Talk:Drag (entertainment)

message: Wearing drag is not only a LGBT thing,it implies that people who wear drag are gay or bi,when many drag wearers are not.
Dudtz 6/10/06 6:27 PM EST
:Nonsense - how does the table imply that? It just implies that it is also an article relevant to LGBT subject, not that it is only relevant in an LGBT context. -- John Smythe 13:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  "Straight" is too well entrenched in English to be considered derogatory (even when it isn't intended that way), and besides, it's more meaningful than "hetero" (which is only a prefix: "-sexual" is implied); it means "not unusual" in a broad sense.  A heterosexual cross-dresser might consider non-cross-dressers "straight", but when referring to people unlike him wouldn't refer to them as "heterosexuals". Unfree (talk) 20:26, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove LGBT Table. 

message: The article says, "The verb is to 'do drag.'"  But there's no evidence cited.  I've never heard "to do drag", but I've often heard "to go in drag".
Also, "A folk etymology whose acronym basis reveals the late 20th-century bias..."  Which bias?
"Drag is practiced by people of all sexual orientations and gender identities."  Is that verifiable?  What about homophobia?  There must be somebody who doesn't "do drag"! Unfree (talk) 20:00, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree; a lot of this article isn't written very well. To "do drag" is not a verb I've heard, but I've heard "dressed in drag" and referring to someone/some people "[being/is/are] in drag." Your third comment about dressing in drag being practiced by all sexual orientations is a little off; I've heard it said that the majority of men who dress in drag are, in fact, heterosexual. But, I agree that it should be cited. »  (•) 12:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

text: You're both right, and way past time for this to be changed.  I'll remove it now. Mathglot (talk) 09:14, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: To do drag

message: I was reading the section on Drag in the performing arts and it says "One is cross-dressing in the performance, which is part of the social history of theatre." I would like to point out that dressing in as a gender not one's own has been a part of the practice of the theater as far back as the middle ages, and perhaps even further. I think it should be noted in the article. »  (•) 12:47, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social History of the Theater 

message: “The term originated in Athens, Greece in the fourth century B.C.E. when it was common practice for gender-noncomforming people to be dragged through the streets as punishment” 
This sounds very dubious to me, especially since the basic verb 'to drag' is from Old English origins, not Greek. It is a pity the contributor has not cited a page reference for Professor Don Kulick’s book Travesti which appears to focus on transvestitism among Brazilian prostitutes. 
The Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper suggests that
[Drag in the] sense of "women's clothing worn by a man" is said to be 1870 theatre slang, from the sensation of long skirts trailing on the floor (another guess is Yiddish trogn "to wear," from Ger. tragen)
Any thoughts?  Whitenoiseuk (talk) 12:54, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In Dutch, 'to wear' is 'dragen', with a 'd'. Erik Wannee (talk) 05:24, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology? 

message: The theatre section really could do with a bit about pantomime dames. I don't know enough myself about the history of pantomime to write this, but someone surely does.
TRiG (talk) 16:41, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theatre 

message: The article needs to be renamed.  "Drag" in this sense, is not about the clothing, it's about the wearing of certain types of clothing (or makeup, or accessories) that are highly associated with one gender, by someone of the other gender.  It isn't drag when it's hanging on the rack, and it isn't drag when worn by a person of the "right" gender. 
The wrong title leads to all sorts of problems in the article, starting with the first sentence which  says, The term "drag" usually refers to the clothing associated with one gender role when worn by a person of another gender, but that's just not correct as it doesn't refer to the clothing at all, but rather the act of donning it by someone whose gender would normally be inappropriate for that type of clothing based on gender roles in a particular time and place. 
Perhaps a better title would be, "In drag", although that makes it an adjective or adverb, and article titles are usually nouns. Here's ngram viewer with some data for common expressions with "in drag".  Alternatively, perhaps a different parenthetical disambiguation would resolve it, although I can't think of a single parenthesized word that would work.  Mathglot (talk) 10:21, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: While I still have problems with the title, I think I've convinced myself that changes to the article can make up for whatever deficiencies the title has, and I just can't think of a better one (maybe someone else can).  Anyway, wrt the point about article titles as nouns, there are exceptions, and the See also section in this article provides one: namely, En femme.  I've done some work on the lead so the objection I raised concerning the first sentence is mostly taken care of  now, and with that and further work on the article I hope that may alleviate any issues with the title. Mathglot (talk) 01:26, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong title 

