Talk:Footjob

message: ** I just removed the photo, does Wikipedia need a picture of this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.214.70 (talk) 14:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: is the editor who removed the images. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:59, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

text: Your personal disgust is not relevant to determining content.  I assume you've read the note I placed on your talk page. --NeilN talk to me 19:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

text: The images appropriate for an article on this subject, your disgust with human sexuality is your problem. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 07:10, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: I have reverted two edits removing images without explanation. Please explain why you oppose including these images. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:56, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: is the editor who removed the images. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:59, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

text: Your personal disgust is not relevant to determining content.  I assume you've read the note I placed on your talk page. --NeilN talk to me 19:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

text: The images appropriate for an article on this subject, your disgust with human sexuality is your problem. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 07:10, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: Hello. As some of you may know I have been trying to rid the footjob page of their inappropriate photos. While I realize this does not go against the guidelines of Wikipedia I still think it would be appropriate to have them removed for several reasons. One of these reasons being that children under a legal age have access to viewing these pornographic images. You cannot simply restrict them from accessing the sexuality articles, but you could at least help the issue by removing these photos. Distributing pornography to kids under the age of 18 is illegal, is it not? These are obvious exposed photos of male genitalia. While photos may help with gaining knowledge on the subject they should at least be replaced with something a bit more minor such as drawings. This would not only benefit the adolescents, but would also help cease the constant removal and reversing of these images. I, myself, am 16. I had no desire to gain knowledge of this subject with pornographic imagery. I find these photos to be distasteful for several logical reasons. And I am sure it could be a traumatizing experience for a far younger child to stumble across them. I would like my words to be heeded and taken into serious consideration. ElliotNettles (talk) 14:38, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Petition to remove the footjob photographs 

message: The VfD ended with a decision to redirect to Foot fetishism, and that was done.  Eventually, the redirect ended up pointing to Non-penetrative sex although there doesn't seem to have been any discussion or consensual process.  Whatever.  What I'm addressing today is that at Non-penetrative sex the only activity in the entire list of Non-penetrative sex#Types of non-penetrative sexual activity to not have a wikilink is footjob.  That's understandable, because it would create a loop, but it's unfair.  Every other sexual activity on the list (except Intergluteal sex, currently unlinked) is wikilinked and points to its own page.
To correct this perceived bias, I propose 1) immediate reersion of the redirect to Foot fetishism, as per the VfD, and either 2) try to put some real content here that is not in Foot fetishism, or 3) extract some Footjob material from Foot fetishism and use it here, with a link from Foot fetishism to here, acting as a "bridge" between Non-penetrative sex and Foot fetishism, describing a specific activity that fits into both categories.
I will wait a while before undertaking this task, in case anyone objects.  -- 192.115.133.116 (talk) 22:06, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To clarify, I was referring to steps 2 or 3 for discussion.  Step 1, restoration of the original consensus, I already did.  --  192.115.133.116 (talk) 22:16, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti- foot fetish bias? 

message: This article contains the definition of "Footjob", taken from different references. Thank you very much. - Margarita1986.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Margarita1986 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article about Footjob 

message: The section "The Footjob in the eroticism" seems like little more than a laundry list of actresses and films featuring footjobs.  I think it is time to clean this part up, but thought I would start a talk section to discuss what would be best.  Thanks.--Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs)  17:49, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Footjob in the eroticism 

message: Could we not have lists of random "stuff" please?  Unsourced and unselected lists of DVDs which might or might show this, or actors who might have appeared in them, are not useful.  At a minimum, we need a reliable source to verify the material, and some indication of why it might be notable.  Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 12:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuff 

message: The current wording for that section makes it sound like she actually performed a footjob on Jesse Metcalfe. Shouldn't this be changed?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.146.38.143 (talk) 07:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eva Longoria 

message: This is my first Wikipedia page that I have significantly made better! I need a digital pat on the back. --The Editors United (talk) 00:43, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teamwork 

message: I am wondering why is this a non-penetrative sexual practice - couldn't it be a penetrative practice if it is performed on a woman? Would it be called differently? If so, we could give a link in an article. Anyway, I'm just raising this issue, since the first sentence suggests that there could be a penetrative counterpart to a footjob, but it is later not mentioned.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:3400:8200:39D3:7C73:549C:B68 (talk) 23:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Critiques if androcentric language and sexual scripts side, the reason is because nothing is being inserted into orifice. EvergreenFir (talk) Please  18:22, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-penetrative