Talk:Lesbian/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2021

can you please write that lesbian is non men attracted to non men? thanks! 2A02:908:950:B8A0:8DF5:42D1:6B66:C9F (talk) 21:16, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --Equivamp - talk 21:20, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 9 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Livrendon.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Lesbian isn't a blanket term for sapphic women.

That's just plain incorrect. Lesbian = any non man loving non man, that includes nonbinary lesbians and trans lesbians. NOT bi/pan women. They're bi or pan or omni or whatever else, if they like men in a sexual/romantic way they're not a lesbian. 2603:7081:1000:1CC:DC32:FB4E:2D6:D501 (talk) 02:02, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

A Lesbian has to be a woman in some capacity. A male-born, male presenting individual who identifies as non-binary cannot be a lesbian.2A00:23C4:3E08:4001:4C38:F69:C8FF:EF36 (talk) 16:48, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Comment I'm wondering why are you coming here to say this when the article doesn't even mention/address bi/pan lesbian. And the word woman doesn't exclude non-binary individuals, it's not only about binary cis women, it's implicitly/indirectly/adherently included. — Tazuco 17:06, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Most people will concede that someone who presents as a woman can be a lesbian, regardless of whether they are cis or not. Pan/Bi “Lesbians” do not exist, prove otherwise. 2A00:23C4:3E08:4001:F4A6:30E:7226:A889 (talk) 10:25, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Lavender Woman, Volume 2, Issue 5, August 1973: "What is a Lesbian? To me, a lesbian is a woman-oriented woman; bisexuals can be lesbians. A lesbian does not have to be exclusively woman oriented, she does not have to prove herself in bed, she does not have to hate men, she does not have to be sexually active at all times, she does not have to be a radical feminist. She does not have to like bars, like gay culture, or like being gay. When lesbians degrade other lesbians for not going to bars, not coming out, being bisexual or not sexually active, and so on, we oppress each other."–Trish Miller, “Bisexuality,”

"The definition of lesbian that I suggest, one that conforms to the two methodological considerations above, is the following:

5. Lesbian is a woman who has sexual and erotic-emotional ties primarily with women or who sees herself as centrally involved with a community of self-identified lesbians whose sexual and erotic-emotional ties are primarily with women; and who is herself a self-identifed lesbian.

My definition is a sociopolitical one; that is, it attempts to include in the term lesbian the contemporary sense of lesbianism as connected with a subcultural community, many members of which are opposed to defining themselves as dependent on or subordinate to men. It defines both bisexual and celibate women as lesbians as long as they identify themselves as such and have their primary emotional identification with a community of self-defined lesbians. Furthermore, for reasons I will outline shortly, there was no lesbian community in which to ground a sense of self before the twentieth century, a fact which distinguishes the male homosexual community from the lesbian community. Finally, it is arguable that not until this particular stage in the second wave of the women’s movement and in the lesbian-feminist movement has it been politically feasible to include self-defined lesbian bisexual women into the lesbian community.

Many lesbian feminists may not agree with this inclusion. But it may be argued that to exclude lesbian bisexuals from the community on the grounds that “they give energy to men” is overly defensive at this point. After all, a strong women’s community does not have to operate on a scarcity theory of nurturant energy! On feminist principles the criterion for membership in the community should be a woman’s commitment to giving positive erotic-emotional energy to women. Whether women who give such energy to women can also give energy to individual men (friends, fathers, sons, lovers) is not the community’s concern." –Ann Ferguson, “Patriarchy, Sexual Identity, and the Sexual Revolution,” Signs, Autumn 1981.

"Individuals who came together a month ago to discuss bisexuality and its relationship to radical feminism decided recently to begin a serious, regular study group on human sexuality and its social/political/psychological manifestations in our culture.

