Talk:LGBT themes in speculative fiction/Archive 3

Image in lede

While I agree that a general image is better in the lede, when I click on a link for homosexuality in speculative fiction, I am certainly not expecting the article to open up with a picture of greek pottery depicting men having sex.

Is anyone going to a Con where they can take a picture of a panel of SF writers discussing the topic of homosexuality? Or a photo that includes of many of the books that relate to the topic? Can we brainstorm for other possibilities? -- The Red Pen of Doom 09:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

well, i chose it cos it's free, and while fair use is fine for the body, they are not liked for GA articles, so is better to choose a free one for the lead (even if it's far to go to get to GA).

You seem to have a specific idea of what speculative fiction means - the article was specifically not called science fiction to cover the whole range of spec fic. The current image shows a representation of a winged god having sex with a man - which is spec fic (wasn't even a religion when made, so is pure myth): ancient literature is also discussed to a small extent in the article. Why should spec fic be a picture of modern SF books? A range of images is better, and we alread have 3 book covers (down from five after another editor challenged their fair use-iness).Yobmod (talk) 10:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

But, i'm working on making some sort of original art, like in the Queer horror article.Yobmod (talk) 10:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Just as you dislike the representation of one author in the lede as limiting, I find the use of mythological characters to represent SF as highlighting a part of the fringes of the general application of the term SF to be unrepresenttive. Yes, the broad definitions of SF cover mythology, but mythology is generally considered to be a concept that stands on its own and is not subsumed by SF.

I was thinking of something like what is used in Science fiction.

This is an article about speculative fiction, not science fiction. A science fiction image is no more representative of spec fic as a whole than a mythological image. We already show multiple images of science fiction books in the articleYobmod (talk) 13:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you may be under the impression that I want a sci fi image, but that is not what I mean when I use SF. I am looking for something that is more representative of what is standardly included under the rubric of speculative fiction (for which I am using SF) in say book store marketing/placement or advertising for SF television programming/movies - in these common usages of speculative fiction - mythology is not included, mythology based books and programs have their own "mythology" branding/marketing. I understand that in a broad academic view of "what is speculative fiction?" mythology can fall under that view, but it does not necessarily and is thus not what I would consider representative of the genre (although as you state perhaps it is the bast free use image we currently have available). -- The Red Pen of Doom 17:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Rowling

I don't think the Rowling image has any place in the article though (sorry!). She wrote one gay character, in a book that no one would catergorise a gay, and his sexuality only became known from a press release. We could have had a picture of Delany or Mellisa Scott - out gay authors who write about their experiences being gay SF authors and have many books with major gay characters and themes. Harry potter is not important to gay science fiction in any way.Yobmod (talk) 10:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I think that the fact that " his sexuality only became known from a press release. " brings up an interesting conceptual view of what constitutes "homosexuality in SF" - it probably requires real analysis by a third party rather than just the announcement itself. (And it was probably the most famous 'coming out' of any character in SF)-- The Red Pen of Doom 11:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

But it wasn't a coming out in SF, and has has no impact on the genre so far. It's too soon to say if it influential or not. Maybe a cited sentence mentioning it, which would show what? That it is still very controvertial to have gay characters in popular SF. So that might be useful, if we can find a 3rd party who has discussed its relation to the genre (as opposed to children's lit). Is it important that HP is fantasy when considering that one character is gay? It seemed notable for its popularity, not it's genresYobmod (talk) 12:02, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Lesbian science fiction merge

All the info from the LSF article has been merged into this article.

The uncited lead also contained:

Lesbian science fiction is a subgenre of science fiction, in which the protagonist is likely to be a lesbian. Some lesbian science fiction is targeted specifically to a lesbian audience, published by small feminist or lesbian presses such as Naiad Press (defunct) and Bella Books. Examples would include the works of Diana Rivers or Katherine V. Forrest.

Works may also be categorized as "lesbian science fiction" if of particular lesbian interest, in subject, theme or characters along with science fiction erotica or lesbian erotica. Examples include works by mainstream science fiction writers Ursula K. Le Guin, Nicola Griffith, or Melissa Scott.

