Talk:Gay icon/Archive 1

message: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay icon (2nd nomination) Speedy kept.--Docg 16:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomination for deletion

message: A gay icon is a larger-than-life celebrity or public figure with wide-spread fans amongst the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) communities[citation needed]. In particular, they are figures perceived to be strong or brave individuals who have wrestled with psychological demons, or issues of sexuality, or have suffered publicly and survived.[citation needed] Sometimes, the term Dycon is used to describe celebrities loved by the lesbian community in particular.
The terms larger-than-life, wrestled, demons,suffered publicly and survived is incorrect terminology, and does not meet the standards of wikipedia. It is essential that the user who continues to change this article the second it is corrected must cease in his actions of negletful, unconscious vandalism. 
Can anybody tell me what "Marxist revolutionary imagery" has to do with "Gay icons"? Anyone? Or are you all as confused as me? Last time I checked they weren't screeching for the blood of the bourgeousie.
Apology Monster 17:10, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gay icon: larger than life?

message: The criticism section is without fact or merit, despite the fact that it is well-written.  "Some believe" or "some argue" can be said about anything (i.e. "some argue that cigarettes lead to eternal life" because I argued it 5 minutes ago.
As for an argument against this opinion being parroted as legitimate, it is ridiculous to criticize gays as being shallow for historically finding icons that they identified with in the entertainment field.  Where else could they look when being gay was taboo, mouch of the population was hiding living as straights (and likely still is), and such.  Society did not allow gay role models, and so they found people to identify with to give them hope.  The fact that this tradition lingers on, despite the fact that some small steps toward equal rights have been made is not shallow.
Finally, criticisms against Madonna Ciccone should be put on her entry.  There is no reason to put them here.
With these thoughts in mind, I believe the criticism section should be deleted and only restored if any actual, cited, verifiable criticism can be found, but it's seriously petty to criticize a culture for choosing an icon (icons are supposed to be simplistic images, no?, i doubt a silhouette of albert einstein would be as effective?) 24.13.85.220 10:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted Criticism Section 

message: I don't get it.  The pop icon article lists a number of public figures who are considered "Pop Icons", so why can't this page list public figures seen as Gay Icons?  To me there isn't much difference.CoffeeAndCigarettes 02:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pop Icon and Gay Icon 

message: I don't understand why this article isn't deleted yet. It had a majority vote against it, it's bigoted (there's no "black icon" entry, you'll notice; hell, there isn't even a black HEROES entry), and most of all there is no argument as to why this fits in an encyclopedia. If an artist says they're a gay icon, put that they said so in their own article. It isn't a fact to be stated categorically--there's no fact to present! You can't simply print an article to tell gay people who they admire. It's repulsive. It's magazine culture, nothing more.
I realize the vote came to "no consensus" but aren't there other ways to delete articles like this, on the basis of them being inappropriate and unverifiable/indisputable? Mistertruffles 17:48, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *The method for deleting articles is AFD. Wikipedia is run by consensus. No, there aren't other ways. Fan-1967 17:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Isn't This Deleted? 

message: I've been working on the Laura Branigan page and wondered why a link from there to this Gay Icon page disappeared.  Has she been demoted?!  Wondering if it were those involved here making a decision about this page's contents or the variously motivated vandals I've encountered over there who removed it.  I welcome the link, if you wish to put it there, though I hesitated to put it back myself if there's an issue at hand, am new to Wiki.   J T  16 November 2005
—preceding unsigned comment by 69.86.17.200 (talk • contribs) 
In a similar vein, the "examples" section is threatning to grow without bound.  There isn't any reason we have to give up on WP:V for this section, so I'm moving all of the current section here, and we can move them back to the main page when some sources are WP:CITEd as to thier gay icon status. - brenneman(t)(c) 05:47, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: **shouldn't Tammy Wynette be included in this list. She was a close friend of Elton John, had may fans who were gay men , had lots of drama in her life, and was married multiple times 
(List merged with the other list below. -- Beland 13:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples 

message: Seems to be mostly used for providing a sounding board for the author mentioned?  I'd like to savagly edit that section.  brenneman{T}{L}  23:43, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You bet - especially that part saying that "activists and revolutionaries" should be role models in the first sentence.  What bunk.  Somebody is seriously trying to push their "being LGBT means you must have a total oppositional stance toward mainstream society" POV with that bit about "activists and revolutionaries".  The section either needs specific cites or it needs to go.  70.108.84.143 03:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crit section 