There are eight of us in the group. For all, understanding bisexuality, both in our own lives and and in our society, is a primary goal. To this end, we decided on a format of readings and discussion, with a facilitator for each meeting, that would bring us through the range of sexual options available in the United States today, from male-identified heterosexuality to lesbianism, to a final informed examination of bisexuality in the context of all that we had learned. Throughout our exploration, feminism will provide both a point of departure, and a point of return.

We started by trying to define some terms, specifically “feminism,” “gay-identified bisexual,” and “bisexual”. Alot of us were amazed to see how many different interpretations each term, especially “gay-identified,” could have. Is someone “gay-identified” because they devote a majority of their time, energy and emotion to the gay community? Or does an individual’s radical critique of heterosexuality make them “gay-identified”? And does “gay-identified” also imply “women-identified”? Some people felt that one could be gay-identified, and still not be woman-identified. And exactly how many Meg Christian concerts make you “lesbian-identified”?

We didn’t reach any conclusions, but had fun realizing that being bisexuals, we are dealing with a whole realm of experiences that can be classified in any number of different ways; and that the variety of possible bisexual lifestyles is as varied as the women who are in the Network."–Barb H, “Study Group,” BBWN, Vol. 2 No. 4, July-Aug 1984

Lani Kaahumanu, "Bisexuality & Discrimination", BBWM Vol. 3, No. 6, Dec 1985-Jan 1986: :::"...my lesbian awareness isn’t lost now that I claim my bisexuality [...] My political consciousness is lesbian but my lifestyle is bisexual..."

Robyn Ochs, "Bi of the Month: Betty Aubut", Bi Women Vol. 5, No. 2, April-May 1987: :::"I call myself a “bisexual lesbian.” I will always politically identify as bisexual, which to me means opposing restrictive categories [...] I consider myself gay. I think bisexuals are gay and gay liberation is our liberation..."

Amy Wyeth, "Don't Assume Anything", Bi Women Vol. 13, No. 4, Aug-Sep 1995:

"Unfortunately, many of my experiences as a lesbian-identified bisexual woman have said to me that having an appearance or demeanor that diverges from the expected means I will not be accepted as truly belonging in the lesbian community."

Naomi Tucker, Liz Highleyman, and Rebecca Kaplan, "Bisexual Politics: Theories, Queries, and Visions", 1995: "I am not just bisexual I am a lesbian I am not just a lesbian I am a bisexual lesbian [...] I have the right to claim my lesbianism and my bisexuality even if it confuses you."

"I recognize that homophobia is at the root of biphobia. I came to lesbianism long before my sexuality was clear to me. I lived an open lesbian lifestyle for four years. I cannot deny the importance of this experience, nor do I want to. For me lesbian identity is more than, and/or in addition to sexuality; it is a political awareness which bisexuality doesn’t altar or detract from. 10 years ago when I left my husband and full-time role of motherhood, it didn’t make me less conscious of what being a mother means. In fact, it gave me a deeper understanding. I am still a mother. That experience cannot be taken away from me. In much the same way, my lesbian awareness isn’t lost now that I claim my bisexuality. When I realized my woman-loving-woman feelings, and came out as a lesbian, I had no heterosexual privilege; yet there were important males in my life, including a son. I am bisexual because it’s real for me, not in order to acquire or flaunt the privilege that is inherent in being with men. My political consciousness is lesbian but my lifestyle is bisexual. If I keep myself quiet for another’s sense of pride and liberation, it is at the cost of my own which isn’t healthy–emotionally, politically or medically. Not only is it unhealthy, it’s ineffective. Since I have come out I have triggered many lesbians to blurt in whispered confidence–“I have a man in the closet. You’re brave to be so open. What am I going to do?” These are not easy times. AIDS has given biphobia free reign in the lesbian community (and admittedly with much less destructive effect than how AIDS is fueling homophobia in society at large), it is all right to trash bisexuals, not to trust us for fear of AIDS. Bisexuals are untouchable to some lesbians. We have to deal with oppression in a constructive way or we will be factionalized forever. Time is running out. We have to see the whole and the part we play in it. Forming family communities with people who share your sexual identity is important, but trashing is nonproductive. The sexual choices we make are equally valid for our individual experiences. AIDS is not a gay disease; it is a human tragedy, a plague that doesn’t recognize boundaries. I urge bisexuals to take a political stand, and to become a visible, viable energy force. It is important and timely to open this dialogue in each of our communities. Nobody belongs in the closet. The only way to get a sense of “our” community is for us to begin to speak out and identify ourselves. When we verify the connections and the networks of our oppression, we build a unity that avoids the, “I’m more oppressed than you” syndrome"

