Jump to content

Talk:Bisexuality: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
m Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 4 WikiProject templates. Merge {{VA}} into {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "B" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 4 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Sociology}}, {{WikiProject Sexuality}}, {{WikiProject LGBT studies}}, {{WikiProject Philosophy}}.
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit
Line 53: Line 53:
:::Just to check, using this new phrasing we're not stepping on the toes of the pansexuality article/subject right? Some people get extremely worked up about labels, so I just wanted to triple check. [[User:Jasphetamine|Jasphetamine]] ([[User talk:Jasphetamine|talk]]) 00:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
:::Just to check, using this new phrasing we're not stepping on the toes of the pansexuality article/subject right? Some people get extremely worked up about labels, so I just wanted to triple check. [[User:Jasphetamine|Jasphetamine]] ([[User talk:Jasphetamine|talk]]) 00:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
::::No. It's fine. Both bisexual and pansexual people can be attracted to people of any gender. The difference is in the type of attraction. The people trying to stir up artificial beef between the two are bad actors and can safely be ignored. [[User:DanielRigal|DanielRigal]] ([[User talk:DanielRigal|talk]]) 00:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
::::No. It's fine. Both bisexual and pansexual people can be attracted to people of any gender. The difference is in the type of attraction. The people trying to stir up artificial beef between the two are bad actors and can safely be ignored. [[User:DanielRigal|DanielRigal]] ([[User talk:DanielRigal|talk]]) 00:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
:::::@[[User:DanielRigal|DanielRigal]]
:::::Thanks for your help! I had an idea for the short description: maybe it could be "Sexual attraction to people of more than one gender", which I believe would be more inclusive. What do you think?
:::::[[User:JohnLaurensAnthonyRamos333|JohnLaurensAnthonyRamos333]] ([[User talk:JohnLaurensAnthonyRamos333|correct me if I'm wrong]]) 21:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:17, 18 January 2024

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - RPM SP 2022 - MASY1-GC 1260 201 Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 February 2022 and 5 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): YC5039 (article contribs).

Question

Cite: "The Kinsey scale says that having a higher level attraction to one gender results in less attraction to the other, which some studies do not support.[39]" How does the Kinsey scale say that? It doesn't seem to say anything about "how strong" attraction is, it just measures if its more towards female or male. Does it really say that people in the middle of the scale can't be equally uninterested in men and women? Doesn't the message stay the same? "More people than you'd think are capable of feeling attraction towards male and female bodies."

Which interpretation of the Bi flag should we use?

It says in the article at Symbols and Observances

"A common symbol of the bisexual community is the bisexual flag, which has a deep pink stripe at the top for homosexuality, a blue one on the bottom for heterosexuality, and a purple one – blending the pink and blue – in the middle to represent bisexuality."

But in the Bisexual Flag article it says that Page described it that way but

"Since the original design, the purple overlap has been reinterpreted and is now widely understood to represent attraction regardless of sex or gender."

Which interpretation is the one that should be in this article? Maybe it should mention both? Adeeta (talk) 16:38, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that we should put too much emphasis on explaining pride flags stripe by stripe. Many such explanations are some combination of incomplete, dubious and post-hoc. I've seen explanations for some of the other flags which are just plain silly. The explanations offered here are far more defensible and I think that both explanations can form a coherent narrative of how interpretation of the flag has evolved over time. Nonetheless, I see this primarily as a matter to be covered in the article about the flag itself. Rather than have an incomplete explanation here, maybe it is best if we don't try to explain it here at all? If anybody wants to know, the flag article is only a click away. --DanielRigal (talk) 17:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article description: "either gender"?

The article description says that bisexuality is attraction to "either gender". Doesn't this enforce the idea that there are only two genders? I'd change it to "any gender", but bisexuality doesn't mean that for some people. How should this be changed? JohnLaurensAnthonyRamos333 (correct me if I'm wrong) 01:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. At first I wasn't sure what you meant as the phrase "either gender" isn't in the article text but then I realised that you meant the short description. "Any gender" is more in line with what the article says so I have changed it to that. DanielRigal (talk) 04:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DanielRigal Sorry, I should've been more clear that I meant the short description. I don't have much experience with this kind of thing, so thanks so much for changing it. JohnLaurensAnthonyRamos333 (correct me if I'm wrong) 06:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just to check, using this new phrasing we're not stepping on the toes of the pansexuality article/subject right? Some people get extremely worked up about labels, so I just wanted to triple check. Jasphetamine (talk) 00:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. It's fine. Both bisexual and pansexual people can be attracted to people of any gender. The difference is in the type of attraction. The people trying to stir up artificial beef between the two are bad actors and can safely be ignored. DanielRigal (talk) 00:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DanielRigal
Thanks for your help! I had an idea for the short description: maybe it could be "Sexual attraction to people of more than one gender", which I believe would be more inclusive. What do you think?
JohnLaurensAnthonyRamos333 (correct me if I'm wrong) 21:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]