message: Verifiability is a core policy of Wikipedia, and unsourced material may be challenged and removed.  The Performing arts section has very few references for its large size, so I've tagged it, and am hereby challenging the the section in its entirety, minus the limited portions substantiated by the four or five references present.  Note that this section represents over half the article currently and contains the subsections Theatre, Opera, Film and television, and Music. I hope that references can be found, as much of the material is interesting, but if it takes slashing over half the article to bring it into compliance, then so be it.  
In addition, some sections of the text in the section sound very polished, which otoh is great, but otoh I question whether some may have been copied from somewhere without the required attribution.  
The first paragraph of section Film and television for example includes this sentence:
The self-consciously risqué bourgeois high jinks of Brandon Thomas' Charley's Aunt (London, 1892) were still viable theatre material in La Cage aux Folles 1978... and it remains pretty much intact since it  on 6 July 2004.  I did a web search but other than one print on demand book from 2013 and various mirror sites I haven't found a likely origin for it, so perhaps the phrasing is the editor's, however the text would still require citations from reliable sources, as does the whole section.
In any case, for now, I've just tagged the section, but if there's been no activity in, say, a month or so, then I'll start to prune this section down to remove unsourced material and remain in compliance with policy. Mathglot (talk) 23:51, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Tl;dr: Much of this section smacks of plagiarism, but I don't see how to prove it.  Perhaps the best that can be done, is demand sources for everything, and just start cutting out what can't be sourced. Mathglot (talk) 00:27, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verifiability of performing arts section 

message: Pinging you here per your talk page request.
Not sure if Drag (clothing) is on your watchlist, but it was in rough shape.  I've made a  recently; hopefully, it's better than it was, but it seems like it has a ways to go.  If it's something you'd be interested in contributing to, I'd be honored. Naturally, feel free to tweak/revert my changes, if not an improvement.  There are also a couple of Talk page sections above that could use comment.  Mathglot (talk) 00:21, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, no, it wasn't on my watchlist, but it is now. You've done fine with helping to fix it up. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  More editors welcome 

message: A discussion about the similarity and differences among several articles including Cross-dressing, Transvestism and other related articles (this one, Transvestic fetishism, Ball culture, et al.) is taking place at WT:LGBT. Your feedback is welcome. Mathglot (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion at [[WT:LGBT]] about similarity among several related articles 

message: Recently, an IP added new section Ball culture. While there is plenty of good information here, it needs to be cut way back.  The problem is: wrong venue.  We already have an article entitled Ball culture, and the material should be merged there.  Once that is done, by following the guideline about Summary style, this article may contain a brief section summarizing the "Ball culture" topic, as the Parent article.  IP 2A02:8388:1600:9100:FC87:A2EE:DBD1:B8D8 (I've pinged you on your talk page) could you please move this information, or merge it into Ball culture first, and then we can see about what kind of summary we want to retain in this article.  Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 12:24, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: So, nothing much has changed since then, so I've taken a stab at it. I moved the whole section to Talk:Ball culture, where the detailed material can be copied or merged in, as appropriate. It has been replaced by a new, shorter, and much more general, summary-style introduction, which I believe will be much more accessible and informative to the general reader, than what was there before. The kernel of it is made up of a copy of the introductory paragraph from Ball culture, slightly shortened, and modified to make it more appropriate here, and adding a  article link in Summary style. This was then augmented by a brief, second paragraph, describing the spread of the previously largely unknown subculture to a larger audience through the Madonna song, the Livingston documentary, and the TV series Pose. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 10:12, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ball culture 

message: I feel like Drag (performance) would be a better title based on the content of the article. Thoughts? – Anne drew 02:21, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You know what, I don't know enough about the subject to make this kind of suggestion. Our drag queen does link here with the words "drag clothing" so perhaps the current title is okay. But to me it seems like "clothing" doesn't capture everything about this subject, which is also a performance art and a subculture. I'm interested to hear what others think. – Anne drew 02:30, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I could support a move to Drag (entertainment). --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:28, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  --SergeWoodzing (talk) 19:59, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

text: Would Drag art or Drag (art) be more simple and accurate? Xdtp (talk) 17:28, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: "Entertainment" can hardly be questioned. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:46, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: It is my experience that some drag persons (queens as well as kings) who do not perform for any other audience than themselves alone. They entertain themselves, not the general public. Can we add that in some appropriate wording to the lead? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:55, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Drag performed for oneself alone