Talk:Pegging (sexual practice)/Archive 1

message: Regarding the sodomy line -- unless someone can show me every single sodomy law in the entire world, we can't unilaterally say that this pratice is controlled by every sodomy law out there. In fact, I've heard that a lot of sodomy laws only cover homosexual activity, which would therefore not affect this practice. Jacqui ★ 19:59, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Sodomy?

message: If this is just a definition of a neologism, shouldn't it be in the Wiktionary? Avriette 02:54, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Current article text is way beyond that now.  Marking this topic "Resolved". — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 12:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DicDef? 

message: "Occasionally, the term is also used if a woman gives anal sex to another woman." -- does anyone have a source for this? When the term was introduced by Dan Savage it was specifically meant to describe a woman giving anal sex to a man, and I'm not aware of any common usage of the term for woman/woman anal sex. Catamorphism 19:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edit to first paragraph 

message: I wonder if there is any information about the sexuality of individuals who participate and/or enjoy this activity.  I have done some reading on this activity in relationship advice columns, and in the questions and answers it seems that the authors go out of their way to imply that it does not imply homosexuality on the part of the male.  But how about bi-sexuality?  Is it used by bisexual males who are in relationships with females as a substitute to satisfy that part of their sexuality?  
Also, to what extent might females enjoy or participate in this?  Maybe those that enjoy male homoerotica, or thrill seekers, or those who like to explore the taboo...?
I think this is a fascinating area of sexuality and deserves study.
:Well, I heard a while ago someone calling into either FH&F or Tom Leykis, that 1/10 of her friends had been asked by a man to peg them. While highly annecdotal, it does give you some place to start. As for my own self, I dont find the male form in any way arousing, however I would most definately enjoy this activity. To me pegging is not in any way homosexual. Sexuality is attraction, not activity, at least in my book. Carterhawk 07:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Participants 

message: Just have to say after reading even the first three paragraphs that I'm impressed by the NPOV, broad and sensistive wording of this article. FWIW. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 11:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Well done

message: As the producers of Bend Over Boyfriend, we read this article with great interest. We'd like to suggest a couple clarifications:
1. Bend Over Boyfriend stars (or features) Carol Queen. It was directed by Shar Rednour. Fatale Media, Inc. is the producer.
2. We would appreciate a link to http://www.fatalemedia.com/videos/bend_over_boyfriend.html. 
3. We would also suggest an external link to http://www.fatalemedia.com/videos/bend_over_boyfriend.html.
The image of the cover of Bend Over Boyfriend appears to be tagged correctly, and we appreciate that. 
Lastly, please forgive our newbie status when it comes to Wikipedia. There are many links to Fatale from different articles here, but we would like credit for producing Bend Over Boyfriend. 
Thank you!
--17:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've responded on your talk page.  Bushytails 18:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested clarifications to the "pegging" page

message: :The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
See below for requested move.
From WP:RM:
*:Pegging (sexual practice) → :Pegging — There is only one other usage mentioned at Pegging (disambiguation), the usage means "to score points in cribbage", and that usage does not have its own article titled "pegging". There were previously several other uses listed at the dab, but none were upheld in their respective articles.  WP search for "pegging" reveals nothing else. — Joie de Vivre 14:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Wikipedia is not a dictionary.  The word "pegging" is only significant enough for its own encyclopedia article when it comes to this definition, logically, the word should redirect here.  Your personal opinion of which things are "odd" should have no bearing whatsoever on the structure of an encyclopedia.  Joie de Vivre 17:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *If this article were not on a sexual subject, there would be no controversy. The question we need to address is "Should Wikipedia protect users from seeing adult-oriented pages by accident?". Should we be concerned by a child finding this page while searching for information on pegging(UK)/staking(US) out a tent? Wikipedia has a clear policy of non-censorship, which is mentioned in the list of perennial proposals at the Village pump. However, I personally feel that it should be made as difficult as possible for users to open an adult-themed page unintentionally. If a child goes to Wikipedia and types the word blowjob, Wikipedia is not responsible for compromising the child's innocence; the child almost certainly knows the word is naughty, and would not have difficulty satisfying his/her curiosity elsewhere on the internet. Pegging is different, and there may be a case for keeping a disambiguation page to say "is this really what you want?" before you see the interesting pictures. Such a policy would not constitute censorship in my view, provided the content remains accessible to those who actually want it. However, this is really an issue beyond the scope of this talk page. Mtford 08:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I would say no, wikipedia should not make any effort whatsoever to "protect" people.  Until someone comes up with a good argument that accidentally finding adult pages will harm people, people do not need to be protected from them.  However, as to the name of the article...  Using the good old google test, 'pegging dildo OR strapon OR anal OR sex OR strap-on' finds 213K results, 'tent pegging' (both a sport and what you do to pitch a tent; I don't know a query to make google only find one or the other) finds 77K results, 'cribbage pegging' 11K results, 'pegging memory' 120K results, 'garden pegging' 127K results, and 'pegging exchange rate' finds 1.2M results.  So, fixed exchange rate is definitely in the lead, and given the large numbers of matches found for other things, having pegging be a disambig page might be best.  Of course, pegging alone with no other qualifiers rarely refers to the other definitions...  Bushytails 16:02, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I agree, a disambiguation page can't hurt. And this is the opinion of a woman who's pegged a number of guys...
*Oppose the move.  The dab page is fine as it is; neither usage is so widely known as to make it the default. Mike Christie (talk) 16:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Speedy move request

