Talk:LGBT themes in speculative fiction/Archive 2

There *was* a lesbian science fiction page. There was discussion of merging it with gay science fiction to create "LGBT science fiction". We still have "gay science fiction", we don't have "LGBT science fiction", and I don't see a record for deleting "lesbian science fiction". But there's a history on the lesbian science fiction page. What gives? -- LQ 17:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC) update: hmm, perhaps some weird wiki hiccup: the page isn't giving me the "There is no lesbian science fiction page" template any more.

No, lesbian science fiction is not the same thing as gay or LGBT science fiction.

(1) I agree. So perhaps you want to speak up on the Gay science fiction page, which is where someone (not me) originally suggested it. So far I've been the only one to respond (and I pointed out at least one good reason for keeping them separate). The reason I added the "merge" link here is because it is on the Gay sf page -- and it is still there, so people coming to this page will not know about the discussion / proposal on the Gay SF page. As long as the entry is on the gay SF page I think it should be, here, too, to encourage fuller discussion of the issue.

(2) Apparently my original comment was confusing so let me clarify. I was making changes to "lesbian science fiction" and noted that "gay science fiction" had a merge request. Then at some later point I could not find the "lesbian science fiction" page and figured it had been deleted by the "gay sf" merger advocate. So I set up this "Talk:Lesbian science fiction" page to complain that "Lesbian sf" should not have been deleted without more process/discussion. Then I saw that it had not, in fact, been deleted -- that maybe it was just a "weird wiki hiccup" that gave me a nonexistent page template. ... The discussion about whether to merge gay sf/lesbian sf and whether to include the "merger suggested" tag is separate from my query about where is the lesbian sf article. -- LQ 14:41, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up. I've removed the tag from the GSF page too since a) they're not the same thing and b) after two months nobody came along to support the suggestion of a merge.

I'm currently expanding and hopefully improving the gay SF page. This involved removing lots of lesbian books and links etc. It seems to me that other wikipedians expect gay to mean LGBT in this context. And considering the crappy stubby nature of this article, i would support a merge, with a seperate list article for the lesbian seperatists to add books to.

Until it happens, i've made the link from gay SF more obvious.Yobmod (talk) 17:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge

While you may state that "homosexuality" and "lesbianism" are different it does not appear to me that conceptually the content of the two articles actually differs. If you are unhappy about the current name of the other article, it appears likely that we can gather consensus to change to something like: LGBT speculative fiction -- The Red Pen of Doom 23:34, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

These are not the same topics. Gwen Gale (talk) 23:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable sources that support your position? -- The Red Pen of Doom 01:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Any dictionary will do. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

My dictionary does not have an entry for "homosexuality in science fiction" or "lesbian science fiction". Can you provicde a source that does make a distinction? -- The Red Pen of Doom 01:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Why Lesbians aren't Gay. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Cute, but not a reliable source. Anything else? -- The Red Pen of Doom 01:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how cute it is, but it's verifiable. I've found some other sources but I'd like to hear from other editors before we carry on with this, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Point of information - if you read down to the WP:V#Reliable sources section of WP:V or read WP:RS, you will find that personal websites do not provide verfifiability. -- The Red Pen of Doom 08:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, according to the wikipedia article, Homosexuality includes lesbianism: this seems to be the consensus of the literature. The Encylopedia of homosexuality deals with both for example. There are many more respectable RSs stating this also.

The joint article could easily explain any slight controversy in it's lead. The "gay SF" articles editors made no complaints about gay being different from homosexual, even if they have different connotations to some people. The only difference between the 2 articles would be the single sentence about lesbian SF presses that have strong feminist seperatist ties, whic gay presses do not.

At the moment it is difficult to keep the 2 articles seperate. Well intentioned editors are constantly adding info of lesbian interest there, most of which i removed with a pointer to here, although i don't add it here, as i think this article is divisive and only serves the interest of lesbian seperatist editors - hence why it gets so few constructive edits. In some areas, lesbianism has different issues from homosexuality, but SF isn't really one of them.