–Lani Kaahumanu, “Bisexuality & Discrimination,” BBWN Vol. 3, No. 6, Dec 1985-Jan 1986; Reprinted from the 1985 Gay Pride March magazine, San Francisco

What makes the Third Annual Northeast Conference on Bisexuality what it is? The breakfasts and dinners–the entertainment–the excitement of meeting others who feel like family. My first event of the conference was stumbling onto a cocktail party just around the corner from the Registration Desk, which turned out to be part of the Woman’s History Week! A bit embarrassing after greeting many people with wine glasses in hand, asking them how they heard about the bisexuality conference! I’ll skip now to describe my experiences at the lesbian-identified affinity group and the two workshops I attended. Why do women who identify as lesbians go to a bisexuality conference? There were about 10 of us in the room, each with a different answer. Most of our relationships at the present time were with women; after that the similarity ended. One woman had affairs with men when not seriously involved with women. Another, in a non-monogamous long-term lesbian relationship, had recently begun a sexual involvement with a man. one woman, now involved with a bisexual woman, was here to discuss her feelings about the situation. Some of us had led exclusively lesbian lives for a number of years and were wondering if we’d closed off important parts of ourselves. Whether or not we would act on our sexual attractions for men, acknowledging them were important to us. Our personal herstories contributed to our diverse opinions. For some, coming out was relaxed and easy and relationships with women refreshingly egalitarian. Others found sexual awakening and coming out difficult, and lesbian relationships fraught with many of the same difficulties as straight ones. We also discussed reasons lesbians don’t accept bisexual women, such as fear that she’d leave for a man or desire to preserved woman-only space. We questioned the reality of “heterosexual privilege,” wondering whether any women could really have it. We discussed the sorrows in our lives, such as family histories of alcoholism, incest or physical abuse, and the joys of our relationships, our work and our lives.

–Stacie, “Lesbian-identified Affinity Group Workshops: Lesbian Sexuality & Politics of Sexuality,” BBWN, Vol. 4, No. 2, April-May 1986

Not to mention sapphism is synonymous with lesbianism and sapphic with lesbian.

— Tazuco 19:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Regardless of whatever those sociological sources state, *how* can a woman in a relationship with a man be considered a lesbian, unless she is in the closet? They fail to answer that in its entirety.2A00:23C4:3E08:4001:BDA5:16F1:949C:B1CD (talk) 00:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Bisexual means experiencing both homo and hetero attractions, therefore when experiencing gay attraction she would be considered a lesbian, while experiencing het attraction she would be considered straight. But that's a old view on sexuality, nowadays bisexuality is a complete sexuality, given bisexual manifesto. — Tazuco 00:48, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

When quoting sources about sexuality that have become outdated, it is incumbent on those who are quoting them to state that some ideas and opinions are based on past beliefs about sexuality and sexual orientation.
Today there are sources like "Bisexual women tend to have elevated levels of sociosexuality and psychopathic traits". Eric W. Dolan (March 8, 2018). PsyPost. (About PsyPost: "PsyPost launched in 2010. We are not interested in re-writing press releases from universities. We are not interested in over-generalizing or mischaracterizing research to get more clicks. We are not interested in confirming or disproving ideological beliefs. We are only interested in accurately reporting research about how humans think and behave. And we only report on research that has been published in legitimate, peer-reviewed scientific journals. All of the information contained in our articles comes directly from these studies and interviews with scientists.") Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 03:40, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

