Talk:List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/Archive 1

message: Proposed standards: This is a list of Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals, and Transgendered individuals. People on this list should have Wikipedia articles, and should have some information about their sexuality or sexual identity in their Wikipedia article with reasonable documentation. In the case of deceased persons there should be significant historical evidence of their sexual or gender orientation.
Voting Yes indicates you agree that the article should be revised to the Proposed Standards
Voting No  indicates that you do not want the article to be revised to those standards
[To vote, put four tilde (~) marks under Yes or No]
Please do not discuss the standards here; please discuss them in the section above. This section is only for voting.
Yes
#Jliberty 23:25, May 11, 2005 (UTC)
#Taco Deposit 14:00, May 13, 2005 (UTC)
#Willmcw 21:15, May 13, 2005 (UTC)
#BlankVerse ∅  11:20, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straw poll on proposed standards 

message: The list entry just includes his name, with no explanation. The corresponding Wikipedia article says nothing about his sexual orientation. In the page history, whoever added his name didn't give either his name or an explanation in the summary.
I really, really, really think that names should not be placed on the page, even on the ";debated" list, without explanation. Anyone happen to know what the evidence for Gershwin would be (other than his failure to marry)? Dpbsmith 21:47, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed George Gershwin, since nobody has yet cited any evidence. Not that I doubt the plausibility that he was gay—I think it's very plausible—but I don't believe any name should go on this page without support from a biography or decent journalistic source or something. Dpbsmith 23:59, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  George Gershwin? 

message: I deleted Margaret Cho.  Although she has a large gay (predominantly Lesbian) following, she has always maintained that she is heterosexual.  RickK 03:29 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)
:If that's so then the article on her needs changing, as it states she is bisexual (I know nothing about her, so I'm not touching any of this myself). --Camembert
::This quote from Margaret is from Out magazine's June 2002 issue:
:::Cho recalls that several years ago when she was performing at a comedy festival in Montreal, her then-manager took her aside and told her "not to sit in Lea DeLaria's lap so much." He then asked her if she was "completely straight." "I told him I didn’t know. And he said, 'It doesn’t matter if you are or if you’re not. You have to tell people that you are completely straight. You have to show that you are completely straight.' I didn’t know how to do that. I didn't know how to be someone who wasn’t me."
::While she's now very open about her sexuality not falling under the straight category, she's not as clear about where exactly it does fit in.  At different times she's referred to herself as bi, "a big dyke," or even as "a gay man in a woman's body."  Paige 13:53 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)
:She has not "always maintained she's straight". She's always maintained she likes guys, which is not the same thing. A substantial portion of her album Notorious CHO is about having sex with women. She said, "I'll eat pussy, it's just not my first choice!" Make of that what you will. - Montréalais
:This is a perfect example of why attempting to shoehorn people into one of three orientations (straight? gay? bi?) is increasingly not working. How do you account for someone like the lovely Tristan Taormino, who writes lesbian erotica, has sex with men and women but prefers women, and yet is engaged in a primary relationship with a female-to-male transsexual? - ZSpinal 02:47, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: The answer is to stop thinking of this as an issue of sexuality, and start thinking about it as an issue of identity and power politics.
WRONG WRONG WRONG!  If Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, then it is about FACTS, not propaganda or politics.  The FACT is, Elton John is gay.  Whether he choses to engage in politics is another matter entirley.172.169.17.120 04:08, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Margaret Cho 

message: :Some historical figures on this list wouldn't be considered GLB by today's standards, but they are included here because they were known to have had same-gender relationships.
First, the above statement is NOT neutral; it implies a subjective interpretation of what "GLB" is. I strongly disagree that people involved in natural "same-gender" relationships are NOT GL or B.  If the bottom line is that being "homosexual" or "gay" is an orientation, then what matters is not subjective interpretation of that orientation but whether they were so oriented.
Also, it should be noted that for GLB people, it can be a point of understanding to see real historical figures that were gay but had to deal with it discreetly.  That doesn't mean label everyone you want (i.e. Abe Lincoln) as gay, just to have a bigger umbrella (i.e. redefine people in our own image).  However, take for example King Henry III of France (ruled 1574-1589).  He was widely rumored to be gay.  He dressed in women's clothing and wore earrings.  He had sleepovers with boys he called "darlings" (he himself was not that old).  He was cold to his wife and produced no children.  So strong was the assumption that he was gay that Paris rose in open revolt in 1588 (also related to his not being pro-Catholic enough).  He was also treated as a "wimp": Duke Henry of Guise tried to push him around and publicly scoffed at the notion that Henry III could do anything to him.  Yet Henry III had Henry, Duke of Guise assassinated in 1588.  In this sense, he was a "hero" standing up to a bully.  As to denials, the writers of the time strongly hinted that Henry III liked males, not females...Likewise, it could easily be documented that James I of England was at least bisexual, engaging in same-sex affairs with "favorites" such as the Duke of Buckingham, "scandalizing" England at the time.  Unlike Henry III, King James was also known to sleep with women, but the umbrella term "likely to be gay or bisexual" would certainly fit here.  It would also fit the argument that people were "homosexual" due to orientation, not just the social situation of the time; it was easier for a person of power..."Divine Right of Kings"...to live out their fantasies than for the commoner who might be executed if "caught in the very act." Since one of the arguments against gay/homosexual people is that they just "emerged recently" and "chose their orientation," by documenting a long historical trail of evidence of homosexual and bisexual behavior, this notion can be defeated.  The prevailing thoughts of then or now should not be overplayed; the facts should come to the fore.  Thus, we know today that U.S. President James Buchanan and vice president William R. King very likely engaged in homosexual behavior, but remained closeted due to the times.  It would be WRONG for us to assume what they would do or say if alive today, so all we can do is note their actions and the reactions of the times. Finally, this list, if inclusive of historical figures, might just educate today's population a little more beyond the self-centered approach of thinking they were the "first" to do just about everything, when in fact many before were in similar situations. 172.169.17.120 03:47, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  This list has gotten fairly out of control.  It should be people who were notable for their inclusion in the LBG community, right?  However, it seems to be developing into a database of possibly LBG individuals.  I wonder what the point of this could be.  Is it being done from a "Yay!  Look who we've got on our team" attitude? ("I pick Socrates!")  If so, wouldn't that be very much in opposition to the informative goal of an encyclopedia?  And probably damaging to the LBG community?  I think listings here should be based on fact, and it should probably be relevant to something.  Otherwise, we should just merge it with the list of Queer Wikipedians and move it out of this space altogether.  Paige 14:08, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sappho!! I choose you!! :) Martin 12:36, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical figures