message: Peg, Pegged and Pegging each have their own disambiguation pages, because the words have different meanings.  The only meaning of "pegging" that is a discrete concept, worthy of its own encyclopedia article, is that found at Pegging (sexual practice).  We have a dictionary definition, that is mentioned only in passing in a related encyclopedia article (pegging as regards to Cribbage), and a dicdef that is not mentioned in the article at all ("pegging" as regards to Fixed exchange rate).  These should not stand in the way of properly categorizing this encyclopedia article.  Wikipedia is not a dictionary.  We are categorizing concepts, not defining words.  
Notably, two editors have come forward to express disgust as regards to the subject matter of the article in question.  I advise administrators and others to carefully avoid discriminating based on personal taste.  Joie de Vivre 18:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Regarding "peg", "pegged", and "pegging"

message: This page contains whole blocks of text from:
http://www.blogto.com/tno/2007/05/bend_over_boyfriend/
:Which?  Joie de Vivre° 05:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.  It appears whomever wrote that article copied from the wikipedia article, violating the GFDL in several ways.  Perhaps you should contact the author of the article?  Bushytails 05:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  plagiarism 

message: I added several references, both to discussion of preferences and to media representations.  So, I removed the no references tag.Arbol25 (talk) 22:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: No references question

message: The article states that all “pegging” is consensual. I disagree; There are cases where the “consent” was non existent. The article must be revised to reflect this. The simplest way would be simply to remove the word construal from the article, the more effective way would be a sub-section addressing rape in this fashion.174.25.49.114 (talk) 05:16, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see the word "consensual" in the article.   Will Beback  talk   06:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears to have been removed; However, there is still the "Pleasure" sections. The article should be revised to include rape in this manner. (If it's there and I missed it call me an idiot. But I didn't see it.)174.25.16.197 (talk) 21:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Consensual

message: I fully realize Wikipedia is not censored, but is that picture really necessary? I think most people can visualize pegging in their head without needing a sexually explicit graphic. I know removing it wont improve the article, but it wouldnt make it worse, either. Yonskii (talk) 00:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe if she were wearing a bra the prudes wwould drop the subject. Just a thought. (Me, I like the pic as-is, but then I'm no prude.) 174.25.16.197 (talk) 21:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

text: @Yonskii, I think most people visualize things far more dramatically than is typically illustrated and that leaving certain things to the imagination can make topics like these worse. Also the text of the article can change and could become misleading at some point while the image will always remain accurate to the subject. I believe that since our goal is to disseminate information we should favor those who do want to learn about sexual topics above those that are offended and just accidentally stumble upon a sexual article and don't want to even look at the subject.AerobicFox (talk) 20:08, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Is that picture necessary?

message: Is the sidebox really that appropriate to have presented like this? The unnecessary display of breast or genitalia (which could be hidden with some creativity) along with the facial expressions seems a bit graphic for Wikipedia? 
24.96.44.208 (talk) 03:08, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, Wikipedia is not censored.  —EqualRights (talk) 03:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

text: How would hiding parts improve the article any?  Bushytails (talk) 05:01, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Wouldn't at all if you were 15. Get a grip. It's inappropriate adult content. 69.24.112.147 (talk) 05:49, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate graphic? 

message: How is it that called if not pegging?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.83.199.22 (talk) 12:00, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  female to female pegging 

message: This section is completely inaccurate and seems to have no references. My only references are from first hand experience, though. Unless someone has some actual references for this, I recommend that we just delete it all together. Also the title is inaccurate, because bondage is not directly related to pegging. I assume the editor meant bdsm, or domination. Silentninjadesu (talk) 00:49, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Gone. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 00:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  in bondage sex culture 

message: Is Dan Savage significant enough for his statement on the subject to comprise the entire "Psychological pleasure" section, or even be mentioned? 
Not to mention the picture of him. The2crowrox (talk) 07:54, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Pavithran, well, the article does currently credit Dan Savage with popularizing the term; if it's the case that he did, that point belongs in the article. Flyer22 (talk) 22:14, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dan Savage 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Pegging (sexual practice). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120302065043/http://www.budapestsun.com/news/54577 to http://www.budapestsun.com/news/54577
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:10, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Reference link 5. currently reads:  "Ruby Rider's Pegging Paradise."
Correct spelling for link:  "Ruby Ryder's Pegging Paradise."
Editing is unavailable for this area of the page.
(No Wikipedia account, but this is Ruby Ryder.)
Thank you for your help.
2605:E000:7D0F:6D00:347F:A966:7909:A308 (talk) 08:02, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed it. Thank you for pointing out the error. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 17:38, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling error in reference link correction request