Talk:Tanita Tikaram

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

[edit] Orientation

This article is included in the category for lesbian musicians, yet there is no reference to this in the article. It's not uncommon for people to be listed in bad faith, so if no one can provide a source to confirm this, I recommend the category entry be deleted. 23skidoo 18:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I think that was me, and it wasn't in bad faith -- it's been widely assumed for a long time e.g., though I can't find her saying so in an interview. In this 1995 article she avoids the question, but asserts she's in love for the first time -- refusing to identify with whom as "they'd kill me". Anyway, I was going to start adding a bit more to this article, anyway, so I'll come up with some wording to handle that. --Dhartung | Talk 08:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

The lack of a reference was what made me a little suspicious, but if you're adding more, that's great! 23skidoo 08:21, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

It's been several months since my previous query on this issue and I see nothing has been added yet. The "avoid the question" issue isn't really proof. I'm going to be bold and remove it for now. If a source can be located to affirm this is true, then by all means put it back (with source). For my part I've been a fan of her's for distressingly close to 20 years now and I've never heard one way or the other.23skidoo 02:23, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I have to disagree with this. What is the evidence that she's heterosexual? I've seen none but quite a bit that she's a lesbian. The phrase bad faith tells a lot; it's interesting that you didn't say "in error" which would have been more neutral way to frame the issue. And why is it that without strong evidence, she is assumed to be heterosexual? This is classic heternormativity: it the absence of clear evidence to the contrary, we'll all considered either heterosexual or asexual. Not fair, not Wiki, not consistent with the WikiProject Countering Systemic Bias [1] Why is it "bad faith" to list someone as a queer? This clearly assumes that being queer is something stigmatizing and that one should only be so categorized if there is irrefutable evidence for this. Otherwise, such a categoriziation is done in "bad faith," something apparently almost libelous. I don't accept this at all.

There's some flexibility in these tags. For example, is TS Eliot an American or a British poet? Or both? Mira Nair, an Indian or an American filmmaker? Or both? Heterosexuals do no not use the plural pronoun "they" when talking about their lovers, but this is a common, and understandable, thing for queers to do. That is considerable evidence that's she queer. Removing the Lesbian tag unless there is "proof" is holding queer people to a different standard than straight people. In matters of citizenship, say for Eliot or Nair, do we require proof in the form of a birth certificate, or do we rely on general consensus in many cases?

When listing someone as African American, there are a number of criteria: popular perception, statements in interviews, etc. We should as willing to entertain a plurality of evidence here. If someone is called a "cowboy singer" do we require proof that he actually worked as a cowboy? No, we're satisfied if he has an audience that considers him a singer in the cowboy genre. And today, when I was trying to find this article, I relied on the category Lesbian Musicians since lesbian friends had told me about her (as a lesbian musician) and the search took MUCH longer because she was not included in the category. Her fans consider her a lesbian, in her statements she's used language (the pronoun) used by queers and not by straights. And since there is no stigma, no "bad faith," in listing such a person as a lesbian, she should be included. According to non-heteronormative standards, The burden of proof lies with those who insist she's straight.

With all respect, I'm going to restore the Lesbian Musican category as, applying Okham's Razor, it is the most parsimonious explanation of the evidence we have AND it makes Wiki searches much more efficient. The evidence favors the Lesbian Musican category. I will encourage its removal when the evidence for her heterosexuality outweighs the evidence for her homosexuality. This is good faith.Interlingua

But my point is there is nothing in the article that says she is gay or bi or whatever. If there is evidence then put verifiable information indicating this in the article. Don't put it on the talk page. I mean there is nothing stopping me right now from putting the Gay actors category onto Brad Pitt's page. And I could provide subjective and speculative proof up and down. But this is an encyclopedia -- if we say something we have to be able to prove it. So you say Tikaram is gay -- fine -- put the proof and a link to the proof in the article. I really suggest you take a look at WP:CITE. If fans believe she's gay, that's great -- the fact is Wikipedia is not intended for fans. It's for people who perhaps have never heard of the woman and who might see the Gay category and say "OK, so where is this referenced in the article?" It's the same rationale that killed the Gay Icons category -- people didn't put proof in the articles, so therefore the category died. There is no bias going on here and I'm offended by your implication. 23skidoo 01:04, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I guess I misunderstood what bad faith meant. Using Okham's Razor, what might be the most parsimonious explanation for her use of a gender-neutral plural pronoun in lieu of a gendered singular pronoun in refering to a lover?Interlingua 01:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not objecting to the removal, for now. I still want to do a Nexis search regarding this issue. Personally, I categorized her this way years ago, but it's also clear that she is very careful what she says about her personal life. Is there a "Kevin Spacey" category? "People of deliberately indeterminate sexuality"? That might be the most accurate, but without sources we should just leave it out for now. --Dhartung | Talk 03:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC)