Talk:LGBTQ people

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LGBTQ people article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 months

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies

Sexology and sexuality Top‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Gender studies Top‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : see Unassessed Gender studies articles and Unknown-importance Gender studies articles
Cleanup : edit to see
Collaborate : see /Collaboration
Copyedit : edit to see
Deletion sorting : see /Sexuality and gender
Expand : edit to see
Infobox : see Gender studies articles needing infoboxes
Merge : edit to see
Notability : edit to see
NPOV : edit to see
Orphans : Brannon Masculinity Scale · Holy Virility · Media and gender · Michael Kaufman (author) · Women's education in Saudi Arabia
Photo : see Wikipedia requested photographs of gender studies
Split : History of feminism
Stubs : see Gender studies stubs
Translate : see /translation
Update : edit to see
Verify : Riot grrrl
Needs attention : see Gender studies articles needing attention

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a contentious topic. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

Fine lines to navigate

There is both a need for this article and the need to be careful with this article, because LGBTQ isn't actually a single set of people. As a group it's pretty much defined as a contrast to another group (i.e., not "straight"), and while there are times (particularly politically) when there is a large degree of unification of interest, when you start getting into things like "culture"... well, G culture and L culture can be quite distinct from each other, even in a single region. So when we say something like "The history of LGBTQ people dates back to the first recorded instances of same-sex love and diverse gender identities and sexualities in cultures around the world" (as is currently in the draft), we may be melding several different histories for the convenience of having a history section in the article. (If I can use an example of something similar but perhaps clearer: we could have an article on History of People of Color in the United States, because there have been social and legal situations in the context of the nation that refer to them broadly... but a page just on History of People of Color would be trying to find an excuse to meld the history of Asia and its people with the very different histories one would find in Africa and Latin America.) -- Nat Gertler (talk) 01:16, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a broad-concept article being introduced to pull together already-existing subtopic articles (like LGBTQ history, this article has been drafted to summarize what those other articles already say. I think that process does create the opportunity to identify potential issues with the scope of its subtopic articles, including gaps, overlap, or inconsistency in the approaches, but for the most part resolution of those issues would primarily occur at the subtopic articles. (For what it's worth, I think LGBTQ history does a good job of keeping geographically separate histories separate without trying to generalize too much, with the possible exception of the first paragraph (which where the above quoted line was drawn from).--Trystan (talk) 15:14, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same as LGBTQ community

LGBTQ people = LGBTQ community

Please describe a person who is in one and not the other. This might have been true with LGBT, but with LGBTQ and LGBT+, everyone is now in both.

One edge case used to be men who have sex with men who were culturally straight but did homosexual behavior. With Wikipedia's categorization, that falls under + or Q to put them in the community. The term LGBT was a voluntary labels for self-identification. The Q and + are less personal or voluntary, and are about behavior that external people can observe.

The Wikipedia definition of queer is "umbrella term for people who are non-heterosexual or non-cisgender". Who meets that definition but is not in both groups? @Fgnievinski: Bluerasberry (talk) 12:36, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluerasberry LGBT community is a relatively recent construct. LGBT people have been documented for millennia. in countries or periods where or when LGBT was illegal, there were LGBT people but no LGBT community. fgnievinski (talk) 13:25, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fgnievinski: Consider Category:Historical figures with ambiguous or disputed sexuality. Are these LGBT people, but not part of the LGBT community? Is this article the place for describing historic figures? Bluerasberry (talk) 14:14, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are LGBTQ people who don't participate in or consider themselves part of an LGBTQ community, including in places and times where there is or was no LGBTQ community to speak of. But that isn't the most fundamental difference in scope. LGBTQ community is about LGBTQ people "united by a common culture and social movements". It discusses LGBTQ people acting as a semi-organized collective whole. LGBTQ people is the broad concept article for the entire LGBTQ subject area. LGBTQ people acting together as a community is a subtopic of that, but so are other subtopics that are relevant to LGBTQ people as individuals (whether or not they participate in a broader LGBTQ community).

As I suggested a couple of sections above, in the absence of a BCA, I think some subtopics (like rights and discrimination) were incorporated into LGBTQ community that don't really fit there, but belong under the BCA instead.--Trystan (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"LGBT Living & Weddings" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect LGBT Living & Weddings has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 26 § LGBT Living & Weddings until a consensus is reached. --MikutoH ^talk! 02:40, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Gender and Sexual Minority" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Gender and Sexual Minority has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 26 § Gender and Sexual Minorities until a consensus is reached. --MikutoH ^talk! 02:47, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"MOGAI" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect MOGAI has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 26 § MOGAI until a consensus is reached. --MikutoH ^talk! 02:49, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also being discussed there: Commonly used queer acronyms, Commonly Used Queer Acronyms and their Meanings, MVPFAFF+ and MVPFAFF. Jay 💬 14:43, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to Talk:LGBTQ_people#Requested_move_14_August_2024?

I was looking for Talk:LGBTQ_people#Requested_move_14_August_2024 (a perennial topic). When I click the link it says the topic cannot be found and may have been moved, deleted, or renamed. No dice at Talk:LGBT_people#Requested_move_14_August_2024 or Talk:LGBTQ#Requested_move_14_August_2024, either. I'm not sure where to ask for technical assistance and thought folks active here might have some insight. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:37, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is now at Talk:LGBTQ (term)/Archive 4#Requested move 14 August 2024--Trystan (talk) 22:48, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I was losing my mind! Many thanks 🙏🏾 --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:15, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if the archive header is put here it shows that message when a topic is archived. Ninixed (talk) 07:58, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

after "not heterosexual, heteroromantic, cisgender," there could be "binary, or endosex", referencing "sexual orientations, romantic orientations, gender modalities, gender identities, and sex characteristics (...)". italics are my proposal for new additions.

disclaimers: considering that some people with culturally specific gender identities (third gender) can be simultaneously cis while outside gender binary, neurogender people, cis people with genderfluid expression, queer-presenting cis folks, cishet drag performers, GNC endosex cishet cross-dressers who were included in trans* umbrella before. ofc none of these examples need to be mentioned, it's just my reasoning. Ninixed (talk) 08:08, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I boldly added. Another reasoning is that gender modality is more currently accurate. Ninixed (talk) 08:12, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]