Talk:Finger (gesture)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

There is a beautiful picture of a classic 60's protester flying the bird right in the face of the camera. I believe this was a cover of Time or Life in the late 60's. IMHO this picture is an aboslute must for viewing in the "classic examples" section of this topic. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the picture. If someone can do so, I would be most grateful as would all knowledge seekers looking for enlightenment on how to fly the bird.


Contents

[edit] Old talk

someone who knows the story should add to this article the origins of "the finger". I know it has to do with archery exploits during wars between the french and the english, but I don't know specifics.

Also, IMHO, this article should be named "the finger" - Kingturtle 21:54 Apr 7, 2003 (UTC)

The 'archery exploits' "explanation" is from an old shaggy-dog story (that means a long joke) with the punch line of "pluck yew". It isn't serious.
The "origin" of the 'V-sign' is certainly widely established 'knowledge' within the UK. Perhaps there should a whole section of the wiki devoted to hand gestures and their origins? -- Basswulf 09:25 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)
See snopes [1]: it is an urban legend. Gareth 21:09, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I am on vacation, and I cannot necessarily do the research, but I know of some decent sources that suggest this explanation is legit. It may be an urban legend that this explanation is an urban legend ;) When I get the time, and am in the right city to get to the right library, I will check up on the info. Kingturtle 22:07, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Isn't it pretty non-NPOV to use underscore to symbolize the word "fuck?" I'm changing that.

That's my finger. No really. Ich 04:26, Jun 20, 2004 (UTC)

see mammalian prehensile digits... right ^_^... [maestro] 10:29, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've always heard the origin of the finger coming from a battle in The Hundred-Years' War where the French had won a battle and were putting up their fingers a la "We're #1!", and the British mistakenly took the symbol as offensive because of its similarity to genitalia...can anyone confirm this?64.24.4.167 16:24, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've never heard anyone suggest that "the finger" comes from English archers. Two-fingers, yes, that's common knowledge in the UK, but not one. And the "pluck yew" thing is patently ridiculous and shouldn't be on the page. [217.42.38.179]

I agree, this is adding confusion to confusion. The 'two fingers' origin may itself be apocryphal, but it makes slightly more sense than this, which I can only attribute to second-order mythologising. (Besides, if you cut off someone's middle finger they could still draw a bow...) I'm going to edit this, unless someone can provide references for the "popularity" of this story. Alai 23:00, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The photo could be of better quality. Also what about the variation of the finger in which the thumb is also extended out to the side? I heard that way of giving the finger is supposed to be more dramatic. Just a few thoughts. --Sudachi 11:09, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)


I'd like to see some sort of supporting evidence for the term "Trudeau salute". I'm sure it does exist but I find it hard to believe that it is commonly used.

Google gives 457 results. —Caesura(t) 20:45, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mike Wirth

Here the link to "Finger" by Mike Wirth http://www.mikewirthart.com/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=23

[edit] during an NFL game

does anyone remember this? i saw it once on a TV bloopers show. toward the end of an NFL game, the camera gives a close up of a dejected fan, his team losing by a lot of points, he looks into the camera and gives the finger. since it was live TV, it went onto the airwaves. when they showed the blooper later, the finger was blurred out. does anyone remember this? if we can get details about it, i'd like to add it to this article. Kingturtle 18:04, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

It was in the early years of Monday Night Football. It was Don Meredith, I believe, who made a comment about the fan saying "we're number one". It wasn't blurred out because, obviously, it was live. —Wrathchild (talk) 19:33, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
This is from http://www.funtrivia.com/en/Sports/Monday-Night-Football-11054.html On October 9, 1972, the Oakland Raiders were headed for a 34-0 thumping of the Houston Oilers (Oakland's third win in as many MNF appearances, scoring 34 points each time). As the fans emptied from the Astrodome stands during the final quarter, the cameras found a wonderful shot: a fan, seemingly alone in his section, was sleeping. "A vivid picturization of the excitement attendant upon this game", was what Howard Cosell called the image of the sleeping man. Then, unfortunately, the man woke up, and less fortunately, "flipped off" the camera. Without missing a beat, Meredith commented, "He thinks they're number one in the nation!"
See also: [2]

[edit] Bird?

Where does the term flipping the bird come from? Anyone know?

Same question here. Last night at dinner, a group of my friends and I wondered about the term, but no one really had any plausible explanation. I was hoping Wikipedia might know, but alas.

[edit] Canada

Erm:

Canada and most of Europe have a more liberal stance, and modest to heavy use of the gesture is tolerated.

I don't know what part of Canada the writer was talking about -- things might well be different in Quebec, for instance -- but giving someone the finger in Ontario is probably as rude as it is anywhere in the States. --Saforrest 07:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah i totally agree i live in a good part of toronto and i almost got my ass kicked because some dude thought i gave him the finger, when i actually didn't. Even in Quebec where i used to live the middle finger is considered pretty offensive to give to someone. i don't know anyone who would tolerate being given the finger in most of canada. --Duhon July 24 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bush example

In the "famous example" of George Bush giving the finger, it mentions a video which emerged in 2005 of the then Governer of Texas. It needs to be clarified, whether the video is from when he was governor and only subsequently emerged in 2005, or whether it emerged in 2005 at all, or whatever - it just needs to be clarified. it also needs to be clarified for me at least whether this is a hoax or not - the still isn't so convincing. I'd appreciate if someone who knows what went on, to give this a look. Cormaggio @ 17:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

  • I've linked to a screenshot of the video that's been on wikipedia for a while. I've also added an external link to the video itself.-PlasmaDragon 18:05, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. And the wording is ok, too - I suppose I just read it wrong. Cormaggio @ 23:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

It's no hoax. This is a screenshot from when he was running for governor and they were all joking around in the studio before taping. It is dangerous to take things like this out of context.Steven 17:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stronach and MacKay

I have removed this claim:

Peter MacKay, deputy leader of the Conservative Party of Canada also famously used the gesture toward fellow M.P. Belinda Stronach.

There's simply no way I would have missed as juicy a bit of news as this, given how broadly the whole MacKay/Stronach romantic arc was played out in the press, and Google can't find a trace. It didn't happen, at least not in public. --Saforrest 03:47, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] V Sign Origin

I have heard the V Sign explained as 'dual penetration' but I don't know if there's any evidence of this.--Jack Upland 07:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

No offence, but the picture looks really atrocious. Can someone take a better one please? See gesture for better examples. Also it would be nice to have a pic of some celebrity, for example this. PizzaMargherita 05:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I've replaced the current picture (which also seems to be vanity since the uploader has only two edits) with that of Nelson Rockefeller's.--TBCTaLk?!? 08:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
There's a couple problems with that. One, you're replacing a free use image with a fair use one- we're supposed to use free use images whenever possible to protect the site from legal action. Second, that picture doesn't have a valid copyright tag, source and other issues and thus is eligible for deletion. Third, the "atrocious" picture excellently profiles the actual gesture, the Rockefeller is seen from the side. I moved that picture to the "Famous examples" section. --TheTruthiness 08:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Consider this done. I have uploaded a professionally photographed picture of myself giving the one finger salute. This picture is under the GPL/Commons license. --Allyn 09:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Better images please

I'm very surprised that we don't have lots of pictures of this, but I can't find any better than the blurry one currently in the article. Can someone take some nice clear pictures of just the hand, one for each different variation? — Omegatron 00:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please continue to provide quality content

I think that this picture is excellent in its depiction of the gesture at hand and does an excellent job of conveying its meaning in a contemporary context. Wikipedia, you've done it again!? 69.209.208.221 17:14, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, I see in the subjects face all the emotion that is generally conveyed with the meaning of the gesture. This is perfect for anyone wanting to understand it's significance. --67.102.158.43 14:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] spam email

I get this occasionally:


  Subject: History of the Middle Finger


  > We never stop learning....      For all you
  history lovers and speech
  > pathologists!
  >
  >             Subject: " History of middle finger"
  >
  >       Well, now......here's something I never
  knew before, and now
  > that I  know it, I feel compelled to send it on
  to my more intelligent
  > friends in the hope that they, too, will feel
  edified. Isn't  history more
  > fun when you know something about it?
  >
  >       Before the Battle of Agincourt in 1415,
  the French, anticipating
  > victory over the English, proposed to cut off
  the middle finger of all
  > captured  English soldiers. Without the middle
  finger it would be
  > impossible to draw the renowned English longbow
  and therefore they
  > would be incapable of fighting in the future.
  This famous English
  > longbow was made of the native English Yew tree,
  and the act of
  > drawing the longbow was known as"plucking the
  yew" (or "pluck yew").
  >
  >       Much to the bewilderment of the French,
  the English won a major
  > upset and began mocking the French by waving
  their middle fingers at
  > the defeated French, saying,  ''See, we can
  still pluck yew! '' Since
  > 'pluck yew' is rather difficult to say, the
  difficult consonant cluster at
  > the
  > beginning has gradually changed to a
  labiodentals fricative 'F', and
  > thus the words often used in conjunction with
  the one-finger-salute!
  >
  >       It is also because of the pheasant
  feathers on the arrows used
  > with the longbow that the symbolic gesture is
  known as "giving the
  > bird."
  >
  >       IT IS STILL AN APPROPRIATE SALUTE TO THE
  FRENCH TODAY!
  >
  >       And yew thought yew knew every plucking
  thing!

