Talk:List of LGBT slang terms

List of LGBT slurs

References are a retarded mess. Lots of books like "Green" referred to without actually providing info as to what frigging book it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.250.21.152 (talk) 15:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Carpet Munch = Perfectly Acceptable SChalice (talk) 07:05, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Am I missing the commonly used "pansy" and "cocksucker" for slang terms for gay men Dre0303 (talk) 19:55, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Pansy = effeminate, non-aggressive, but not necessarily homosexual male. Cocksucker = hmmm, having trouble keeping a straight face … so, I had (a looong time ago) a girlfriend who actually loved giving head — and she was good at it. She called herself a "World Class Cocksucker." I'm pretty sure she wasn't a gay male. Go figure.  — Myk Streja ^(beep) 18:39, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

---

List of LGBT slurs → List of LGBT slang – Some of these aren't even slurs. And more importantly with a new title, we can incorporate LGBT slang, as that has no list, and very few examples.relisted--Mike Cline (talk) 15:17, 28 December 2011 (UTC) CTJF83 13:10, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

I would rather have this article deleted.

It serves no encyclopedic value and is acting more as a VIZ dictionary for offensive terms.

Thanks Jenova20 13:19, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

That's why I want to transform it to more slang terms Twink (gay slang), Bear (gay culture), Gaydar, and other words on Template:LGBT slang CTJF83 13:22, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Still doesn't seem that notable to me.

I support your requested move though and am glad you are working on the article rather than expanding on the current list of offensive insults.

Thanks Jenova20 13:47, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

I also don't see any encyclopedic value in the list as it now is. It can be deleted in its entirety with no loss of important encyclopedic information. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 14:00, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

The slang may have encyclopedic value as the LGBT community relies heavily on it and it's documented everywhere, especially the examples CTJF used.

List of racial insults could probably be deleted easily though.

There's a few more like List of ethnic slurs etc

Thanks Jenova20 14:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Please stick to discussing the renaming proposal. If you feel it should be deleted, take it to the proper venue. Thanks, CTJF83 14:08, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

• Transwiki to wiktionary as an appendix 70.24.244.248 (talk) 05:39, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

• Relisting comment: Please clearly state Opposes/Supports and avoid discussion of deletion in this discussion. If deletion is desired, please WP:PROD the article or take it to WP:AFD. --Mike Cline (talk) 15:17, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support as a more neutral term. Paved with good intentions (talk) 13:29, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested Move

The article in current state is a list of slurs, not slang. I would like it moved to List of LGBT Slurs so that this article space is free for me to create a List of LGBT slang. As the lede and article are currently clear, "The following is a list of LGBT slurs" - not slang. The article cannot be expanded to incorporate both as it is currently formatted and written. Please post up some responses before i start the process of a requested move. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 12:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I think you should look at turning this into the list of slang with a section devoted to slurs and point out how sometimes they overlap. Insomesia (talk) 13:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I think slurs is more accurate than slang for most of these terms, although there is a gray area of overlap. I support Jenova20's plan of creating a List of LGBT slang article (sans slurs), keeping in mind that there is already an LGBT slang article. I also support copying the slur and slang terms to Wiktionary. - MrX 15:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

After reading your responses does anyone have an issue with me instead merging the two (slurs and slang) into the same List of LGBT slang article? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:11, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I am opposed to moving slurs to the LGBT slang article as I think it's out of scope. I think it would be better to move the (incontestable) slang terms to LGBT slang and then move what remains in this article to List of LGBT Slurs. - MrX 15:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

And so splitting the article into two? With the removed content being the non-slang slurs? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Sort of, but reverse it. What I had in mind was taking the few, clearly slang terms out of this article (List of LGBT slang), for example terms such as 'Queen', and moving them to the existing article, LGBT slang. Then rename/move this article to Listggf LGBT Slurs (your original proposal). Many of these terms are equally as offensive as terms like porch monkey, WOP or kike, and clearly don't belong on a list of slang terms. - MrX 15:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

