Talk:The Ethical Slut

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Ethical Slut article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Sexology and sexuality Low‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

NPOV

I am as big a fan of The Ethical Slut as the next hedonist, but I don't think that the article as it originally stood reflected a NPOV, and with the mention of Stranger in a Strange Land was definitely not NPOV and of arguable accuracy (and Stranger doesn't have anything to do with tES anyway). While I was at it I clarified the issue of the book's authorship and added a couple external links.Kit 06:40:47, 2005-08-10 (UTC)

Poly/open relationships

The Ethical Slut is about consensual non-monogamy, which includes everything from swinging to polyamory. If anything, they talk more about open relationships than about polyamory but the article should reflect the fact that it is used by members of all communities within that spectrum as a valuable resource. Kit 22:04, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with that sentiment. What I did have a problem with is that when you click the link for "open relationship" it took you to the Poly page. Which, at least in my vernacular, "open relationship" is much more like "swinging" than poly. In fact, the first page of the poly article says, that the two are different things, however there is a redirect setup from open relationship to poly... which is totally wrong. I would say that we should use your term... "consensual non-monogamy" and perhaps add a line after saying "including swinging, open relationships, and polyamory"

--Hcatlin 17:24, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To me, open relationships covers the entire spectrum of alternative, non-monogamous relationship styles and serves as either a generic or an umbrella term. However, I agree with your suggestion that we should emphasize 'consensual non-monogamy' along with a clarification, since it is the term I believe they use most in the Ethical Slut and avoids differing definition issues. I think we should probably have an open relationships article that is distinct from polyamory at some point though, discussing all the different types. Kit 18:26, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have improved the article and given a better idea of the spectrum of relationships covered in the book. What do you think of the current version of this article?

Also I see you've already started discussion of the overall problem of open relationship in Talk:Polyamory so I have continued that conversation there. Kit 21:47, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Some criticism removed

I removed the following language from this article:

Most of the book’s reviews have been positive. However, there are several criticisms that the book contains thinly veiled attempts to glorify lesbianism, condemn heterosexual females, and demonize males. They cite the fact that all the positive anecdotes contain only female characters, and that all the negative anecdotes contain a male antagonist.

First I'd like to see this cited if it is going to be added back. But more importantly, it is not at all true -- less than 5 minutes flipping through my copy of this book showed that on p.190 is an anecdote involving a heterosexual couple which is as positive as any in the book -- a couple decides to open their relationship, encounters some tension, and then works it out through their agreements. Therefore, all hetero/male-involved anecdotes in the book are not negative.

If there is citable criticism of this book, of course I would support it being added to the article. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 20:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean, "if" there is a citable criticism? Do you seriously think it possible that any book can be free of criticisms which may be cited? 118.209.10.111 (talk) 01:39, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"More"

What kind of subject heading is this? This section needs a more encyclopaedic heading. Branfish 02:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody? Come on, I'd change it myself, but I haven't read the book in question. Branfish 00:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ethical slut.jpg

Image:Ethical slut.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Movie? What movie?

Here we are six years later, and no sign of the movie. A Google search for

"Moses Ma" "The Ethical Slut"

finds nothing later than 2007. Almost all the snippets say "will be producing" or "forthcoming", and most of them are the same report of the same article (An article in the January 31, 2007, issue of the East Bay Express reports that Moses Ma will be producing a movie adaptation of The Ethical Slut.) IMDb has one result:

a 2002 episode of SexTV (Season 4, Episode 12): Girl Show/The Ethical Slut/Sex and the Beard? (2 Feb. 2002)

It's dead, Jim. --Thnidu (talk) 06:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Ethical Slut. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110612030036/http://media.libsyn.com/media/polyweekly/PW110.5_23_07.mp3 to http://media.libsyn.com/media/polyweekly/PW110.5_23_07.mp3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:54, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]