The article mentions it briefly, but it should address all of it. DyslexicEditor 01:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

And you think a spam email is a reliable source? — Omegatron 02:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
No, so I went here and the article didn't say much about all the contents, just something vague and brief. DyslexicEditor 15:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crossed arms variation

Is there another article somewhere that describes the related gesture where the arm giving the finger is passed underneath the other fore-arm, making a cross shape? I don't even know what that's called, but it's clearly related to "The Finger", as the two gestures are most often combined into one. (Though not always - this gesture, with the finger replaced by a little hand-wave, was used with comedic effect as a respectful salute in the movie "Spaceballs".) --Lurlock 21:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] George W. Bush

"In some subcultures in the United States, it is known as the 'one fingered victory salute' which gained popularity after this video appeared on the Internet in October 2004, showing George W. Bush, at the time of the film the Governor of Texas, using the gesture while goofing off before beginning filming of a public address."

Was the film made in 2004? Because if so, I'd like to point out that George W. Bush was not the Governor of Texas by October 2004 as he had been president of the US for four years at that point. --Thaddius 22:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
It simply states that Bush was governor at the time the film was made. It makes no comment about when the film was made. Bhumiya (said/done) 00:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Xzibit

"A popular MTV show, Pimp My Ride featured rapper Xzibit taking a car with a pair of Mickey Mouse gloves with four fingers including the thumb. As Xzibit drives the car, he wears the gloves and flips off the camera. Despite the technicality, it is still censored."

Despite what technicality ???

He's wearing a glove while giving the finger; he's literally "giving the finger" but technically you can't see it because of the glove being worn over the hand. Whether or not that's the same thing is debatable, but regardless that's the "technicality" referred to by the original author. 71.201.59.110 08:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Phallic Symbol?

Neither I (nor anybody I know) thinks the finger is a phallic symbol. "The reference to coitus may be strengthened by first wetting the finger or by sucking on it." I have never heard of anyone doing that either. Who in the hells thinks of or does the gesture that way? --TheTruthiness 06:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I've never seen or heard of this either.--67.102.158.43 18:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

That the finger is a phallic symbol is pretty much common knowledge, especially given the thought which it generally symbolizes ("Fuck you" is a decidedly phallic phrase, if we're going to consider the active/passive roles typically associated in coitus that would historically assign meaning). I've never seen anyone wet the finger or suck on it, but the middle finger is the closest thing to a universal insulting gesture the world has so I wouldn't be surprised if those are common regional variations. --The Centipede 17:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

To quote the Wikipedia entry on phallus, "Any object that visually resembles a penis or acts as a symbol for it may also be referred to as a phallus; however, such objects are more correctly referred to as being phallic." In other words, "the finger" is a "phallic symbol" simply because it resembles a penis (and the erection of the finger of course results in an image resembling an erect penis.) It doesn't matter who thinks the gesture is not a phallic symbol; it just is one. 71.201.59.110 09:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I have seen people do it, and it has a certain flair.HichamVanborm 02:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Finger - punk rock band

Since The Finger redirects to tris page, I've added a redirect to the punk rock band. There is definitely no need for a disambiguation page in this case. --Cyhatch 11:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image

Why is someone continually replacing Image:Middle finger.JPG? Not only is the image in public domain, it's also more focused on the finger than Image:Male_right_middle_crop.jpg is--TBCTaLk?!? 16:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I can see two reasons. One, people want to show their face (or their brother's face) on Wikipedia. Two, Image:Middle finger.JPG is a very bad picture indeed. Compare with some other pictures at gesture of professional quality. PizzaMargherita 19:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
One, that image is not in the public domain, but the GNU Free Documentation License. The other picture is also released under the GNU Free Documentation License, so that argument is invalid as they're both free images. I agree with Pizza that the Image:Middle finger.JPG is horrid. The guy is both paler and has bonier hands than me (that's saying something), and the picture is overall just creepy and awful. I have no idea who the dude in image:Male_right_middle_crop.jpg is, but his face is far less scary that that horrible hand that gives me nightmares. --TheTruthiness 23:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
That said, I agree with TBC that we should have a picture that focusses on the hand only. I also fear legal issues if the person depicted is unaware of having his picture on the net. Who knows, I may get around to post a better picture in the future... PizzaMargherita 06:18, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Usage in Germany

Similarly insulting gestures in Germany include
making a circle by touching the index finger to the
thumb (perceived in America as the "OK" sign) to
call someone asshole; [...]

