same-sex flings. Two separate things. Still, you have to bring some sources to back all this up. Haiduc (talk) 23:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello Haiduc. It seems I was too occupied to carry on this conversation, and then I just forgot about it. I would like to continue it now. The problem is, 'sexual orientation' is a very modern, Westernized concept which only works if men in general are heterosexualized. In the entire non-West, there is no such thing as a sexual orientation, and men can form deep relationships with women as well as men. Although, the social system is such that men marry women, but their more meaningful relations are only with men. "Sexual Orientation" doesn't make sense in this scenario. So, you can only talk about being closeted in a Westernized context, where the sexual orientation concept is valid. Also, its only in the West that there are immense pressures on men to be heterosexual. In the non-West, the pressures exist only to get married. So, again, men need not be "into closet," and men often in some ways acknowledge that they like men in men's spaces (even if they don't acknowledge that in formal spaces, which gives teeth to the false propaganda of there being a 'sexual orientation' and men being divided into hetero-homo). I'm telling you out of personal and work experiences. The Wikipedia page on homosexuality negates all that and presumes that 'sexual orientation' as seen and defined in the West is universal, and thus even biological, which is problematic. Even in the West, lots of people have been protesting against the society's validation of 'sexual orientation,' even though they're helpless. Of course I agree that whatever is given should be cited.(Masculinity (talk) 04:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC))

Your recent changes to the lead of the Gender article
Hello, Masculinity. I remember you. You most likely do not remember me, because we did not converse for too long, but it was at the Homosexuality article (back in 2008). Anyway, I reverted your recent changes to the lead of the Gender article. The reasons why are stated there. I would be more than willing to work out the design of the lead with you. Flyer22 (talk) 18:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The same goes for the Gender role article. Flyer22 (talk) 18:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

wholesale repetitions within an article and other edits
Since you're the editor whose work I just substantially edited and you may find the reasons useful, please see Talk:Sexual_orientation. Thanks and best wishes. Nick Levinson (talk) 20:24, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Human male sexuality
Hi Masculinity. I reverted your unreferenced edit to Human male sexuality, but regretted this and put most of it back in. However, it really needs a reference! Please put it in, so it won't be removed again... Lova Falk  talk  11:43, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Introductions and sources
Masculinity, if you're going to make such big changes, then you must provide sources for your information. If the concept of gender is understood differently on a West/non-West basis, then it would be right and proper for the gender article to provide this information. However, you must provide sources, such as articles written by or quoting expert philosophers or social scientists who hold this view.

I figure that you believe that your concept of gender is right and you want to get accurate information out to the readers, but you're going to have to do it with reliable sources or your contributions aren't going to stay visible very long. Using sources will also make your contribs look more credible, which could have a bigger effect on more readers in the long run.

The other problem is that your changes were in the wrong place. The introduction of the article should cover what the concept is long before getting into how the concept is understood differently in different parts of the world. Unlike, say, orientalism, the way cultures differ from each other isn't central to the concept of gender. You might want to take a look at WP: LEAD for more information on what a Wikipedia introduction should look like. Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Did you write this article?
http://men-masculinity.newsvine.com/_news/2008/10/06/1957783-heterosexualization-of-men-and-their-spaces
 * It seems very similar to the early edits of men's spaces. It would be a copyright violation if it is not your original work, and even if it is your work, we generally discourage direct copying and aside from the other issues this article has it would be good to re-write it.  —  Soap  —  22:55, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * All I can say is this newsvine article has been copied from the Wikipedia, and not the other way round. As about the other issues, plz go ahead and rewrite it.(Masculinity (talk) 10:56, 19 September 2010 (UTC))

Proposed deletion of Men's spaces


The article Men's spaces has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Seems to be a synthesis of many different papers, trying to make a claim that is not actually verified by any of them, either individually or taken together.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  — Soap  —  02:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Men's spaces
Hi, I hate to bother you, but can you fix this article's many serious issues? Please fix the issues tagged in the article. If you need assistance, please contact me. Bearian (talk) 22:49, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride!
<div style="padding:3em; font-family:'Helvetica Neue',sans-serif; font-size:110%; line-height:1.75;"> You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!