The consensus is that a lesbian is a homosexual woman. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 13:11, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Homosexuality doesn't exclude bisexuals — Tazuco 16:34, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Sure, you could extend it to mean a sapphic relationship in which one or more of the individuals involved are bisexual, or, to mean a woman who is attracted to another woman. But when you boil it down to the bare essentials, how could one argue against the commonly agreed use and definition that it is indeed a homosexual relationship in which the parties involved are homosexual? Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 18:37, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

The article lead says "The word lesbian is also used for women in relation to their sexual identity or sexual behavior, regardless of sexual orientation, or as an adjective to characterize or associate nouns with female homosexuality or same-sex attraction.". So a sapphic relationship is synonymous with lesbian relationship, same-sex relationship is synonymous with homosexual relationship. A sexual relationship between two bisexual women is a lesbian relationship and a homosexual relationship. You could specify lesbian/lesbian relationship (L4L/Lesbian4Lesbian), meaning both are lesbians. But a bisexual relationship is dubious, would that mean duogamous relationship and/or bisexual/bisexual relationship (Bi4Bi/Bisexual4Bisexual)? Still, bisexuals are included in the definition of homosexuality, they experience homosexual attraction, but not exclusively. The idea of being exclusively homosexual is recent, even then bisexuals are classified as homosexuals as well, although not wholly/only partially. — Tazuco 18:52, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

I think we are somewhat misinterpreting one another; I don't disagree with you. What I am saying is that arguing "Lesbian = any non man loving non man" changes it from the consensus of it being a homosexual relationship with women. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 19:09, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Something I Thought Should Be Added

Lesbians are non-men who are attracted to other non-men and only non-men. There is so such thing as bi-lesbians, pan-lesbians, etc. Why? Because, Lesbian, a non-men, usually a woman, who is only attracted to other non-men. You can't be a lesbian and have romantic/sexual/etc. feelings for a man that go beyond platonic. By identifying as a bi-lesbian or pan-lesbian you are harming actual valid lesbians. You can be bi/pan/etc and have a preference for non-men, that doesn't make you a lesbian. 2600:6C58:7300:C8CF:786A:5549:BE0B:C68F (talk) 12:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Agreed but I do believe this page is sane in that it ignores the woke rebranding of lesbianism.2A00:23C4:3E08:4000:E10D:4A6:7E06:BB67 (talk) 00:30, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Historically, any woman known for being attracted to other women would have been called a "lesbian" because the distinction between women attracted only to other women and women attracted to women at all did not exist due to bi-erasure. So using "lesbian" to refer to bi and pan lesbians makes sense. Also, some people who are not men are not comfortable being included in lesbianism because they feel that it makes them too associated with womanhood. There are multiple ways to expand the definition, not all universally agreed upon, and the lead section's purpose is to summarize the entire article's contents, so some level of generalization is probably necessary. Although I do think the article would benefit from coverage of more inclusive definitions, since the existence of non-binary and/or bi/pan lesbians seems to be notable at this point. PBZE (talk) 07:28, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

"non-binary and/or bi/pan lesbians" – Some day, in the future, the next generation will look back on all the current woke frenzy and wonder WTF were people thinking. The point of being non-binary is that you don't identify with a gender. The point of being bi is that you prefer sexual and romantic relationships with both males and females. The point of being pan is that you are into male, female, non-binary, transgender, at any given time. The definition of lesbian -- as well as the definition of gay male -- doesn't change because some people nowadays want it to. A homosexual female is a lesbian. Homosexual females/lesbians are sexually and romantically attracted to their same sex. That's not going to change no matter how many people today want to turn language into a kickball. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 09:19, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately we do not live in a perfect world where everyone fits into neat little boxes, so language will always be imperfect and incomplete. The "current woke frenzy" is a result of people who had previously been defined out of existence finding ways to describe themselves. Ironically, you got some terms' definitions mixed up. Non-binary does not mean and has never meant that one "doesn't identify with a gender", it is an acknowledgment that gender is complicated and many people are not completely described by the binary terms male or female, and thus it includes a wide range of genders, such as demigirl, genderfluid, agender, etc. Bisexual is often used for anyone who is attracted to multiple genders, including non-binary ones. PBZE (talk) 10:05, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