But is no rush to merge, i'm slowly integrating the tiny bits of info here into the Homosexuality in speculative fiction (see how much better it is? think how happy readers would be if it were even more comprehensive!). Help there is always welcomeYobmod (talk) 08:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I just notice all the de-genderising of the HiSP article. this is fine if the merge goes ahead - but is premature! If the merge doesn't take place, the articles focus has been weakened, giving a Homosexuality article that covers both areas, and a seperate lesbian SF article. Such edits should wait until after consensus.Yobmod (talk) 08:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I have nothing against a well sourced seperate article devoted specifically to Lesbian Science Fiction. However, since the current article is totally void of sourced information of any kind, this seperate article at this time seems premature. Creating a well sourced thorough LGBT Speculative Fiction article FIRST and then spinning off sub topic articles as reliable material is accumulated would seem to be a logical development plan. -- The Red Pen of Doom 09:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. If there is consensus. The previous merge proposal unfortunately had no consensus (see above), even though the articles were in much worse a shape. It is too early to declare it here. 2 against one, and less than a day of discusion.Yobmod (talk) 09:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Gwen, are you still opposed to re-naming the Homosexuality in Speculative Fiction article to something like LGBT Speculative Fiction and then merging the content from this article? -- The Red Pen of Doom 18:42, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but yes, this article woefully needs sourcing. This said, please see my comment at the end of the next thread and all the best. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Why is the topic of Lesbianism in Science Fiction unable to be covered under the umbrella discussion of LGBT Speculative Fiction? -- The Red Pen of Doom 00:31, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

This is a highly complex topic with both biological and environmental sides. For example, biologically, the overall difference between lesbians and homosexual males now seems very likely to be even wider than that between heterosexual males and homosexual males, given the differences in gender along with new descriptions of brain symmetry: Brain symmetry of lesbians different from brain symmetry of homosexual males. Hence, the umbrella of LGBT might as well be LGBTH or, more likely, not used at all. Lesbian science fiction and gay science fiction are not the same topics. Disclaimer: I have a conflict of interest on this topic. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

It is still unclear to me how even if these potential biological differences exist and affect Speculative Fiction that they cannot be discussed appropriately under the umbrella of LGBT SF. -- The Red Pen of Doom 01:08, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

These differences are not potential, they exist and they are many. These are two different topics, the same way man and woman are not the same topic, but likely even more so. Disclaimer: I have a conflict of interest on this topic. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

For the sake of argument, I am willing to give you that there are biological differences between gay men and lesbian women. You have yet to show that these biological differences have any effect on Speculative Fiction, or that any such differences would not be able to be covered under appropriate subsections of the general topic heading of LGBT SF. -- The Red Pen of Doom 02:13, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes lesbians are different from gay men (and straight women, and bi, and trans etc). But the treatment of LGBT people and tzhemes in speculative fiction deals with the same issues. There are no speicifically lesbian issues in this area. Lesbian sepratist novels have a gay counterpart etc. Homophobia kept both lesbian and gay characters as perverted villians or disguised their sexuality etc.

A fully informative article on one needs to include the other. No-one is saying that lesbian = LGBT - just that in this specific area of the arts, they are better treated as in the same article, as shown by the poor state of the seperate articles.

If the combined article manages to gather enough sourced information about seperate Lesibiansism in SFF, then would be the time to spin of a daughter artcle detailing these issues.Yobmod (talk) 09:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

"There are no speicifically lesbian issues in this area" Even if there are specifically lesbian issues, they can be addressed in a section(s) unter the article topic of LGBT SFF.-- The Red Pen of Doom 11:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, if there are such issues, this article certainly doesn't tell of them :-)Yobmod (talk) 11:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The evolution of Lesbian SF has followed to some extent a separate path from that of generic LGBT a/k/a "Gay" SF, primarily due to the work of various lesbian feminist separatists who (by and large) came into the field from outside the usual fan and reader circles, with different perspectives and different priorities. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:41, 8 July 2008

But we have no citations for this, and it seems unlikely any current editor is going to provide them, so there is simply not the information to build an article on. Does this difference in path constitute a big enough topic to warrant a full article instead of a section? Gay SF by non-genre authors exists too, but sits perfectly well in the Homsexuality...article. The lesbian SF i've read would too. The tiny amount of info on non-genre presses could use expanding, but is already thereYobmod (talk) 17:08, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of citations, I'd also like to hear from User:Lquilter, who seems to be away for now but in RL is a noted expert on lesbian scifi crit and I think, likely knows more about the reliable sources on this than I do. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:08, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I left a note at Lquilter's page. We can wait a week or so to see if Lquilter or other people have any contributions/ideas that will help form a consensus on how best to improve the quality of these articles. -- The Red Pen of Doom 22:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

So, i waited 2 weeks, then merged, as the consenseus amoungst those of us who actually contribute to these articles was to merge. I also created 2 list articles for Lesbian and gay SF. But the redirect here was reverted (without changing any of the merged info in the other 3 articles).