Original research

Have tagged the article as possibly containing original research, and have started a discussion at Wikipedia:No_original_research/noticeboard#Homosexuality_in_speculative_fiction.23Comics_and_Manga. Hiding T 11:11, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 16:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

No-one seems to respond at the comics requests for assessment, so i've done it myself. anyone more official is welcome to change it if they disagree :-).Yobmod (talk) 12:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Star Trek

Rules of Acquisition

• 112. Never have sex with the boss's sister.
• 113. Never have sex with the boss's daughter.
• 114. Never have sex with the boss's wife.
• 115. Always have sex with the boss.

Strictly speaking, doesn't this count given that these rule apply exclusively to males? Sweetfreek (talk) 08:30, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, from my meagre knowledge, the last means only man on man sex, yes? But might be better at the more general Sexuality in science fiction or Sexuality in Star Trek article, where they can stay together for context. It was never really enforced, was it?

Request for feedback

Hi Yobmod. I saw your request for feedback[1] and thought I would give my two cents. Speculative fiction is fiction which includes science-fictional elements but which is perceived to fall outside that genre.[2] This article says "Homosexuality in speculative fiction (SF) refers to the incorporation of gay themes into science fiction or fantasy fiction." However, shouldn't it be "Homosexuality in speculative fiction (SF) refers to the incorporation of gay themes into media having science-fictional elements but which are perceived to fall outside science fiction or fantasy fiction genre." Also, are the gay themes science fiction themselves or real world gay themes? In the article write up about Star Trek, it says that no gay characters existed in the television franchise and that the "sexual experience" (e.g., same-sex kisses) were not gay same-sex kisses, but something else. Yet, the top of the article says "Such elements may include an LGBT character as the protagonist or a major character, or exploration the varieties of sexual experience that deviate from the conventional." The write up on Star Trek does not seem to meet either of these requirements. I don't think the scope of the article is clear from the lead paragraph and the name of the article does not seem to aid in this. There is a lot of good, well written, and well sourced information. As an improvement, I would suggest providing more detail in the lead paragraphs that provides a road map to the rest of the article and revise the rest of the article to adhere to that road map. Suntag (talk) 17:02, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Your definition of speculative fiction differs from the wikipedia article, which is also cited. doh. It was coined by a science fiction author talking about science fiction - it doesn't refer to fiction that is NOT science fiction. It is generally used to mean Sf, fantasy, horror, maybe magic realism. (ah, checked out Jesseworld - many of their definitions are VERy dubious (they claim high fantasy = epic fantasy = sword and sourcery). Should i define the term as used here more in the lead? Or is the wikilink enough?

The star trek section illustrates that homosexuality has not been realistically represented - this lack of representation is notable (per sources). The same sex kisses appear to "explore the themes that deviate from the conventional" to me (having lesbian sex with an ex wife after being reincarnated as a woman doesn'thappen to me very often! An LGBT theme doesn't require the characters identify as LGBT.

But i will expand the lead much more to define the article scope, thanks!

Nova

Any source for this?:

Nova (1968) is the first major science fiction novel with a gay male protagonist, nominated for a Hugo award and listed by critic David Pringle as one of the 100 best SF novel from 1949 to 1984.

I reffed the "major" part with the pringle ref, and can cite the "gay" part. But nowhere can i find the "first" part :-/.Yobmod (talk) 14:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Seems to be not true, so i rmvd it.Yobmod (talk) 15:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Archives

I copied the talk pages of the redirected Gay SF and Lesbian SF pages to the archives here.Yobmod (talk) 12:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Anyone know how to control placement of these templates for portals? I wanted them next to the see alsos, as i've seen in other articles, but they move the teyxt downward instead of sitting beside it. The columning method must be changed?

Tiptree Award

I'm a little puzzled as to why you removed the historical note "(which predates all of these)" from the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

1. It was untrue. The lambda awards are 3 years older according to the wikipages.
2. It seemed irrelevant. This isn't an article about the award, so how does this information add to the articles topic?
3. It made the award seem more important, whereas the some of winners have nothing to to with LGBT themes, so is actually less important than the other awards.