"Bisexual is often used for anyone who is attracted to multiple genders, including non-binary ones." And that usage is called: bisexual erasure. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 10:24, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

That doesn't make sense. At least people who say the existence of bi/pan lesbians is lesbian erasure have a point, since lesbianism has historically been associated with the complete rejection of men. But has bisexuality ever been associated with the rejection of non-binary people? Have bisexuals ever defined their sexuality in terms of not being attracted to non-binary people? Has that ever actually happened? PBZE (talk) 18:02, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Non-men = women. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.24.253.33 (talk) 12:14, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

"But has bisexuality ever been associated with the rejection of non-binary people?" - someone who identifies as a Lesbian cannot describe their relationship (hint: not their overall orientation) as being Lesbian-orientated if they are dating someone NB. You also seem to confuse the concept of Lesbian ID'd people dating NB people with someone NB Iding as Lesbian - NB people cannot be Lesbians because they don't identify as women. A Lesbian is a homosexual woman. "Bi lesbian" just doesn't make sense, nada, none, no way. --2A00:23C4:3E08:4000:1465:AED9:B5DF:F936 (talk) 17:08, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Lesbianism is non men loving non men, enbies (non binary people, dont call them 'NB' as black people have said that it means non black and not non binary) are outside of the binary meaning they fit into every sexuality. XxashxxX (talk) 22:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Definition

The definition of lesbian is completely wrong and transphobic. It is not a homosexual woman. It's non men, the literally definition of lesbian is non men loving non men. Not women loving women. XxashxxX (talk) 22:56, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

@XxashxxX: Please list wp:reliable sources? Thank you Adakiko (talk) 23:02, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Lipstick Flag

The lipstick flag is rude 216.197.136.87 (talk) 02:52, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

The "lipstick flag" does not appear in the article. This is the lipstick flag:
= it contains the lipstick kiss graphic.
Ignorance about the flag that copied the LF colors led the uneducated to conflate the non-kiss flag with the kiss flag. No one knows who copied the colors and created a different flag, but the colors-only flag was NOT created by the person who originated the lipstick lesbian flag (she did not and has not ever claimed credit for the derivation). As the saying goes, and as we all know: "Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth." Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 09:25, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

But how is the flag rude? lol. It's like the least threatening flag ever. And I hate being kissed.--2A00:23C4:3E08:4000:1465:AED9:B5DF:F936 (talk) 17:09, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

@2A00:23C4:3E08:4000:1465:AED9:B5DF:F936: the flag isn't rude, just the flag designer that made racist/anti-Asian and anti-butch statements on her blog. The idea was stolen from the cougar flag (both based on the bear flag, which was based on leather flag and 7-stripes rainbow flag by Gilbert Baker). Some also point she was biphobic/monosexist and cissexist/transphobic). Tazuco (talk) 18:26, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

I read the blog post about her date and that was enough… yikes. 2A00:23C4:3E08:4000:6D92:C6A9:46D5:490C (talk) 20:23, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

You can write a personal blog post about anyone and anything ... and it is your personal opinion -- but no more. So the designer of the lipstick lesbian flag stole the color-stripes idea from the "cougar flag", and the cougar flag designer stole the color-stripes idea from the bear flag, whose designer stole the color-stripes idea from the leather flag, whose designer stole the color-stripes idea from the Baker flag (and Baker stole the rainbow flag idea from the Flag of Cusco, which was first flown in 1973). When you look at all the Pride flags from the outside-looking-in: none of them can claim to be "the original" anything because the idea for each flag was based on another flag. You cannot copyright a flag design that's composed of a simple geometric arrangement of colors. Intellectual thieves who bitch and moan about someone else doing what they, themselves, did are a-holes. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 11:21, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