Did i read the consensus wrong? Should this crappy redundant article remain, so biased editors can watch it it without making any effort to improve it? The homosexuality in science fiction now contain MORE info about lesbianiasm in SF than this one does. there is still not a single reference (let alone citation) indicating that this topic is substantially seperateYobmod (talk) 16:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I do not acknowledge the opinions of two editors as a consensus but have reverted myself and restored this redirect, which I see as unhelpful and perhaps even pointy, pending later discussion. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Pointy being that it has a point: Lesbian and gay SF is not substantially different?Yobmod (talk) 17:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

As I've said above, they are not the same topic. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

And yet we have citations treating them as the same (Encylopedia of homosexuality, Uranian worlds, Nicola Griffith, etc etc), and you have provided none.Yobmod (talk) 17:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

You're mistaken. Please stop misrepresenting my edits, thanks. Meanwhile, you have your redirect and I see no need to dicuss this further until more editors show up. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Mistaken about what? You deny that the sources in the article exist?! You deny that you have provided no sources for your claims? I have misrepresented which edits? - you've only ever reverted while calling others disruptive.Yobmod (talk) 11:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Removal of external links

This series of edits by User:TheRedPenOfDoom was clearly meant to remove any external links which contained the word lesbian and given the user's comments above, along with the misleading edit summaries, was not only pointy but as close to vandalism as one can get. It was certainly disruptive. Gwen Gale (talk) 03:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Not vandalism, just a difference of opinion - please assume good faith, at least until after a talk page discusion :-). I re-removed one two of the links (post-stonewall & Golden crown), as they seems to cover all lesbian literature, and say very little about science fiction. Nb, the subject of the article is SF, with lesbian as a modifying adjective.Yobmod (talk) 08:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

As stated in the edit summaries, the links did not meet my interpretation of the guidelines for external links. Either not being reliably sourced (Links to Avoid #11 "Links to blogs and personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority.") or links not on the topic of the article (Lesbianism in Science Fiction) (Links to Avoid #13 "Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject: the link should be directly related to the subject of the article") and open wikis (Links to Avoid #12 "Links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors.") (in the last 30 days there have been a total of 6 edits by 3 editors). -- The Red Pen of Doom 08:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

http://www.lesbiansciencefiction.com/ appears to be a personal website should be removed as well. -- The Red Pen of Doom 08:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Personal web-sites are allowed, no? It's an ex link, not a ref. Someone has to write them! :-). If it's useful, i would say keep regardless of where it comes from. The removal of the feminism wiki i agre with though - it has less coverage of it topics than we do.Yobmod (talk) 08:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Links to Avoid #11 - it is not clear who the author of the site is and whether or not the author is a recognized expert in the field of Lesbianism and Science Fiction.-- The Red Pen of Doom 09:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

But the guidline says "normally". As wikipedia doesn't have a "List of lesbian SF" article, it provides very useful info to readers. Also it is pretty comprehensive, and probably better than any wiki-list would ever be. Hence i find it useful anough to "abnormally" keepYobmod (talk) 09:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough reasoning. -- The Red Pen of Doom 18:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey y'all, I'm so sorry but I must exit from further discussion here since I'm an admin and have a big docking RL conflict of interest on this topic. Even so, I hope this article doesn't get wiped out in a merge, lesbian and LGBT are not the same topics. Cheers, Gwen Gale (talk) 18:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

You keep making that claim and have not provided any reasoning to back it up. Why cant the umbrella article of LGBT Speculative Fiction cover Lesbianism in Science Fiction? (Please answer in above section, this section should remain about external links so we dont have duplicative conversations.)-- The Red Pen of Doom 00:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)