But, because there is overlap i just planned to move the slurs into their article and add more to the slang. Terms like queen are used by both gays and homophobes, while words such as chink, wop, negro and faggot are used exclusively by racists and homophobes. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 17:03, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I see. I guess that would work also. - MrX 17:59, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Faggot, is a good example of why one article may work better. It's a common slur yet usage - such as Dan Savage's long running syndicated column uses "Hey Faggot" purposely to reclaim the word. I think this is common with many (Most? All?) of these slurs. Insomesia (talk) 20:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I considered that as well and it's a valid point. It largely depends on who uses the terms, and how they are interpreted. In my mind, something that starts as a slur and is later reclaimed by members of the LGBT community, is still a slur for purposes of an encyclopedia article. A good example would be nigger/nigga/niggah: it would never occur to me to consider these slang terms, but I suppose there are people who would consider them slang. - MrX 20:33, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Here's an easier alternative then: merge the lot and then we can remove anything, which is only a slur and not reclaimed or slang. It'll be easier when we can see the result. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 09:13, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I'd counter that generally I don't think any should be removed but simply sectioned as commonly seen as slurs. I'd be willing to bet you can find someone who has reclaimed every one of those in some way. Insomesia (talk) 13:00, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Looks like it's a merge then. Thanks for the input ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 13:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Request

May we add that some of these are rather offensive? 216.195.228.107 (talk) 03:28, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Potentially anything is offensive to someone or something, that should go without saying. Doesn't "Slang" also convey that the word or phrase may be controversial and/or offensive? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 09:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't "Slang" also convey that the word or phrase may be controversial and/or offensive?

No, I don't think it does. For example, quid is British English slang for pound, but it isn't a controversial or offensive term for a pound. Unless you mean, because we're already discussing LGBT matters, and such matters are often dealt with in an offhand or wilfully ignorant manner. But that's rather assuming that all LGBT treatment in common usage will be abusive, which isn't necessarily so.

Nuttyskin (talk) 13:59, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

I think you're missing the point. Some of these terms are widely if not universally accepted as offensive slurs. "Slang" is too broad of a term; the slurs need to be labeled.

-Qaus (2018.3.2 11:45AM PST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:601:C980:375A:AC3A:699D:EBE0:5623 (talk) 19:45, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I think the separation of slurs from neutral slang can get complicated. For example, dyke is used as a pejorative, but some lesbians also use it in a positive or neutral fashion. (On the other hand, I'm sure there's plenty of slurs/pejoratives that aren't reappropriated by the LGBT community.) Maybe we should somehow distinguish between terms that are primarily used against LGBT people, pejoratives that have been reappropriated by the LGBT community, and terms that are primarily used by/were invented by LGBT people (e.g., egg, kiki, cishet, baby butch). Different sections, expanded definitions, etc? -Kravk (talk) 16:03, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Encyclopaedic Value of This Page?

Someone above said:

"I would rather have this article deleted.

"It serves no encyclopedic value and is acting more as a VIZ dictionary for offensive terms."

I agree. If this page stands, then we might as well import the whole of Roger's Profanisaurus into pages such as "List of slang terms for sexual intercourse", "List of slang terms for an unpleasant person", etc. 212.159.102.166 (talk) 16:39, 29 November 2013 (UTC) KJN

Yes please delete or change this page significantly! Wikipedia isn't urban dictionary! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.165.178.170 (talk) 20:57, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

I have to agree that this is a poor article. It is very far from comprehensive, little attempt is made to group slang terms regionally, many explanations of derivation are questionable or absent, etc. etc. --Ef80 (talk) 19:44, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

While this page could be better defined, a list defining slurs of different minority groups is appropriate do to the historic changes in cultural identities. There is a difference between defining pejorative terms and terms which may only be seen as offensive, this page is relevant for this reason. KillingsBjorn (talk) 17:17, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of LGBT slang terms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070911013138/http://www.londonslang.com:80/db/u/ to http://www.londonslang.com/db/u/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Notice to anonymous users and page workers: Indef Semi

Following an admin endorsement on WP:RFPP, this article is now under indefinite semi-protection.

• You may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
• Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the {{request edit}} template should be used.
• If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of that page for instructions on how to post requests.

Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) 01:06, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of LGBT slang terms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071022045704/http://www.londonslang.com/db/b/ to http://www.londonslang.com/db/b/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071022045704/http://www.londonslang.com/db/b/ to http://www.londonslang.com/db/b/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071022045704/http://www.londonslang.com/db/b/ to http://www.londonslang.com/db/b/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:41, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Propose moving page

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To not merge given the lack of consensus, and that a better target, given the contents, might be List of LGBT-related slurs. Klbrain (talk) 06:24, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

---

Obviously, this page needs a HUGE trim-down. So many of these terms are derogatory and out-of-date. I propose that it is revised and incorporated into the LGBT Slang (https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/LGBT_slang) page. The LGBT Slang page offers a better format for defining slang terms and also has a small section on the history of LGBT slang. Smnananm (talk) 15:55, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Honestly, I think it would be better if this article was remade to something like List of LGBT slurs which currently redirects here, the slang list on that other page is much better and this could be used for something useful instead.★Trekker (talk) 05:29, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Blegh, yes, the current name poorly distinguishes this article (which according to its lead is intended to be "a list of slang and/or insulting terms for LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) people", emphasis added) from LGBT slang's list of terms used by LGBT people, and from List of LGBT-related slurs (which is ambiguous about whether it's intended to cover only slurs for LGBT-related people, or also things used by LGBT-related people). This confusion seems to have led to the addition just now of 'TERF', which however seems out-of-scope for this article (I see it was also added to List of LGBT-related slurs, highlighting how poorly distinguished these articles are). -sche (talk) 21:20, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Support merge of this article into LGBT slang, or delete of this article. It duplicates other articles, it's poorly formatted, its purview is unclear, its value is questionable. Also, a large number of terms cite "Green 2005", with no source by that name, and with broken links. A145GI15I95 (talk) 17:37, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Support merge per A145GI15I95. Jdcooper (talk) 02:36, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Someone proposed to merge List of LGBT slang terms to LGBT slang but didn't finish this by starting a topic here. Well, for one, I support the idea. This article already has a list, no need to have two articles unless the list gets too long, and right now it seems manageable. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:36, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

DO NOT MERGE - EDIT THIS PAGE! SO many of the terms on this list of slang terms re horribly offensive, and could actually be classified as hate speech. Therefore, by merging this already hugely flawed list with the page defining what lgbt slang is (saying that LGBT people use LGBT slang), you are inciting that the words in this list are words accepted by the queer community. This list of LGBT slang trms should not exist - there is no need to have record (especially if it is without contextualisation about how offensive these terms are) of these bullying words. I hope myself and others can edit the page so it contains up to date colloquial language and slang, such as "top" "bottom" "kiki" etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.41.131.252 (talk) 13:40, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Support merge otherwise keep separate since the proposed target has neutral, non-slang, and offensive words, per 192.41.131.252 above. Doug Mehus T·C 16:04, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Don't merge or alternatively, Delete If the reason for it to be merged is that this list is poorly made/sourced, then.... don't merge. I agree with A145GI15I95 that this page's goal is unclear and it duplicates other article's goals. Outside of deletion, either:

A.) This page should be edited and trimmed down (and made to clearly be about "LGBT slang" used by LGBT people), with information updated and slurs clearly denoted by starting the description with "a slur against..."

B.) The page should be a partial merge and only sourced, currently accurate, or up-to-date information should be merged

C.) This page should be Split, and the sourced slang should merge with LGBT slang and the sourced slurs merged with List of LGBT-related slurs.

Either way, I think the first step is editing/trimming down/updating the inaccuracies in this article. If it's not accurate information, don't move it to somewhere else on Wikipedia. - Whisperjanes (talk) 15:00, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

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

Trap

The word trap in the transgender section is incorrect. The word is used to refer to men who like to trick others into thinking they are women. The LGBT slurs page claims it to be a transphobic slur, yet here it states it is used by trans people to trick cis people. I'm confused.