 * What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
 * When? June 2015
 * How can you help?
 * 1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
 * 2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
 * 3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2016
As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?
 * Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
 * Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
 * Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 21:32, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Introduction to Eunuch Article
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Eunuch, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Basically, the additions you made to the introduction just feel rather out of place. There is a lot of focus on the word "eunuch" as an insult, which doesn't really belong in an introduction to a subject. On the other hand, the piece about being a Eunuch for the sake of God could be a worthwhile additions. Could you clean it up a bit, maybe pull some of that material out of the introduction you wrote and put it into its own section? I've reverted the changes you made due to the overall tone that it invokes, but I suspect much of that material could be worthwhile otherwise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sawyeke (talk • contribs) 00:20, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for pointing out the problem with my additions. I would try to realign it in a separate section. There is a problem with the introduction section previously (and there still is) to correct which I had made the changes. E.g., it is misleading to say that a person who is not inclined to marry or is celibate may be referred to as a 'eunuch,' except as a put down -- just like a person holding hands with another man may be referred to as 'gay' by a westerner, but that is not the real definition of gay. Therefore, I suggest that this line be taken out altogether.(Masculinity (talk) 11:27, 5 August 2017 (UTC))

Moved your comment
Hi, I moved your latest comments (without changing it) to the end of the talk page you wrote it on. I hope you don't mind. New sections go at the end of the page. I have taken notice of the comment and will read through the page. I don't have access to a great many sources, but I have some relevant material and may be able to help. -- Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:34, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks(Masculinity (talk) 10:51, 22 February 2020 (UTC))
 * about the text about Assyrian law that your reverted, I don't know where to talk about it, so I'll do it here. The problem is that the ancient law does not stipulate any homosexual act to be punishable ... but only that which involves:


 * - Penetrative sex


 * - By a high class male


 * - Upon an equally high class male


 * Which means that:


 * - If a high class male penetrates a low class male, he will not be punished.


 * - If a low class male penetrates a low class nale, he will not be punished


 * - If a high class male gets penetrated by or performs any other sexual act with another high class male, he will not be punished.


 * To claim that any sexual act between any two males (homosexuality) was punishable by castration is a gross misrepresentation of facts. It's like saying heterosexuality was punishable, when only rape was so.


 * I don't have access to scholarly papers, but here's something I found on an internet article (there are hoards of internet entries, including on Wikipedia that say the same thing).:


 * http://epistle.us/hbarticles/neareast.html


 * "Table A, paragraph 20 deals with a physical act done, not just a rumor: “If a seignior [an Assyrian man] lay with his neighbor [another citizen], when they have prosecuted him (and) convicted him [the first citizen], they shall lie with him (and) turn him into a eunuch.”14 This describes a situation where a man has forced sex upon a local resident or business partner, who then has the option of bringing a charge against him. Noticeably, the perpetrator is punished while the victim is not; so the crime here is rape. Homosexuality itself is not condemned, nor looked upon as immoral or disordered. Anyone could visit a prostitute or lay with another male, as long as false rumors or forced sex were not involved with another Assyrian male. Still, both of these laws suggest that for a male to take the submissive woman’s role in same-sex intercourse was looked down upon as shameful and despised.15"
 * (Masculinity (talk) 11:18, 22 February 2020 (UTC))


 * Thanks. We can discuss this on the article talk page - that would be fine too - but as you have begun here, I will continue here. The first thing to say is apologies for reverting the edit. It is not that I disagree with you (I think you are likely to be right), it is just that this is not what the quoted source says, and all claims on a page should agree with the citations.


 * So the next question is where to find a citation that is clearer on this. What you have is a good start. It would also be fairly easy to find sources to this effect in the Roman period, because the Romans wrote a lot, and this power relation issue is clearly sourced in the Roman period. The problem is we are going back further, and need to be careful that we do not assume a homogeneity of viewpoint throughout history. Thus what we are looking for is an academic treatise that makes the point that can source the claim. You may well have found one there, so I will read it now and see if we can expand or adapt the text to fit. -- Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:43, 22 February 2020 (UTC)


 * And now I have read what Bruce Gerig has to say. I think he speaks with some authority, yet he makes claims that he does not substantiate ("his describes a situation where a man has forced sex upon a local resident or business partner...") and he seems to write with an agenda. Who is he? Google shows up various essays but no books or academic papers that I can find. He does have citations in "The Epistle", a Christian magazine. This piece seems to come from there, but then it may seem that there is an agenda here. It would be problematic to quote that in an article demonstrating that homosexuality was not frowned upon in Assyrian life. Again, that may well be perfectly true - but we need a reference that shows that clearly. -- Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:59, 22 February 2020 (UTC)