If Wikipedia had a like button I would give you one. I can't keep all the damned flags straight anyway. I'm gonna make one up for just my very own self and sit on my rooftop with it. It will be interesting to see if anyone comes around and tries to steal it. ABF992 (talk) 04:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

The lipstick lesbian flag is transphobic. Use the sunset one instead. XxashxxX (talk) 22:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

As noted and discussed above ^^^ ... the lipstick lesbian flag is not used in the article. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 00:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2022

Change lesbian definition to include all types of lesbians, including multi-gender spectrum attracted (mspec) lesbians.

Reasoning (warning: long!!):

Lesbian definitions have changed over time and can be considered to be more fluid depending on the person. Changes within history make it to mean more than just women who love women, and women that "don't like men".

Lesbians can be attracted to many genders. It's queer attraction, so it's not in a strict binary. I ask that another definition can be added to this article, in a way to include all types of lesbians.

Lesbians can be and also be attracted to women, femme, feminine aligned, and non-binary people; exclusively or not.

Sappho was considered the first bisexual lesbian in recorded ancient Greek history. Lesbians can have multi-attraction, split attraction, and just diverse attraction in general.

The definition will change per lesbian. It also reclaims its historic meaning, and includes more than just the typical definition of western queerness and western binaries that has excluded BIPOC on a few occassions. (i.e a two-spirit person attracted to women exclusively may identify as "straight lesbian".)

People such as lesboys, also known by the black-exclusive term "lesboi" may identify as masculine, or male in some way and still be lesbian. It is a historic meaning that is often left out of discussion because of erasure of BIPOC history and lesbianism in other cultures. These people may be transmasculine, or transgender men too, but not always.

Indigenous peoples are also often referred to have fluid and diverse identities that transcend western binaries and boxes. These people can be considered as lesbian, as it does not only mean, "women who love women".

To understand the change of lesbianism and it's historic definition, we must first understand Sappho herself, the original lesbian from the island of Lesbos, in which Sapphism is inherently related to her and Lesbianism itself.

Sappho is reported to have written love poems for both men and women, and can be considered to be the first documented bisexual lesbian from ancient Greek history.

Gay women, lesbians, and sapphic women - along with women that were reffered to have "sapphic tendencies" were oftentimes used separately in many documents across the internet within history.

To reclaim the original meaning of lesbian before the Radical Feminist Movement is the highest honor towards Lesbianism that could include all lesbians, historically and currently.

I suggest a change to be made for these reasons, to add another definition that includes all Lesbian peoples. It should include Multi-Gender spectrum (i.e MSPEC) attracted lesbians, as well as lesbians that may not be exclusively attracted to women, or attracted to women at all (i.e a lesbian attracted to feminine people only, a lesbian attracted to bigender people, etc).

This change would include all lesbians, western or not.

SOURCES:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavender_Woman https://www.jstor.org/site/reveal-digital/independent-voices/?searchkey=1664827437155 https://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/220262-mspec-lesbians/ https://radiantbutch.medium.com/why-you-should-respect-he-him-lesbians-85dca31a5b4f https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J155v03n03_04 https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:54127339$12i https://archive.org/details/closertohomebise00weis https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:54102753$26i https://www.jstor.org/stable/3173515 https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:54102719$5i https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:54127013%2448i https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:54127170$14i https://archive.org/details/bianyothernamebi00hutc https://bi-lesbian.carrd.co/ Forever0613 (talk) 20:12, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. This is clearly going to be a contentious change, and should have consensus before implementation. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:06, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

This looks to have a lot of non-WP:Reliable sources and to be based in WP:Synthesis. Crossroads ^-talk- 06:51, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Should we write a FAQ to put at the top of the talk page about this? There seems to be a perennial problem of people coming to the talk page to ask us to change the definition to something like "non-men loving non-men" or similar (typically without particularly good justification). Skimming through the talk page archives, it appears this has been asked dozens of times. Endwise (talk) 09:29, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