I must also mention that I have noticed that this word has been up for debate over the past few years.

--- As a trans woman, I agree that the Trap noted in this list is incorrect, Trap is used occasionally in an offensive fashion towords Transpeople in general, however in this article it makes it seem like the term is excluisvely used towords trans women and trans men, when thats not the actual meaning of the slang. Trap, and reverse trap, refer to crossdressers who pass so well that men/women get "trapped". you can see how this can be offensive when used towords transpeople however the term actually refers to crossdressers and is used within the crossdressing community all the time. I believe the article should be edited to note this nuance rather than let it give the idea that the word trap is *only* a transphobic slur when in reality it only *sometimes* is. I do not feel it is a good idea to give off a misconception on the meanings of terms and to make people believe that words cannot have a different meaning that is unrelated to transpeople. NariHari (talk) 20:37, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

We need WP:RS for this. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:42, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Removal of "Trap"

Removed the term "Trap" do to it not being used in the General community & being stated on the List of LGBT-related slurs page as OFFENSIVE! —Thedued (talk) 09:57, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

See WP:NOTCENSORED. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 16:16, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Fix references

This page includes many Harvard-style short citations that don't work well with the other normal-form citations. For example the citation for "Green 2005" does not link to an actual book. Can I change all uses of Template:harv to the equivalent Template:R or Template:Rp templates with working Template:cite book citations? GrahamCracker325 (talk) 05:49, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Boldface

Is there a reason why half the entries are in boldface and half are not? Should all be converted to italics per MOS:WORDSASWORDS? —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 16:14, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Page name change

Why are other pages that list slurs (ethinic slurs, etc.) actually called "slurs" but those used against LGBT people are minimalized and called merely "slang"? The page should be called "LGBT Slurs" or similar, as opposed to "slang terms." Inhighspeed (talk) 10:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I would support changing the article name if all entries were slurs, however multiple entries appear to be slag terms which are not slurs. Greyjoy ^talk 10:56, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 June 2021

Change “Shemale” & “Lady Boy” to also be listed as slurs. 2607:FEA8:F1C0:A100:B95F:6D2D:130E:5822 (talk) 20:19, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

 Partly done: I noted that shemale is considered derogatory and associated with pornography per the relevant article's sourcing, but didn't see any similar sources or claims on the Kathoey article, to which Ladyboy redirects. If you can provide a reliable source that it is derogatory I will insert it. --Equivamp - talk 20:28, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Reliable source?

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

There is consensus not to cite the peevish source in this article. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 07:46, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

---

Regarding the self-published slang dictionary here:

• http://www.peevish.co.uk/slang: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

Is this source is adequately reliable for our purpose in this article? Elizium23 (talk) 00:55, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Comment. Has there been any prior discussion on this? Gaelan 💬✏️ 01:54, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Comment Self-published sources are usually not reliable. I'd advice to see if the desired content is available in other websites. --NoonIcarus (talk) 18:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

No It is self-published. 06:37, 14 June 2021 (UTC) TOA The owner of all ☑️

No for self-published sources Spudlace (talk) 19:41, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Maybe (Summoned by bot)} It's self-published, but appears to curated by an academic (Ted Duckworth on slang@manchester.ac.uk is the contact) at Manchester Univ, so it is not wholly dismissable - especially given that this is a fairly marginal and problematic area of study anyway (what would be the threshold for inclusion of any slang term anywhere?). The entries on the whole seemed very 'mainstream' (especially as it is for all UK slang, and only incidentally LGBT terms) - so the likelihood is that in most instances a better source would exist. Pincrete (talk) 07:44, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

No it looks self-published. And in dealing with slang the criteria is pretty much mention it to me and I will post it [1]. I perceive issues with WP:NEOLOGISM.Ramos1990 (talk) 03:53, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

No This is self-published. Sea Ane (talk) 22:35, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Removed terms from article

I am moving unsourced terms here so that we can locate WP:RS for them.