Being an Austrian myself that has worked and lived in Germany, I never heard of this one. Can anybody cite a source for such a usage? Dagonet 17:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Being a German, I must say that I have never heard of anybody finding this gesture offensive. I use it myself a lot (to signal "perfect" or "ok") and have never gotten into any trouble, nor did anybody even find it offensive. --88.64.13.160 17:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moved to talk page

All of the following is actually about the V sign and not about the middle finger. Also, there is no source presented either for the myth or for its rebuttal (snopes.com can hardly count as a reliable source about anything, and much of the text seems like the editor's personal statements anyway). Furthermore, this is supposed to be an encyclopedia, so using rhetorical questions etc. is totally inappropriate. --194.145.161.227 13:16, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


It has long been told that the famous "two-fingers salute" and/or "V sign" derives from the gestures of English archers, fighting at Agincourt. The myth claims that the French cut off two fingers on the right hand of captured archers and that the gesture was a sign of defiance by those who were not mutilated. Knights of the time were extremely difficult to challenge in open engagement due to the amount of armor they wore, and the enormity of the horses they rode. One problem the knights faced however, was the English longbow. From a garrison or fortification, longbowmen would string their arrows in quick recession and aim for the armors weak spots. This resulted in many casualties for the knights. If the knights did however capture the fortification, they would either kill the longbowmen, or chop off their middle finger (necessary for stringing arrows effectively). As for the bowmen that escaped, upon seeing a knight, they would hold up their middle finger in mockery of the knight as if to say "ha, ha, you didn't get me"[citation needed].

Unfortunately, this is by no means the way that it happened at the time. Bowman were not valuable prisoners; they stood outside the chivalric system and were considered the social inferiors of men-at-arms. There was no monetary reward to be obtained by capturing them, nor was there any glory to be won by defeating them in battle. As Keegan wrote, "To meet a similarly equipped opponent was the occasion for which the armoured soldier trained perhaps every day of his life from the onset of manhood. To meet and beat him was a triumph, the highest form which self-expression could take in the medieval nobleman's way of life." Archers were not the "similarly equipped" opponents that armored soldiers triumphed in defeating; if the two clashed in combat, the armored soldier would either kill an archer outright or leave him to bleed to death rather than go to the wasteful effort of taking him prisoner.

Moreover, if archers could be ransomed, then cutting off their middle fingers would be a senseless move. Your opponent is not going to pay you (or pay you much) for the return of mutilated soldiers, so now what do you do with them? Take on the burden and expense of caring for them? Kill them outright and violate the medieval moral code of civilized warfare? (Henry V was heavily criticized for supposedly having ordered the execution of French prisoners at Agincourt.)

Even if killing prisoners of war did not violate the moral code of the times, what would be the purpose of cutting off fingers and then executing these same people? Why not simply kill them outright in the first place? Do you return these prisoners to your opponents in exchange for nothing, thereby providing them with trained soldiers who can fight against you another day? (Even if archers whose middle fingers had been amputated could no longer effectively use their bows, they were still capable of wielding mallets, battleaxes, swords, lances, daggers, maces, and other weapons, as archers typically did — and as they indeed did at Agincourt — when the opponents closed ranks with them and the fighting became hand-to-hand.)

http://snopes.com/language/apocryph/pluckyew.htm]

Jean Froissart (circa 1337-circa 1404) was a historian and the author of Froissart's Chronicles, a document that is essential to an understanding of Europe in the fourteenth century and to the twists and turns taken by the Hundred Years' War. The story of the English waving their fingers at the French is told in the first person account by Jean Froissart. However, the description is not of an incident at the Battle of Agincourt, but rather at the siege of a castle nearby in the Hundred Years' War. Adding to the evidence is that by all accounts Jean Froissart died before the battle actually took place; it was therefore rather difficult for him to have written about it.

One should note that Jean Froissart's writings aren't the most reliable and that a similar story is told about the English giving the V sign. This can be further explored at the Battle of Agincourt.

[edit] Image

I've just added a better pic. Walter Humala - Emperor of West Wikipedia|wanna Talk? 04:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About Bush's picture, again

The photo depicting President Bush giving the finger gets periodically deleted and re-added. Interesting as the concept of a now-you-see-it-now-you-don't illustration is, it would be nice to reach some very rough consensus on this. My opinion is that it is just a photo of a real, and well-known, person doing the gesture spontaneously, and not staging it to create an image for the article. Opinions? (And, I am not sure that removing the picture qualifies as a "minor edit", as in something that "could never be the subject of a dispute", per Help:Minor_edit...) Goochelaar 08:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, in accordance with WP policy I removed spam (WP:SPAM), and for the reasons given in this statement, the action qualifies the deletion. In all due respect, posting a picture of the President of the United States of America, or any other major political figure depicting an improper gesture is considered inappropriate and vulgar to the general public. Another aspect of the issue at hand is that posting a picture depicting such action inherently condescends and belittles the educated Wikipedian observer. Besides these observations, we must remember that children are being subjected to an improper view of their President, and that is unacceptable to the majority of Americans – moreover, because Wikipedia is an educational tool, the picture depicting ‘the finger’ adds no value to the article (as mostly everyone knows what the article is already pointing to). Depicting vulgar photos on the encyclopedia could also potentially become a Public relations nightmare in the WP environment, discouraging quality articles from ever being created because Americans (that see this content) respect their country, and their President (regardless of denomination) who is a figure thereof. I am sure Jimmy Wales would agree with this statement. Therefore, under Wikipedia spam policy provisions, the photo qualified for deletion, and I deleted it. Best regards, --Lperez2029 14:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Then we're not gonna have any pic on this article, not even a drawing. -- Walter Humala - Emperor of West Wikipedia |wanna Talk? 03:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Call me thick, but I do not see how any President Bush's photo may qualify as spam. He is not selling anything, is he? As for children or Americans being shocked, this is a reference work, and is bound to contain material (graphic or otherwise) that might be found unpleasant by somebody (anatomical details, disturbing news...). Finally, I am not an American, but if a President of my country (Italy) were caught doing a less-than-polite gesture, I wouldn't worry too much. He is responsible for his actions. But wait... It has already occurred! The article corna is: a) complete with a generic depiction of that vulgar gesture; b) endowed with an image of Italian former President Giovanni Leone making the corna. I find it an interesting photo documenting the gesture. Best regards to you, Goochelaar 08:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, Now I agree with u cuz' if I don't follow rules Ill get banned. (again) (Emperor banning) -- Walter Humala - Emperor of West Wikipedia|wanna Talk? 04:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think I've ever read anything more wrong on Wikipedia than what Lperez2029 said. I sit in shock and awe of the complete lack of knowledge in regards to not only Wikipedia, but life in general. One of the main rules is that Wikipedia is UNCENSORED- so don't give this "it's for the children" line of bullshit. The President is not a sacred cow, it doesn't matter if it's President Bush, Johnny Cash or Bob from across the street- it's a perfectly valid picture. It is in no way spam by any sane person, the only reason to remove it is because the image does not have sufficient information on its copyright status. But the most ridiculous line was "the picture depicting ‘the finger’ adds no value to the article (as mostly everyone knows what the article is already pointing to)". I don't think I can begin to describe the idiocy contained in there. Maybe the WWII article shouldn't have any pictures because mostly everyone knows what the article is already pointing to? Maybe no articles should exist at all?? The article exists because we don't assume mostly everyone knows what the article is already pointing to, we have a picture because it clearly ILLUSTRATES the hand gesture we're talking about. Dear God, I can barely read Lperez2029's comment without laughing hysterically. I've put the old image:Male_right_middle_crop.jpg back as per the earlier discussion about it. --TheTruthiness 04:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that Wikipedia is not censored, Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive. But we are talking about Spam (because the picture ‘politicizes’ the hand gesture) not censorship. You are from Canada I see. --Lperez2029 12:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I am not an American, so I may not be able to appreciate fine points of US politics, but if I understand correctly your point, you are stating that the simple act of showing a photo depicting Bush is a form of anti-Bush propaganda... Goochelaar 15:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Exactly. There is no need to link the hand gesture to any political figure because that would qualify it as spam. On another note, unlike TheTruthiness I appreciate your civility, for it is the true spirit of a Wikipedian. Like you, I am of Italian descent myself and clearly see the intellectual advantage and ability to reason things out without resorting to rudeness and personal attacks. If I were a Canadian, I would putTheTruthinessin his place because he would bring shame to the people of my country -- but I am not going to waste my time. Some people prefer to be Impolite, Inconsiderate, Offensive, Obscene, and I believe all these things together with incivility eventually belong in Wiki-Hell [3]. Everything under the sun has its place. For (spam free) reference information, that's in an encyclopedia. For other things, it's in a thesaurus or a dictionary. Never should these be mixed. Best --Lperez2029 17:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC) 17:42, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't coddle the stupid, sorry. My being Canadian doesn't mean anything- it has no bearing on the fact that it's not anti-Bush propaganda. If it was a photoshopped picture or had text added like "BUSH SUX" then yes, but an unedited picture cannot be propaganda. He's one of the most famous and powerful people in the world, and him performing a rude hand esture is notable. Remember, a former Canadian Prime Minister has been famously photographed performing the gesture- in fact I think it used to be on Wikipedia. I never removed it from any article or tried to get it deleted because it isn't anti-Trudea propoganda. Besides, Bush has done a billion things to give people a lower opinion of him then flipping the bird. --TheTruthiness 00:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[At this point in the discussion a remark by a user was deleted by another user (see history for details). The deleted remark was harshly critical and could even be construed as a personal attack toward a third user, but are we sure that it is right to delete it? I strongly disagree, but did not revert the reversion, not intending to start even an edit skirmish. Goochelaar 11:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)]

[edit] Perception in non-Western cultures?

Does giving the finger mean anything in non-Western cultures? I'm sure it's probably known about, but the article never goes into details. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.193.151.207 (talk) 07:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Better picture

Can we get a better picture for the start of the article? What does everybody else think? Maybe Pete Doherty giving the finger? There's bound to be a ton of those around. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ISeeDeadPixels (talk • contribs) 21:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

  • Try reading the previous discussion on this. --TheTruthiness 22:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] politics and the finger .... really boring - edit it out

the whole discourse on politicians and the finger is entirely boring - it would be much more interesting to describe what the roman and greek origins of the finger are in a little more detail and maybe discuss other places it has been used in history (non-political stuff)... most of us really don't care what politician is using the finger when we're looking up the history of it, we're interested in how it became part of modern culture. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.127.235.162 (talk) 01:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] New image (again)

I've added a new image of the middle finger. Any thoughts on it?--TBCΦtalk? 01:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The finger looks unnaturally too small compared to the hand, but it's much better than most horrors this page has seen. 83.67.217.254 21:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The picture was taken while the middle finger was at a slant, which might explain it looking a bit unnatural as you've mentioned. If I have time, I'll take a better one next week.--TBCΦtalk? 06:09, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

IMO, too dark and not very insistent/threatening. I don't sense any hostility. --CliffC 11:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, lighting is not great, plus the computer-aided trimming adds to the unnatural feel. A white wall like in finger would be fine. Thank you very much TBC. 83.67.217.254 13:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question for Picture

Hello:

In response to requests on this talk page, I attempted to add the following picture:

One Finger Salute
One Finger Salute

Which I had taken by a professional, with better lighting, and then commons-licensed. Then someone took it off, saying that it did not contribute anything. I am not replacing it until I get comments here. Do you want a better image? --Allyn 12:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The new picture adds nothing, IMO. My criticism of an earlier picture of a hand and finger only as "...not very insistent/threatening. I don't sense any hostility" is not resolved by the new picture or the one currently on the page. We should show the gesture and not the issuer, especially since neither one of these persons looks to be snarling an honest "FUCK YOU!" --CliffC 13:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, you might have a point. However, there are two sides of the gesture. There is the snarling option. Then there is the 'lets have some fun' option. People can get turned on by the gesture if it's in a loving, sensuous setting, as suggested by this picture. --Allyn 06:50, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

There are many things I don't like about this picture:

  • awful lighting (note flash-light shadow behind the finger and hair + saturated yellowness on the side)
  • reflecting and distracting raincoat (this is not an article about raincoats)
  • lack of contrast between subject and armchair

Good luck to the "professional" who took the picture. We really need a good finger-only picture. 83.67.217.254 20:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

You have a point. I will suggest to the photog to use a remote flash with a diffuser and adjust the lighting. Thank you for the feedback.

[edit] Reverted vandalism

Someone substituted billions of years for thousands of years. I put it back to thousands of years. --Allyn 02:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../f/i/n/Talk%7EFinger_%28gesture%29_549f.html"