I also noticed you didn't give a citation for the claim that the winners touch on LGBT themes. It is true from looking at the list, but i wouldn't be suprised if it gets tagged during peer review as OR. Yobmod (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC) I've added a citation.Yobmod (talk) 11:27, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Comstock laws

I rmvd it from the lead, but this is still in the article:

"In addition, since most SF publishing was done in magazines, and these in turn were subject to the Comstock Act, transgression of cultural mores could lead to prosecution and shutdown of the publisher."

According to wikipedia, these laws were against pornography and contraception advice. Is there any proof that they had any effect on pulp magazine content? Or even a reliable source's opinion?Yobmod (talk) 12:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

You need to look more deeply into the history of that period! Even ordinary science fiction fanzines were kept out of the mail sometimes on grounds of "indecency"! (See this excerpt from Fancyclopedia II, the article under "Censorship" [3]. Magazine publishers could only exist as long as they retained their second-class mailing privileges. This was a constant problems for early gay-activist publications, for example; see Before Stonewall, p. 107. Read Paul, James C.N. and Murray L. Schwartz. "Obscenity in the Mails: A Comment on Some Problems of Federal Censorship"; University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 2 (Dec., 1957), pp. 214-253, for contemporary coverage; and any history of American magazines for the broader picture. Your persistent edit seems intended to deprecate the magazine publishers for a situation that at root was not their fault, and particularly to imply some kind of inverted gender-based bias. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I do not mean to deny that some editors of the period were in sympathy with censorship (or at least parts of it), and I modified the lede to acknowledge that; but the fact is that if you read up on the history of the period, everybody from H. L. Mencken to Bernarr McFadden ran afoul of the censors from time to time, for what by late-20th-century standards would seem innocuous material. Pulp publishers were not about to push the edges of the envelope for a matter of principle. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Every sentence in the lead is a summary of a cited sentence in the article. Changing it without adding citations to the article is not a good idea, as it confuses what is cited, and what not - that's why i reverted the lead, but left the main addition alone. At the moment it sounds like your original synthesis that this law stopped gay characters from being portrayed in SF. How did Lesbian pulp fiction flourish, if this law applied as you claim? It appears to me that having gay characters in non-explicit stories was legally allowedYobmod (talk) 15:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

If you read the misleadingly-titled article lesbian pulp fiction more closely, you'll see that it is about paperbook book publishing, not magazine publishing; during this era, almost all SF was published first or only in magazines. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

2. And my edit isn't to deprecate magazine editors. It is not my opinion, it is the opinion of the sources (more than one). Find a source saying SF editors were affected by these rules, and i'll be happy. Good articles must be sourced!Yobmod (talk) 15:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on that part; but most of the older publishing professionals I've asked just mock Wikipedians for asking for a cite for such a fact. To some extent, it's like asking for a cite for "Fish live in water and die without it." Censorship was part of the air they breathed in that era. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

3. Why do these laws affect non-US magazine editors? If they do not, what is their excuse for avoiding gay themes? I noticed in the fancylopedia link that the magazine censorship examples are from Australia Canada, and involve horror magazine, presumanbly based on violence rather than LGBT themesYobmod (talk) 15:38, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

If you read the Fancyclopedia article more closely, you'll see this passage, "Various generalzines have had difficulties with the PO, mostly for publishing indelicate illustrations ("Postal inspectors can usually see, even if they can't read") but Max Keasler got in bad with Them on account of an article on butterfly fandom, "The Immoral Storm", and they kept after him so persistently on subsequent issues that OPUS 4 had to be smuggled into a different postal area and dispatched from there." U.S. postal censorship is relevant because of the leading role which U.S. magazines played in the creation of SF as a recognized genre, and the secondary role of non-U.S. publishers in the early days of the genre. There were almost no non-U.S. magazine editors for quite some time. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, with sources, it would be a good addition indeed. My 4 main sources (Encylopedia of SF, Enyclopedia of homosexuality, Uranian worlds: Guide to alternate sexuality in SF, Encylopedia of GLBTQ culture) all mention prudishness of the editors or that editors were "protecting" readers. None mention censorship (until Delaney's novels).Yobmod (talk) 15:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Quote

• Comment - the boxed Delaney quote in the "New Wave" section is missing a word. It currently reads "...one can't seeing it as...". Can you add the missing word please? Otto4711 (talk) 22:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Whoops, the missing word was "avoid".Yobmod (talk) 10:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)