1. Todger dodger
2. Harry hoofter
3. Knob jockey
4. Marmite miner
5. Jobby jabber
6. Nancy or nancy boy, girlyboy
7. Poof (variations include: poofter, pouf, poove, pooftah, pooff, puff)
8. Queen, princess and variations
9. Dinge queen
10. Curry queen
11. Drag queen
12. Gym queen
13. Pissy queen
14. Scat queen
15. Shit stabber
16. Turd burglar
17. Cock jockey
18. Cock knocker, cockknocker and cocknocker
19. Fag hag
20. Breeder

• Thanks Elizium23 (talk) 14:01, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@Elizium23: I found some sources, quoted below. Talib1101 (talk) 01:37, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Fag hag

"Sure, you may hear about some random 'dyke tyke' or 'lesbro' (two terms that, unlike fag hag, are hardly part of the popular slang vocabulary and actually required me to do some intensive googling), but their existence is clearly minimal."

"The term fag hag is normally used in gay male culture to describe a straight woman who associates with gay men."

"noun Slang: Usually Disparaging and Offensive. a heterosexual woman who seeks out or particularly enjoys the company of gay men."

Breeder

"Slang: Sometimes Offensive. a term used by gay people to refer to a heterosexual person."

"offensive a heterosexual"

References

Dictionary.com

I have doubts about the appropriate use of dictionary.com to source a few entries as has recently been done. I would note that on the bottom of the page to these entries, there is a disclaimer: NOTE This is not meant to be a formal definition of enby like most terms we define on Dictionary.com, but is rather an informal word summary that hopefully touches upon the key aspects of the meaning and usage of enby that will help our users expand their word mastery. and I would suggest that dictionary.com is actually disclaiming these terms as outside of their canonical lexicon, and would not be suitable for inclusion here. Elizium23 (talk) 01:10, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

The word enby is obviously not in use by most people because it's a word for nonbinary, which most people don't know about. But the word is very common / well known in nonbinary spaces. So, it's not included within Dictionary.com's main canon because it's slang used by a small minority. But this Wikipedia article is directly focusing on LGBT slang, so I think it makes sense to include here. Most of the words on this list are not used by the majority, but they are known within their specific community. Linguist97 (talk) 01:57, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Linguist97, WP:DUE requires for inclusion in articles that an item be adequately covered in reliable secondary sources. If we can only find it in niche or unreliable sources, it isn't worth including at all. Elizium23 (talk) 01:58, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I replaced the reference for enby with the one used on Non-binary gender. --Equivamp - talk 02:02, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

remove cisgender?

This article as I understand it is a list of words referring to LGBT people, therefore it should not include cisgender heterosexual people. I think that either the article should be reformatted to specify "words used by the LGBT community" or the cisgender section should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linguist97 (talk • contribs) 01:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I think that widening the scope would not be a problem. Elizium23 (talk) 02:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I think this article LGBT slang is better for "slang used by the LGBT community," and I think most of the cisgender words could be moved here. I dunno, this page is a mess, haha. Maybe this whole page should be merged into LGBT slang.

HuffPo

Huffington Post Contributors are not reliable, per WP:RSP. The source cited was indeed by a Contributor and has remained online since their discontinuation of the featured content. Elizium23 (talk) 02:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, the I'll source for that particular content from the huffpost article is genderqueerid.com . is that a "reliable source? AFAICT, that was the only term in the HuffPost article that used such source. Some of the terms (but not all) in said article seem almost facetious. so, I'm not sure one way or the other. I think another source ought to be sought, but I don't think outright deletion should be done either. i also make note that general reliability guidelines on specific sources are likely not as applicable for a page like this. Firejuggler86 (talk) 23:43, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Merge discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Let's undo this unfortunate WP:CFORK. The topic area is completely duplicated. Elizium23 (talk) 02:17, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose - after looking at LGBT slang, the content doesnt appear to me to be "completely duplicated" at all. It MAY perhaps be that most (or all, I don't really know) of the terms here are ALSO there; however, this page is strictly a list of terms applied to people, while that list appears to be just a hodge podge collection of all LGBT-related slang generally (and some that isn't LGBT-related at all, e.g., about a dozen or so entries having to do with asexuality. To categorise asexuality as LGBT would be like categorising Bosnians as "Asians", even though they're European Slavs, just because they are primarily Muslims). Anyway, that list is HUGE, and this list containing only what it does contain, with those items not being buried amongst all that other stuff is useful. that overlap exists where some of the information is duplicated is not problematic. Trying to merge all overlapped content into enormous articles just to eliminate any and all duplicate content would not improve the encyclopaedia... Firejuggler86 (talk) 21:52, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