message: FYI, :Category:Gay icons is up for deletion, at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 April 8#Category:Gay icons.  (I hate the transinclusion style of deletion votes; if you forget to look even one day you may totally miss a vote in progress.  I'm betting there are others in the same boat, which is why I bring it up here.) --TreyHarris 06:49, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've voted to keep.  Without repeating myself verbatim, in essence I think that just because the category and article have been misused by some editors does not make the subject itself invalid.  We may need to be strict about insisting on sources, but we should be doing this anyway.  Throwing it away simply because it's difficult to manage is not a good enough reason - if that was the case we'd be deleting every contraversial topic at the first sign of an edit war. Rossrs 14:58, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category is up for deletion 

message: I don't know who moved the list here, but some of the articles actually explain the gay icon status, so I moved those back into the article.  Some need to be checked further, or perhaps shouldn't be included.
There's a starter list here: 
-- Beland 04:08, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahem.  You’re asking in an online encyclopedia who Jimmy Somerville is.  Try looking him up.  I’m not gay but even I can tell he’s a cast iron candidate for gay icon if ever there was one, even if Americans have never heard of him.  Bombot 15:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  moving uncited list here

message: Can't believe nobody's brought this paragraph up for discussion, as I was sure it would be edited out of the article by now:
<<Another criticism of gay icons is that the concept is based on the notion that a person's sexual orientation dictates, or at least influences, a person's cultural and aesthetic preferences. By extension, a person's role models would be dictated by their sexual preferences. This effectively means that the role models afforded to androphile men are narrowed to a few celebrities and would not include people like Dwight D. Eisenhower, Albert Einstein, drag racing legend Don Garlits, Iggy Pop or Muhammad Ali.>>
For one thing, it seems to be misworded or badly edited.  Androphiles are persons of any sex or gender identity who are attracted to men.  The writer doesn't support the declaration of the final sentence with the previous two.  Is the author's point that gay men aren't attracted to all types of men, but rather to men whose sexual image is either stereotypically gay (even if not actually gay or bisexual, like some of the boybanders people keep putting up here), or iconically straight (even if actually gay or bisexual, like Rock Hudson or James Dean), thereby excluding types of men more typical to the gender, such as Eisenhower or whomever this Garlits character is?  And who is the author of that paragraph to imply that gay men not attracted to Iggy Pop or Muhammad Ali?  I'd say the sexual component to both of those men's appeal was within the realm of that appreciated by some gays, if not to the level of gay iconography.  On the other hand, Iggy Pop has always been cited as one of the major proponents of androgyny, alongside David Bowie and Marc Bolan, and as such would have a fairly iconic stature affecting the sexual or gender identities of some who grew up with him as an influence.  So if that was the writer's point, the glam Iggy Pop - or for that matter, the very vain and rather handsome Muhammad Ali, who spouted poetry about his own physical beauty - would seem to be out of place, as they do have a sexual appeal to certain segments of the gay community, and therefore don't support that point.
The only way it makes sense as I read it is if Eisenhower, Einstein and the rest ARE gay icons yet gay icons whose appeal is not explained by the definition.  Yet...is there a subculture of gays who would cite Eisenhower, Einstein and Garlits as chief among their icons?!  ("Drag racing legend" seems to me about as synonymous with "gay icon" as "Aboriginal spear-thrower."  Less, as at least the Aborigine shows some skin.)  Finally, the writer doesn't make the point that gay icons are limited to celebrities by citing other celebrities - Bella Abzug or Harvey Milk, while known personages and people who fought for the rights of women and gays (and thereby candidates for iconic appreciation), were not celebrity-famous, and neither classically attractive nor part of a trendy subculture, and would more appropriately festoon (?!) a list of those lamentably relegated to would-be icons but for the fact they're not celebrities, if that was the point.  Could the original writer, or someone who understands and can explain this point clearly, help me and others understand what this statement means, so that we can clarify that point in the article?  If not, I propose it be removed.  Abrazame 19:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What the...?!  (Proposal to clarify or delete paragraph from article) 

message: I added this criticism section because there is an argument that gay men can (and sometimes do) miss out on a lot of history, because of their narrow choice of role models/heroes. I was giving examples of people who were innovators in their fields who don't have a gay following to show that gay men don't necessarily follow icons like Cher or have any interest in gay culture at all. Who a person likes shagging and who their role models can be unrelated. (Chris Henniker 15:22, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A response

message: See discussion here about why the article has been protected. Thanks. Harro5 09:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection 