OP setting trans rights back, not forward. Also, spurious claims over the definition being racist is like claiming anti obesity is racist, when it is the ‘Westernised’ diet that has led to skyrocketing obesity rates!87.74.160.34 (talk) 20:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

I created the FAQ. It has appeared a few times by now. It's a decent suggestion, but I couldn't think of much else to add. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 19:15, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

You wrote this as the FAQ answer:
This article does not use the definition that a lesbian is "a non-male who is attracted a non-male" or some similar definition due to the lack of a consensus as this being the definition. The consensus is that a lesbian is a homosexual woman.
It fails to say that reliable sources need to be included for a change to be implemented. Pyxis Solitary (yak yak). Ol' homo. 07:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

I think that FAQ is not very good. "It's that way because the consensus is that way" doesn't actually say anything, particularly not to the new users who would be asking about it. The reason this article defines the word lesbian that way (i.e. the reason consensus is that way) is because that it is how reliable sources define it, particularly the highest quality and tertiary sources we currently cite like Oxford Reference and the Encyclopedia of Lesbian Histories and Cultures. Endwise (talk) 07:59, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

A consensus of clearly stated facts through reliable sources should be self-evident, else it would not, or should not, be there. In any case, it seems unlikely that this topic will not resurface again. I wasn't keen on creating an FAQ for one question only. Expanding it is not out of the question. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 12:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Aztec Lesbians

From the heading "outside western culture" and subheading "Americas": "The book Monarquía indiana by Fray Juan de Torquemada, published in 1615, briefly mentions the persecution of Aztec lesbians: 'The woman, who with another woman had carnal pleasures, whom they called patlache, which is to say: female incubus; they both died for it.'" I looked up what patlache means and it is translated as hermaphrodite, specifically "The hermaphrodite is a detestable woman, a woman who has a penis, a [virile] arrow, testes; who takes female companions, female friends" (From the Florentine Codex). I would like to propose a minor edit that acknowledges this as a persecution of not just lesbianism, but transgender lesbianism.

(I'm not trying to turn an issue of lesbian persecution into one of trans people, I just found it super interesting to discover that there's a nahuatl word for trans lesbians, and that this isn't mentioned on the trans history wiki page.) Zirrix (talk) 10:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source. Sundayclose (talk) 21:48, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

My bad! Not super familiar with wikipedia etiquette. I'd like to add to the end of the first paragraph under the headings "Outside Western Culture" -> "Americas" that "patlache" is the Nahuatl term for what is essentially a trans woman. See this Nahuatl dictionary entry that cites the Florentine Codex (a source that is cited in other articles without a link). Suggested wording with citations:

Patlache is a Nahuatl term describing a woman with a penis (citation here), suggesting that one of the aforementioned women was what we might today call a transgender woman.

Source: Fr. Bernardino de Sahagún, Florentine Codex: General History of the Things of New Spain; Book 10 -- The People, No. 14, Part 11, eds. and transl. Arthur J. O. Anderson and Charles E. Dibble (Santa Fe and Salt Lake City: School of American Research and the University of Utah, 1961), 56.

(This is the source cited on the dictionary website, let me know if anything is wrong here. I'm unsure if the proper citation would be to the Florentine Codex or to the dictionary site that cites it.) Zirrix (talk) 03:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Your personal opinion is that in 1615 Aztec language, a word that a Spaniard interpreted as "hermaphrodite" means transgender today and, therefore, the individual referred to by Fr. Bernardino de Sahagún is a "trans woman". But if that individual was actually born with an intersex anatomy, then the correct description for that individual is not transgender -- it is intersex. As such, the material now being interpreted in this article as being about a "lesbian" should be moved to the Intersex article. Pyxis Solitary (yak yak). Ol' homo. 12:44, 28 July 2023 (UTC)