  If the articles remain unmerged, then we'll need several serious discussions about scope and article name. Elizium23 (talk) 21:53, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

• Support merge List of LGBT slang terms and LGBT slang are similar concepts. Both articles are list articles. Combine relevant content. Delete every claim and list item which is not backed with a citation to a source. If there is content here outside the scope of LGBT, as Firejuggler says, then that content can go somewhere else. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
• Support Lexid523 (talk) 19:22, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
• Rename both to something like List of slurs and slang describing LGBT people and List of slang terms used by LGBT people to make the distinction clearer. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
• Support as long as all the content from the List of LGBT slang terms page is retained, so I agree with Firejuggler86 on that count. Historyday01 (talk) 03:14, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
• Support as said above ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 18:07, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
• Support TsunTsky (talk) 04:17, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
• I support merging these 2 pages, at least until the list of terms is long enough to justify a content fork. During the merge process, please make sure no slang terms are lost in the process. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:25, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

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

Update: User:Reywas92 merged these pages on April 20, 2022. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2021

change "List of LGBT slang terms" to "List of LGBT slurs" 99.41.160.124 (talk) 10:41, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:52, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Animals in LGBT culture into List of LGBT slang terms

There's already List of LGBT slang terms and LGBT slang that already need to be merged and have a number of these already. There does NOT need to be a separate article for this subset of slang terms. Reywas92^Talk 14:17, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I've started a discussion over at Talk:Animals in LGBT culture. I've explained, Animals in LGBT culture is NOT intended to be specific to slang terms. Also, you've suggested all of these terms are for gay men, when that's not true. Please discuss further before making such drastic changes. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Bears: gay men, Bull: gay men, Chicken/hawk: gay men, otter: gay men, silver fox: gay men, wolf: gay men. Unicorn: I put that in the bisexual section. Puppy and pig: hypothetically anyone but we all know it's for gay men. A separate article is not beneficial.

@Reywas92: You might want to sign your above comment. "hypothetically anyone but we all know it's for gay men" -- citation needed ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:10, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Of course, your complaint that they're not specific to gay men is irrelevant because they're all still slang that belongs in a list of slang. It's easy enough to reorganize to list those that can apply to others in other sections. Reywas92^Talk 16:16, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I still think the Animals in LGBT culture entry should have an overview of the animal slang terms, even if editors decide that the list of animals terms belongs over at LGBT slang. The slang terms are part of the intersection of animals and LGBT culture. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:42, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Right, exactly. That's why I think this article is valuable. It is definitely an article which should be on here. Historyday01 (talk) 17:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Oppose merge. I've added a new Unicorns section which has nothing to do with slang. Further work is needed to expand this entry. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:30, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I've also started a section for fictional LGBT animals. Again, has nothing to do with slang. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:07, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

