Talk:Trade (gay slang)

Latest comment: 3 months ago by Unkagemma in topic Victorian and Edwardian eras

US centric edit

This discussion is very U.S./"first-world" centric. Do "happily married" men in the U.S. not also engage in "trade" with men in their own country or in Europe (as well as in Brazil and Thailand)? As the article is now, it's disgustingly colonial. 76.254.25.22 (talk) 07:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

it's a colonial concept, mary! an encyclopedia has to present the concept in its most common context. don't get your panties in a twist.Aroundthewayboy (talk) 00:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
Umm, please. We actually do need to represent multiple viewpoints and it's likely this could use some content/context to help add a more worldwide perspective. All editors are welcome to help. -- Banjeboi 05:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sexual identity edit

The section entitled 'Sexual identity' should be removed. It's written very poorly with no regard to sociological theory regarding sexual identity (i.e. what does it mean to be 'straight' in the first place) and frankly sounds judgmental.Regress (talk) 03:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Done. It was poorly written and seemed to cause more problems than it solved. -- Banjeboi 09:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Trade tv edit

Is this the source? Bokoharamwatch (talk) 14:11, 16 March 2021 (UTC) Ps Don’t tell Boko Haram I was posting on gay topics, they probably hate me enough as is.Reply

Victorian and Edwardian eras edit

This is so out of place within the entire page. There is no context. It Should have a heading to denote it is for a particular country adn perhaps include follow up in each section. Unkagemma (talk) 10:09, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply