Talk:Sex (disambiguation)

Requested move

Oppose This is clearly a joke. If you put 20 disambig pages ahead of the page everyone is looking for (sex is the most viewed non-topical article on Wikipedia) everyone would still find it and vandalize the talk page just as much because they can't vandalize the article because it is protected. 199.125.109.88 (talk) 03:05, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was a request to move the page Sex (disambiguation) to Sex, but there was no consensus found for the move. Dekimasu よ! 07:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Severius NEEDS TO LEARN HOW TO TROLL

Eehh... Someone really messed up the page... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.145.139.167 (talk) 17:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Meanings of 'sex'

Is there a particular reason why Sexual dimorphism is listed as the first likely intended target of someone searching for 'sex', but Gender and Human sexuality are down in the See Also section? In the past it was more common to use the word 'sex' than 'gender' to define an animal's or person's classification as male or female, so 'sex' seems a very likely search term for someone looking for Gender. I would like to add Animal sexual behaviour and Sexing (both valid meanings of the word 'sex' - one a broad noun, one a verb) but I'm wondering whether to reorganise these categories at the same time, using the top section only for interpretations of the word 'sex' itself. ~ Kimelea (talk) 18:59, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now done. ~ Kimelea (talk) 07:43, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sex and gender are not synonymous

That the meaning of sex listed, with reference to male vs. female (vs. non-binary standing), is represented as gender, is very misleading. Sex as a descriptor of physicality of genitalia is not gender. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madysonegan (talk • contribs) 06:12, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Madysonegan, people commonly see sex and gender as synonymous, as made clear in the Gender and Sex and gender distinction articles. Flyer22 (talk) 12:29, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Linking

Sharif Uddin, regarding this, this and this, there is no need to link sexual activity, which redirects to the Human sexual activity article...which is already linked on the page. That is unnecessary overlinking. There is also no need to link Copulation (zoology). Copulation redirects to the Sexual intercourse article, which is already linked on the page, and the Copulation (zoology) article is specifically about non-human animals. The line in question is not solely about non-human animals.

Pinging In ictu oculi and Bkonrad for their thoughts on this since they also fixed up this page. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also not sure that your sex drive addition needs to be on the page. If we are to retain it, it perhaps should not be under "Animal sexual behavior" since sex drive is not a behavior. That stated, it obviously affects sexual behavior. You originally placed it elsewhere on the page. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:21, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]