This has gotten to be even more absurd WP:SYNTH. If these have nothing to do with the slang, maybe this shouldn't be an article. There is no encyclopedic basis to say a mythological creature seen with rainbows and glitter has anything to do with calling a bodybuilder a bull, or that those have anything to do with animated animals in media that are gay. Please draftify until you have something that's a legitimate unified topic. (Still, there's no reason the slang terms shouldn't be at the list of slang terms.) Reywas92^Talk 15:27, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Strong Oppose. Its not the same as slang terms. Sure, it is related, but NOT the same. Historyday01 (talk) 14:37, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Nonsense. His primary source is literally called "Popular Gay Slang Inspired by the Animal Kingdom". The fact that this article is not in the best shape and there is consensus to merge with LGBT slang does not mean this a separate page for this subset of slang is needed. Reywas92^Talk 14:45, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Where are you getting there is "consensus" to merge, when the only !votes above are against merging? --Kbabej (talk) 15:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I am referring to Talk:List_of_LGBT_slang_terms#Merge_discussion. There is consensus to merge these two pages, which I'm working on. Reywas92^Talk 15:57, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Except the fact that that discussion was about merging two pages about LGBTQ slang terms while the Animals in LGBT culture page is about MORE than just about slang. You can't compare apples and oranges. For instance, I wouldn't say "Bear culture" is slang, but its become a name used to describe a part of gay culture. So, the consensus you say does NOT exist from the current discussion. I would give Another Believer and others time to expand the page before jumping the gun on this topic. I can already think of some ways to expand that page with mentions of popular culture, as in the Simpsons episode Much Apu About Nothing they reference Queer Nation and bears as noted by Queer Theories. Also noted here, even mentioned in the National Review of all places. That's just from a quick search and I'd guess there is more. The Bear culture page I listed above already has a "References in popular culture and art" section, so some of those examples could be moved into Animals in LGBT culture page. Historyday01 (talk) 17:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Well put, @Historyday01. I agree that "the consensus you say does NOT exist from the current discussion." Quite the opposite, in fact. --Kbabej (talk) 17:33, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not sure why they are claiming a non-existent consensus and threatening today that they could nominate the "Animals in LGBT culture" page for deletion, saying, in part "...I will absolutely AFD if you want this page to synthesize a slang glossary and interest in animals often seen with rainbows." Yikes. Historyday01 (talk) 17:38, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Jesus Christ, I said there is a consensus at Talk:List_of_LGBT_slang_terms#Merge_discussion to merge List of LGBT slang terms and LGBT slang, which I have now completed. I never said there is a consensus yet to merge Animals in LGBT culture, how can you be so dense after I provided the links to both that merge discussion and that target article and you could see my edits completing the merge of these two articles I said I was "working on"? Did you really think I was saying a consensus existed to merge a new article from an older discussion? Yikes... "Bear" is absolutely a slang term, which is why it's appropriately listed at LGBT slang, and is one which also has an associated culture. But that's utterly irrelevant to unicorns and Arthur and furries. Historyday01, you seem to have missed that at the time I created this, the article ONLY had slang and was devoid of those topics, which were only added when threatened with merging. Obviously I do not think those topics belong in the slang article. Reywas92^Talk 20:08, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm not "dense," its just that you weren't as clear as you could have been. I still think the Animals in LGBT culture section can and should be its own article. It can and should be expanded going forward. I don't think the threat to merge it was necessary. As I said before, I think you jumped the gun on this, and I'd say it makes sense that it has its own page. It is better to discuss these things without threat of merging or deletion. I know the latter because another LGBTQ article (List of feature films with LGBT characters if you are interested) I was working on got threatened with deletion and people floated all sorts of ideas on how to improve it. But after the AfD had ended, not one of those people, including those who favored deletion, contributed to improve the page, showing that the whole AfD was a total waste of time. I don't want that type of thing to happen with this article. Historyday01 (talk) 02:14, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Oppose merge. The Animals in LGBT culture article is more than just slang, and is being expanded as we "speak". Look at the subsections: as the article currently stands, there are subsections not having to do with slang that include Animal roleplay and furry fandom; fictional LGBT animals; and Unicorns. This article was also just created yesterday - I don't see the rush to merge it when it's obviously undergoing a major expansion. --Kbabej (talk) 15:56, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't know why they are rushing this. It seems strange they are rushing to merge. What's the big hurry? Historyday01 (talk) 17:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)