message: Alright I have few suggestions to the examples list:
It seems there's a lot of singers who are just popular rather than icons, Whitney Houston, Kelly Clarkson, Sean Combs (seriously what is P. Diddy doing here?), Janet Jackson and Celine Dion being the most obvious. Could someone explain to me why they are considered icons?
Also Marilyn Monroe seems like a strange pick for a gay icon, because isn't she an icon for all people and not just gay people?
I get that Debra Messing is a gay icon, but shouldn't Eric McCormack, Megan Mullaly and Sean Hayes also be on the list? 
Finally how about adding RuPaul, Jobriath (the worlds first openly gay popstar has got to be an icon) and maybe The Scissor Sisters to the list?
What? Debra Messing and the rest of the "Will And Grace" cast aren't gay icons just because it's such a popular gay show. I'm gay and I've never even heard of Jobriath, being a gay icon is half history/half popularity. Keep that in mind. And instead of adding anyone that seems would be a gay icon we should only put people in with that status given to them by the gay community. Research, research, research. Also ... Marilyn is both a gay and national icon because gays consider her a gay icon. It's all about gay community concensus, if they say you're a gay icon then you hold gay icon status. It's because us gays are odd like that. --QuirkyAndSuch 04:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some suggestions  

message: Unless there is an actual reference attached, names can and should be removed.
The following I removed from the list. If one of them is wrong, get a reliable source (or two) that says that they're a gay icon. Note that I don't know what the gay community considers an icon, so don't get pissed if I remove someone who "obviously" is an icon:
*Christina Aguilera - one claim of experimentation
*Julie Andrews - no mention
*Are You Being Served? - a portrayel of gay character
*Joan Collins - "sex icon" who is in Will & Grace
*Ann Margret - "sex-kitten", no mention
*Deborah Harry - icon, no mention
*Rita Hayworth - icon, no mention
*Audrey Hepburn - icon, no mention
*Daniel Craig - gay scene in a movie, no other mention
*Nicki French - performed at a gay pride festival, no mention
*Geri Halliwell - no mention
*Ayumi Hamasaki - no mention
*Celine Dion - no mention
*Aretha Franklin - no mention
*Mariah Carey - no mention
*Patsy Cline - no mention
*Betty Buckley - no mention
*Shirley Bassey - no mention
*Lance Bass - last minute outing
*Bronwyn Bishop - politician of Liberal party
*Tom Brady - American football qb
*Dean Cain - Superman actor, Republican
*Tom Cruise - "allegedly" gay
*Pauline Hanson - conservative politician
I'm done sorting. Someone else can pick up where I left off. Try and be objective. 24.126.199.129 20:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing names from list

message: Please read WP:RS, WP:CITE and WP:V for further information. Unsources statements will be removed. Iolakana•T 17:05, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If they truly are, you won't have trouble finding a source. Iolakana•T 16:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed (almost all) of the names from the list

message: To the person who says it's bigoted because there's no "Black icon" category: create one.  If you think the whole idea of the "x icon" category is bigoted because it favors one group over another, then you are basically saying that to define anybody as a gay icon (or for anybody to define themselves as such) is bigoted, and I think you could agree that's absurd.  That argument is not as clear as I'd like it to be; I hope you get the gist.
I think this article has merit; "gay icon" is a phrase that has entered the culture to describe some people, and it requires more than a dictionary definition.  I agree that you should be able to support your choices, but I suspect some people removed the entire list because they want the article deleted, for whatever reason.
I think it needs a major, NPOV rewrite, for sure.  I also think the personal attacks need to stop.
Rather than external links as are currently done, shouldn't that be a reference list?  I'll fix it sometime, but I have a paper to write.
Finally, I added Barbra Streisand because she's a gay icon and she knows it.  I submit as my evidence her comments at her Madison Square Garden concert.
The end.  Thor Rudebeck 08:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distillation 

message: People when adding gay icons add them because they are an icon and not just because they are gay.  Not every gay celebrity is necessarily an icon.
--Jaydeejj 04:04, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding gay icons 

message: Need I say more? It takes up most of the article! Zazaban 00:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critisism too big..... 

message: That's great that you think that.  I'd tend to disagree and say it's probably Judy Garland.  Another person might say it's Barbra Streisand.  You can't pick just one person as the most popular, especially without citing a source.  Cher is extremely popular among gay men; after all, she was cool enough to put in an appearance on Will & Grace.  But I don't think we can classify her as the "most popular" without a source. Thor Rudebeck 00:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The most popular gay icon is Cher." 

message: I find this article absolutely unncessary. Although it has been discussed at length, I don't think it's necessary for "Gay icon" to be it's own article, and frankly the wording and phrasing is up for debate about what classifies "an icon" (i.e., "larger than life" is both poor prose and very vague)
Now, if the article stays (which it probably will), I think it would be beneficial to include those that have been instrumental in gay society. If Madonna is such a great "icon", what has she actually DONE for the community? Not every homosexual is a rabid fan of Madonna (the Madonna article already states what she has done ... why mention it here?) The names that come to mind aren't always celebrities, and of those that are, they have a truly unique impact to the overall well-being of the gay community.
Further, it's stereotypical to assume that a "gay icon" is "someone that died young and beautiful" or something along those lines. Once again, it's up for interpretation, which in turn, makes it POV and subject to deletion.
I am more than willing to write a solid, factual article on Gay icons, but I can tell you that it won't inclde petty things, such as actors or play gay characters (who are paid to do so), or musicians who may be bi-sexual and appeal to the subset. Trodaikid1983 22:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is severely lacking in tons of areas 

message: I have substantially rewritten this terrible weak article, adding as many ref as I could. I rendered the criticism section invisible, as it was added by an anon IP and I could not find a single reference for any assertion in the section. Feel free to re-add that section if you can find any refs. A criticism section would be nice, if it was sourced. Jeffpw 14:07, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is some critisism in the following article: John Howard. Pink doesn't mean fluffy // Independent, The (London), 4 August, 2005. I have added the link, but not the info yet.--Antanta 19:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes as of 15 January, 2006

message: This has the potential to become a great article - I'm not going to debate the merits of it; that was done in the AFD.  However, parts of this article are beginning to resemble a list, which will almost certainly reflect someone's personal views about inclusion at some point.  Every name in the list has a citation, but that doesn't necessarily make the list "accurate."  Theoretically, future editors would seek out information to prove names they already wish to add, rather than finding information and then adding names based on it.  How can we deal with this effectively? Thor Rudebeck 17:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there should be a single paragraph (subsection) for each person with expanded explanation or citation from references. It would look more apprortiate, I think, as opposed to the plain list without any explanations. For example, the link for Shirley Bassey is incorrect - the term "gay icon" is used only in comments, but not in the original bbc article. The correct link is this.--Antanta 19:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listing 

message: This recent poll of 5000 gays and lesbians about gay icons would seem very appropriate here.--Antanta 19:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional info

message: This section looked very messy so I changed it into a list format, but it's still not perfect. If anyone can make it better, please do, or if you think it was better the original way revert it. davekeeling 20:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I  don't care for the way it looks a all, though I won't revert it. Let's see what others have to say. Jeffpw 09:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't care for it either, though that long prose list really was getting out of hand.  Might be possible to break it up by saying something more about why and how each of these people is a gay icon, instead of just listing them. —Celithemis 10:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: In Entertainment Section

message: Hey, I'm a gay man and I vote for the inclusion of the sadly departed actress Elizabeth Montgomery as a gay icon. As Samantha Stevens in the "Bewitched" sit-com she was a camp favorite of mine and many of my gay baby boomer friends. I even read an article somewhere on why the character Samantha was a gay male icon and Jeannie of "I Dream Of Jeannie" is not one. Anyway, although a heterosexual herself, Ms. Montgomery was thoroughly sympathetic and devoted to the cause of LGBT rights: she was even a official Grand Marshall of the Gay Pride Parade in Hollywood, along with her friend and co-star Dick Sargent, who played Darren in "Bewitched."Buddmar 08:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, gay icons, that may be a bit strong in my opinion.  Although I would favor Elizabeth Montgomery over Dick Sargent as a gay icon. Azalea pomp 05:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How About Elizabeth Montgomery? 

message: How can we forget Wayland Flowers and his puppet Madame or Bea Arthur (or the Golden Girls in general). Azalea pomp 05:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More possible Gay Icons 

message: Debbie Harry was the original frontwoman and forerunner to everyone from Annie Lennox and Madonna to Gwen Stefani and Shirley Manson. She was good friends with Andy Warhol, a regular on the Studio 54 scene and has a huge LGBT following. She has long been a promoter of LGBT issues and is going to be touring the USA with Erasure, Cyndi Lauper and other campaigners for gay rights. She has even admitted, while being heterosexual, to having enjoyed relationships with men and women. Why therefore have you deleted her from the list of gay icons?
As a gay man myself I happen to love many of the gay icons included in your list, but Debbie Harry has been associated with gay rights for far longer than for example Beyonce, who would still have been in nappies when Blondie were conquering the music scene. Much as she is a fabulous modern diva, in the words of the Lauren Bacall "she's not a legend". She's not been on the scene long enough. Debbie Harry has had over 30 years in the music industry and has during most of this time been very much part of the LGBT community. 
I appreciate gay icon is a fairly loose term and it kind of suggests that everyone who is gay is somehow expected to associate with all of these characters to be part of the "club" like clones. But a fair number of gay men do associate themselves with queer history and culture and this most certainly does include Debbie Harry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Divinelydecadent (talk • contribs) 23:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why was Debbie Harry deleted from this list?