2

28 questions are tagged , and eight questions are tagged . No questions have both tags. Browsing the list of questions, I saw five or six that could be tagged . Neither tag has any followers.

Given the low volume of questions, do we need both tags? It seems like all 36 questions could be tagged , rather than trying to sort them into subcategories. Or, if someone wants to go on a retagging spree, we could remove both tags.

| |
  • 6
    I can't see why there's an lgbt tag on a site about Science Fiction & Fantasy in the first place. (Well, I can't really see that for sexuality either, but well.) – TARS Mar 15 '16 at 10:15
  • From the votes, it sounds like people want to leave things the way they are, so never mind. – Molag Bal Mar 15 '16 at 19:09
  • @TARS Fiction often addresses real issues from the real world. Science fiction and fantasy are certainly no exception, and LGBT issues are quite real. For example, JK Rowling thought it was important enough to mention publicly that Dumbledore was gay, and that topic has certainly come up on the site. I can understand wanting to categorize questions like that. – Cascabel Mar 19 '16 at 3:06
2

Per my earlier answer to this question, When should we do another tag cleanup?

Whilst it's quite straightforward to see the damage caused (repeatedly flooding the front page with dozens of minor edits) where I'm struggling is trying to see what the benefit actually is.

I see no good reason why retagging these questions would have any positive impact on the site's usability or any good reason why we'd want to flood the front page when there's nothing at stake.

| |
  • 1
    That's why I initially suggested making them synonyms. It gets rid of one tag without flooding the main page. Then we could clean up the other tag during the next tag cleanup, i.e. never. – Molag Bal Mar 15 '16 at 16:14
  • 1
    @amaretto - I'm still stuck on why this improves the site. – Valorum Mar 15 '16 at 16:29
  • 1
    @Richard If some people see an advantage for the site in synonymising lgbt with sexuality, then do you have any argument against it? Given that your point about the damage caused by flooding the front page doesn't apply to synonymisation, does this answer apply only to the possibility of manual retagging? (Note that I'm not taking sides here! :-) Haven't voted on either question or answer, and have no strong feelings either way.) – Rand al'Thor Mar 15 '16 at 17:34
  • 1
    @randal'thor - I just don't see the need either way. Perhaps I'm just dim, but how does this actually improve the site – Valorum Mar 15 '16 at 17:44
  • @Richard Dunno. Ask amaretto and the people who upvoted the question :-) – Rand al'Thor Mar 15 '16 at 17:44
-2

I'd take a different approach:

Sometimes you just have to do this stuff with tags, especially when it's so minor. I would've just axed LGBT without asking anyone.

Same as when I've created other tags that needed application to several questions, or pruned other unused tags.

Improving tags on a small scale is just part of normal user moderation. If someone contests your actions, you can always go to meta after.

| |
  • This question (which is for removing the tag) has an overall negative score, indicating that people disagree, and the only other answer (which is for leaving the tag) has an overall positive score - why therefore did you think it appropriate to remove the tag / go against the community consensus on this question? – Rob Mar 16 '16 at 20:54
  • 1
    All of those points are your opinion, none of which you called out in your answer above. Instead you decided to ignore the rest of the community who had voiced an opinion on this matter and remove the tag anyway. As long as there are LGBT people the acronym will be unlikely to become outdated, Sexuality != LGBT. There are a whole host of other things covered by sexuality (e.g. Asexuality, which was explored in some ways in the TNG episode "The Outcast"), it's just that LGBT is a more prominent/well-known aspect. – Rob Mar 16 '16 at 21:04
  • Since there are a number of science fiction authors, Delany, Varley, Russ, Bishop, Sturgeon, Le Guin come to mind, who write extensively about various expressions of sexuality, shouldn't there be tags that allow people on the site to highlight their questions about those works—and even other works that seemingly aren't connected? The introduction of these themes in print was controversial at the time and in other media is probably still so. Having a couple of tags available is probably worth the clutter. – rosesunhill Mar 17 '16 at 3:10
  • 1
    @roseunhill If they were used that way, but they weren't. This wasn't a hypothetical. It was applied almost randomly to questions that mentioned non-hetero relationships between characters or non-cis genders. It was inconsistent, not generally helpful, and barely used since inception. In your scenario, I'd suggest author tags + keywords. – user31178 Mar 17 '16 at 3:33
-2

It seems like it's a moot point now that there are no questions tagged . And not being an active user here, I don't want to try to say what tags should and shouldn't exist.

But I'd urge you not to regard and as synonymous, or to treat as a subset of .

includes straight sexuality, and clearly focuses on the sexual aspect of things. That is, it's about sex, not sexual orientation. This is demonstrated both by the tag wiki excerpt ("Sexuality is the quality of being sexual or possessing sex.") and the questions so tagged.

doesn't really have to be about sex at all. Yes, the LGB part is sexual orientation, but plenty of LGB issues are really nothing to do with sex. And the T is about gender identity, not sexuality. (While it obviously has some connections to sexuality it's clearly not just about that.) In any case, questions can be about LGBT topics without being about sex.

So consider this: would you apply to all questions about straight relationships, e.g. everything that mentions marriage? I don't think so. It doesn't seem any more appropriate to apply to all questions about LGBT topics. If anything, it might be a disservice to the important, meaningful topics of those questions. "What are Wizarding society's attitudes towards homosexuality?" is really not about the same subject as "How many alien women has Capt/Admiral Kirk slept with?"

| |
-2

Both the and tags enhance the taxonomy of questions on scifi.se.

Works of science fiction and fantasy have been used to explore sexuality, for example The Outcast (an episode of Star Trek: TNG) uses Asexuality as a plot device. Captain Jack Harkness (Doctor Who / Torchwood) is the poster boy for Omnisexuality.

LGBT on the other hand (as a specific term) is much better know and in more common usage and thus should remain (unless there are enough questions to warrant breaking the taxonomy down further).

It could be suggested that the sites search facility is ample for those who might be interested in questions regarding sexuality in general, or LGBT specifically. There are two questions that have recently been denuded of their which counter this argument:

In short, there is everything to loose, and very little to gain by removing tags, which I think is part of the point Richard Valorum has tried to make in his answer.

| |
  • 1
    I'm not sure if I should be proud that my answer is the only one with the words "lesbian" and "gay" in them. – Valorum Mar 16 '16 at 21:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .