Talk:Gay lisp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class.

This article was nominated for deletion on 14 December 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Is "lisp" the right word? The gay accents I'm familiar with are very distinct, but don't really have lisps. I'm not proposing the article be moved or anything; just food for thought. -Branddobbe 06:10, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)

The gay lisp is also known in the community as the 'shane' accent. It is a sign of femininity, and has a role in defining which partner will assume the role of the submissive in a relationship. Often, the 'shane' accent is used as an identifier for submissive homosexuals, in contrast to the characteristics of the dominant, or 'butch' homosexuals. -Victor Fieri , August 26, 2005.

What??? ExRat 18:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Citation? Tiagojones 05:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Still others suggest that the accent stems from marginalization.

Who suggests this, and what exactly do they mean? --Peter Farago 02:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

The studies mentioned (Gaudio, Moonwomon) need some references, too. 68.9.205.10 04:29, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

• Yup, it's a fact: Wikipedia has EVERYTHING. After I found this page along with "fag hag," I am amazed! --152.163.101.12 03:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

A lisp is a lisp. The only way I would see a lisp as being specifically gay is if the speaker were impersonating one to personify the stereotype. The homophobic rapper Elephant Man, for example has a lisp. This article is completely unfounded. GilliamJF 03:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Overly narrow?

The biggest problem with this article is that it's focused on an ostensible "gay lisp," when all three of the articles cited deal with gay speech in general, not just lisping. An article about gay uses of language might be appropriate, with a section on American gay male enunciation. But the article as it stands needs to be drastically overhauled. -Droman 03:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The summary of the Rudolf Gaudio study is very mushy. People could differentiate between gay and straight. Clear cut and dried. Because the results could not fit his hypothesis on pitch measurements does not mean the results should be discounted. There is another factor at work here that Gaudio does not understand. It also needs to be noted that this study used only 13 subjects to rate readings from 4 straight men and 4 gay men. This appears to be a very small sample to reach a solid conclusion. But this may be only part of His whole study. My study info comes from http://joeclark.org/soundinggay.html which is already second hand.

I would hate to see this article disappear for the sake of political correctness This article is of importance to those that lisp and are trying to understand how this affects how they are perceived by others. Speaking differently can be cause for ridicule and marginalization. A person may tend to associate with another maginalized group after they are "cast out of the herd". JTH01 01:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) JTH01

[edit] It's an okay article

The article has plenty of solid references. The name, while a slight misnomer, is a popular term for the supposed speech patterns the article discusses. The main thing wrong with the article is that it doesn't have specific line-by-line citations. While that sort of citation is preferable, I can't help feeling whoever added ^{[citation needed][citation needed][citation needed][citation needed]} had an axe to grind. I too have been guilty of attacking an article when its the subject of the article that I had a real problem with. Maybe that was the case here?

If we were going to rename it, what could be the new name? "Gay speech" invites a discussion of slang and those articles always turn into unencyclopedic mush. "Gay inflection" is as inaccurately prescriptive as the current title and doesn't share its circulation. This is an okay article and it could be a good article with a little work.

For those who want to raise maintain quality standards on Wikipedia by attacking articles rather than improving them, there are lots and lots of much bigger fish to fry. House of Scandal 18:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This article really should be renamed

"Gay lisp" is a made-up and arguably perjorative slang term. The references do not support the title, and I agree that the focus is overly narrow. "Gay speech pattern," or even better, "Perceived gay speech pattern" would be preferable. Thoughts?Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 19:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

• • Without trying very hard, I found and cited a couple LGBT sources which use the term to refer to the sound of gay male speech. While the term is facetious, and is a misnomer, it is definately linguistic currency and we needn't be thin-skinned about it. House of Scandal 07:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This is from Wikipedia:Naming conventions:

In a nutshell: Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.

I offer this as something to consider rather than "proof" that we shouldn't rename. House of Scandal 02:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)