LGBT studies Start‑class | |||||||
|
Linguistics Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
right word?
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)
shane accent
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? --April Arcus 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)
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
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 {{Fact}}[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)
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)
Aren't all terms made-up? And what's perjorative about calling a lisp a lisp? 76.27.239.216 (talk) 22:34, 19 January 2009 (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)
"Perceived" is a bit redundant in this context, don't you think? And "pattern" implies word selection and organization, not just accents. If we're too thin-skinned to accept "lisp", perhaps "Gay Accent" or "Vocal Mannerism (Gay)" is our term? 76.27.239.216 (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
This article needs phonetic detail!
I agree with other posters that "gay lisp" is not a good title for this article. How about "Gay pronunciation: 'Gay lisp'", to give it a more objective title, but reference the popular terminology at the same time?
What is really needed for this article is for both a phonetician and a sociolinguist to provide a detailed description of the phenomenon. As a start:
The phonetic reality: We have to recognize that American English has a variety of articulations (tongue positions) that are perceived as S sounds, and most people don't consciously notice the differences. U.S. women tend to use an S that has a smaller groove (the channel formed by the upper surface of the tongue against the alveolar ridge) and more muscular tension of the tongue tip against the lower teeth. This combination of gestures makes an S that sounds more strident than other articulations.
The sociolinguistic reality: When a male uses this articulation, it breaks with our unconscious association of the articulation with female speech, and in U.S. culture, whenever a man does something normally associated with female behavior, the popular assumption is that he is homosexual.
Note that the exact same articulation of S exists in other languages, notably in some Latin American Spanish dialects. But in those areas, the articulation is NOT associated with either male or female speech, so the "gay lisp" phenomenon simply doesn't exist. Rldavis04 15:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Dr. Drew theory
Dr. Drew Pinsky theorizes that this lisp is something of a "tone arrest" basically men and womens voices seem to stop growing at the point of their traumatic experience. Very interesting if you ask me. 67.164.65.21.
- Any sources that can confirm this? Benjiboi 15:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
None yet, but I haven't searched, but he often describes it on his show Loveline.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.65.21 (talk • contribs)
No such thing among Russian gays
The article should be re-named because the title "gay lisp" implies something that is typical for gay men everywhere in the world. But in reality it is something specifically American. There is no "gay lisp" or anything similar among Russian gays, for example. 66.65.129.159 (talk) 03:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
At least in Spanish, there is also a gay lisp. I don't think is exclusively american at all —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.151.52.253 (talk) 02:02, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
When I was working as an English teacher in Moscow way back in the early '90s, there were a couple of gay men among my circle of Russian friends. Since I'm not a native speaker of Russian, I can't be sure whether they had a "lisp" or not, but my gay Russian friends (and their gay friends whom I knew only as vague acquaintances) definitely had certain "mannerisms" in their speech, such as sometimes using grammatically feminine word forms in reference to themselves or to other gay men. (For example, Russian past-tense verbs will have different suffixes depending on the subject's gender. A Russian man who wanted to tell you "I was reading..." would normally say Ya chital , while a woman would say ''Ya chitala . And these gay guys would sometimes use the feminine -ala verb ending instead of the masculine -al.)
What I'm not sure of is whether this was something they'd started doing in imitation of English-speaking gay men who switched pronouns, or if it was an independent development.Throbert McGee (talk) 16:36, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- Ahahaha. How I laughed. User:66.65.129.159 is American, I know it, before I even check his WHOIS. How do I know? Because it seems only Americans who have this 'America is the English-speaking world and the English-speaking world is America' attitude and are ignorant of anywhere outside the US borders. The gay lisp is well known is the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa - want me to go on? Basically in pretty much any English-speaking country. I guess that'd be why the Russians don't have it. What would be interesting is a section on the history of its development - when was it first recorded as being used, how did it spread to such universal use in the gay English-speaking world? Here in the UK it has been used for decades, even centuries - for example in Polari, a gay slang (later popularised by British comedians Kenneth Williams (himself gay) and Hugh Paddick (also gay) as characters Julian and Sandy. Check them out on Youtube.) 86.133.51.201 (talk) 15:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Gay lisp - as a signal to other gay people
As a gay man, I offer the following reasons for the gay accent, which don't seem to be covered in the article. I have not done much googling to see if there are papers which support these arguments. (Except maybe http://americanspeech.dukejournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/82/1/32 ). Firstly, it's a signal to other men that you are gay, which might not otherwise be obvious. Since it's a speech pattern, and not some other marker like clothing, you can also mostly 'turn it off' at will, if meeting someone you do not wish to reveal your orientation to. Secondly, the gay accent may also just be a result of living in proximity to other gay people with the same accent - a way of identifying with a community. Note: I don't have a gay accent, very deliberately! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.116.194 (talk) 16:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
I very much agree with this. It harkens back to the theater, the life-as-pageant, fun-loving worldview. Gay or straight, it's just a fun way to talk and shows up the old "macho" ways of speaking as dull dishwater. 76.27.239.216 (talk) 22:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
As a gay man, I disagree. I don't even notice myself having a "gay lisp" while I'm speaking, but when I hear my recorded voice played back to me, I definitely hear a "gay lisp." I don't think I sound as bad as some gay men though. I definitely don't do it on purpose. I just do what comes naturally. It actually embarrasses me, but I don't try to change my voice because I would feel even more uncomfortable posing as someone I'm not.
- I'm straight, but when I hang out with more than one gay friend I start talking like them. It is fun, and easy to get carried away with. I'm definitely not doing it against my will. I do the same thing when I'm in Brooklyn or Texas: start talkin' like the locals. (Those accents come in a little more subconscious though, they kind of sneak in.) Can't explain all this but any group is gonna pick up ways of talking. It definitely originates in "camp". It's actually more than a lisp; there's a sort of Bette Davis thing going on too. One thing: it ain't genetic. Though you could find solitary gay dudes in the middle of straight island. It's spread by way of stereotypes and media as much as "mainstream" gay culture and the gay sense of life and alienation. But dudes should talk to some Bears if they think all gays talk this way. Bears do not talk like this, usually. It's sad anyone would be ashamed of it, but people do treat gays like weirdos in some places. Gay or straight, a lisp could blow job interviews for sure and attracts derision, but it's also a great way to talk. This article was okay, but needs some sound files. 76.105.254.23 (talk) 17:41, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Not restricted to the English speaking world
Here in Denmark it is also common to hear this type of speech among gay men, especially those who also dress feminine. I don't think there is anything negative or stereotypical about it, it's just a way of expressing feminine beauty like lipstick, attractive clothes, high heels and so on. I believe it's common all around the world however I'm pretty sure that in homophobic countries(such as Iran), gay men are smart enough to only use this accent in safe, friendly settings. Maybe this is why ahmedinejad claims that there are no gay people in Iran ROFL. T.R. 87.59.78.140 (talk) 01:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Pleathe delethe thith arthicle.
Really, what the hell wikipedia. There's plenty of straight men with similar speech impediments. I wonder about the importance of this article... 81.84.1.180 (talk) 20:10, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
- The article isn't about an "impediment", it is about a stereotypical quality of speech which is *called*, by the world at large, the "gay lisp". It doesn't suggest, imply or advocate that this phenomenon exists in reality, is characteristic of gay men, or is in any way bad. Like the wikipedia articles about any other social construct, it merely explains the phenomenon in question. The article isn't perfect, but it's certainly no less worthwhile than thousands of other articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.248.87 (talk) 15:32, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I got it that not all gay mean speak this way
But is it really necessary to have 50% of the article stating that this is a stereotype and that some (BUT NOT ALL!) homosexuals speak this way? --Belchman (talk) 15:26, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I agree with this. It is a pretty widely recognised occurrence; Every single person who has ever watched TV in the West (at least) understands what the "Gay Lisp" is and that it exist. That the article not only states once, but go on and on to state that it might even exist is pretty strange. 207.61.204.116 (talk) 13:47, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I am deleting the part that says "non-natural"
I'd like to see a reference that can prove it is a "non-natural" attribute of gay speech. I'm not saying that it's necessarily "natural" but until someone can prove that it isn't I think this is a typical homophobic/self-hating gay response to gay speech in English. 76.71.207.13 (talk) 17:04, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Uh, because if it were natural don't you think that they would be able to find some scientific correlation between the two? --192.251.125.85 (talk) 09:01, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Your conception of bigotry, tolerance, fear, etc is extremely confused. First of all, you do not tolerate things you like, think are good, etc. You tolerate things you think are bad, wrong, evil, etc. So people demonstrating their distaste for something in no way what so ever denotes hatred, bigotry, intolerance, etc. However, based on the standards of intolerance you're putting forward, you're being intolerant of views which differ from you on the matter. You sir are a hypocrite of the highest, most self righteous, order. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.96.88.141 (talk) 18:58, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
/s/
4chan reference i believe, hurry up and fix it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.144.244 (talk) 05:51, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
horrible web page
Looks like it's a "gay wash" here or something. You have on cited claim that "none has beenproven", when the very cite in question immediately after lists two studies that show that it was proven that the "s" was indeed pronounced idfferent in a statsitcally significant way. Garbage in garbage out. The writes of that stupid "poster", as they are not scientists/reserarchers, start with the complete non-sequeter and red herring angle that it's hard to figure out what exactly a "gay lisp is". There are so many logical flaws in that "poster" its mind boggling even the msot left wing university would host that utter nonsense.66.190.31.229 (talk) 20:46, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
It's a legitimate question
There have been some studies that tend to suggest homosexuality in males may have a genetic basis. It is possible that the 'gay lisp' may be attributed to this slight genetic difference, or it may be purely cultural. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.20.107.17 (talk) 14:44, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Programming language?
I recently reverted this edit by Codeofdusk, who changed the lead sentence to be "The gay lisp, which is not a programming language is a..." Codeofdusk reverted my revert, so here we are. I do not see the relevance or the necessity in that statement. If there is indeed a notable programming language named "gay lisp", it can be disambiguated through conventional means. Certainly, the rest of the lead sentence and the article will make it clear that this article is not about such a programming language. Mz7 (talk) 22:46, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- @Mz7: Sorry, it's a couple of friends of mine messing around. I told them about this edit which I encountered when I read the article for the first time; it lasted for nearly a week. They found it very amusing, as did I; it refers to this kind of lisp. I've semi-protected the article for a day. Graham87 15:07, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gay lisp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101027153157/http://speech-language-therapy.com:80/codemix.htm to http://www.speech-language-therapy.com/codemix.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:24, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Gay lisp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.speech-language-therapy.com/codemix.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110514003200/http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/gayspeak.html to http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/gayspeak.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:56, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Move to Gay English
@Fivejohnny5: Just a warning that there may be some push-back against your move. There seemed to be some support for "Gay speech characteristics", for example here. That said, "Gay English" seems fine to me as that covers most of the article's scope (even if a little strange to me for some reason). I have no idea however if that term is established in the academic literature like "Philadelphia English," "New York City English," etc. Wolfdog (talk) 18:22, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Title of this article, and other issues
Wolfdog and Fivejohnny5, regarding this and this, respectively, we go by what WP:Article title states, not our personal opinion on what is less judgmental. And a part of WP:Article title is WP:Common name. Per WP:Requested moves, titles that are likely to be contested should go through an official move request. Because of this, and because the move currently needs an admin's help, I will request there that the article be moved back. I will then drop a message at WP:LGBT, WP:Linguistics and the WP:Article titles talk page for opinions on what the title of this article should be. Also, Wolfdog, regarding this and this expansion you made, we shouldn't be using words such as "so-called," or scarequotes; this is per WP:SCAREQUOTES. You have also separated "gay lisp" from "vowels" when all of this goes under the same category in sources. When sources talk about the gay lisp, which almost always concerns only males, they talk about vowels. And you have also based a lot of the material on Benjamin Munson, which can be argued as WP:Undue weight. And I know that this speech-language-therapy.com source was in the article before your expansions, but it's poor and needs to be scrapped. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:05, 2 April 2018 (UTC)