Talk:Dicksucker

Cocksucker and dicksucker are synonyms for fellatio?

According to Flyer22, "cocksucker" and "dicksucker" are synonyms for "fellatio." I'm not an expert on everything, but I'm pretty sure this is wrong. They sayShe says this is according to online sources. I asked if theyshe would stop the WP:REVTALK, start a discussion and provide the sources, but theyshe - declined.

"You can easily search online yourself, including in slang books. 'Cocksucker,' for example, is clearly in regular dictionaries, such as The American Heritage."

Well, the online sources I found - merriam-webster.com, oxforddictionaries.com, onlineslangdictionary.com - do not give these terms as synonyms for "fellatio" - which is the act of fellatio, to fellate - not the person who performs the act. If anyone has a reliable source to support F's claim, I'd love to see it. Lightbreather (talk) 03:43, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

First: I think you know that I am a "she," since you have seen people refer to me as "she" and by other female pronouns, as recently as my latest WP:ANI case that you became involved with. And because of that case, you are surely aware that I identify as female on my user page. And if you doubt that I am a she, you can take that up with the WP:CheckUser who talked with me via Skype and reported back to others during my big 2012 block case; that WP:CheckUser noted that I am a she, as recently as this discussion (her "00:55, 18 September 2013 (UTC)" reply). So, yeah, referring to me as "she" instead of as "they" is what is best.

Second: I stated here and here that the terms cocksucker and dicksucker are synonyms for fellatio and are pejoratives. How are you defining the term synonym? For the term cocksucker, Merriam-Webster clearly states, "usually obscene. one who performs fellatio —often used as a generalized term of abuse." TheFreeDictionary.com clearly shows different dictionaries (including The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition) that define cocksucker as "One who performs an act of fellatio." and "A mean or despicable person." The Onlineslangdictionary.com clearly states, "a despicable person. Literally: one who sucks 'cock' (penis.)" This Cassell's Dictionary of Slang source (by Sterling Publishing Company, Inc., 2005, page 309) states similarly, showing cocksucker can simply mean fellatio, and going into other definitions of cocksucker, such as cunnilingus, and variations of the term (such as cocksuck and cocksucking). All of these sources are clear that cocksucker means "fellatio" and "pejorative," with a heavy emphasis on it being a pejorative. And as for the term dicksucker, which is not as WP:Notable as the term cocksucker, sources show the same regarding it, as seen here, here and here (that last source is the same Cassell's Dictionary of Slang source, but is on page 399). Fellatio is about a person performing an act of oral sex on a male; so, for example, "one who performs fellatio" is a synonym for fellatio. The act of fellatio is not separate from the person, since it requires that person, whether we refer to that person as a fellator or a fellatrix, or not. So the semantics you are applying make no sense to me.

Third: I don't see how restoring this WP:Dummy edit was wise, given that you added unneeded text to the page and had previously requested that we stop communicating via WP:Dummy edits.

Fourth: When I state that I see no need to take something to the talk page, I mean that, and it's usually best that the person wanting me to take the matter to the talk page don't pursue it. Flyer22 (talk) 05:21, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't dispute that the words are pejoratives, but they are not synonyms for "fellatio." Synonyms can be interchanged. A person does not perform "cocksucker." A person performs fellatio, or sucks cock, if one wants to use slang.

You may know a lot about some things, but on this you are wrong. Not one of the sources you gave backs you up. Cassell's does give "fellator" and "fellatrix" as two definitions for "cocksucker," but again, those are definitions of performers of the act, not the act itself. Lightbreather (talk) 06:02, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Also, I don't know what you meant by that "Fourth" paragraph, so I'm going to ignore it and what I think you meant by it. Lightbreather (talk) 06:05, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Just about to log-off and I caught what you linked to near the end of your "Second" paragraph: "'one who performs fellatio' is a synonym for fellatio." When one follows the link, to the M-W definition of "fellatio," it says "oral stimulation of the penis." It does not have a second definition, "one who performs fellatio." If there's more than one meaning for a word, dictionaries give them. Again, I'm off to bed. Maybe there'll be input from someone else here or at the grammar project talk page tomorrow. Lightbreather (talk) 07:51, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I disagree that I am wrong on this matter, and I believe my sources do support me on this matter. You are defining synonym very strictly, which is why I linked you to the Synonym Wikipedia article above for you to get a wider perspective on the term. You can also check Google Books and Google Scholar for such perspectives. Synonyms are not always fully interchangeable. But I don't see why it matters in this case anyway, since I was not challenging your redirects or your "send to Wiktionary" argument on these two cases, considering that these terms are highly pejorative; I was challenging your assertion that they don't equate to fellatio. They obviously can equate to that. Flyer22 (talk) 06:12, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

As for the fourth point, I simply mean that when I'd rather not discuss a matter, I'd rather not discuss it, and that a talk page discussion with me included is likely not going to happen; not that I'm always right, if you took it as the latter. Flyer22 (talk) 06:53, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Regarding this bit you added on to your post above (the "07:51, 20 September 2014 (UTC)" text), it would best if you posted in order when it can be done sufficiently. Disjointed postings are confusing, even with the time stamps, especially since editors often overlook the time stamps. As for the Merriam-Webster bit you note, you clearly missed the point that I was making; this point goes to the partial and full synonyms points I've made below. I also stated above, "The act of fellatio is not separate from the person, since it requires that person, whether we refer to that person as a fellator or a fellatrix, or not. So the semantics you are applying make no sense to me." And, no, as those sources below show, dictionaries don't always give all of the definitions. Flyer22 (talk) 08:26, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Also, don't ping me back to this discussion; this talk page is clearly on my WP:Watchlist. Flyer22 (talk) 05:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Tell you what, I won't ping you if you won't carry on WP:REVTALK with me. It's contrary to WP:ES. Lightbreather (talk) 06:07, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I used a WP:Dummy edit to make a note in the edit history about your edit. You decided to carry on in a WP:REVTALK manner, even after noting that we should stop. Flyer22 (talk) 06:12, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I've asked at the grammar project talk page. Maybe someone there will come and give a third opinion. Lightbreather (talk) 06:28, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I see that you have, even though, again, I don't see the point of this dispute...unless it's to enlighten someone. Hopefully, any other editor who weighs in on this matter is in tune with the fact that synonyms are not always fully interchangeable, and that many scholars have different interpretations of what a synonym is; for example, as noted by this Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Synonyms 1984 source, which (starting on page page 23; page 27 for the URL link) addresses the shift in how the term synonym came to be defined, and this 1997 Exploring the French Language John Wiley & Sons source (page 61), which states, "It is theoretically possible to distinguish between two classes of synonym: complete synonyms and partial synonyms. However, in reality, complete synonyms are extremely rare: they involve words which are completely interchangeable (a) with no change of meaning and (b) in all contexts. Examples of this are hard to find, for, as duplicates, they waste the language's resources. ... Partial synonymy on the other hand is a very widespread phenomenon. It involves (a) subtle differences of meaning and/or (b) differences in the contexts in which the words concerned occur." Flyer22 (talk) 06:53, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Maybe this makes my point clearer: Is "wino" a synonym for "imbibe"? Lightbreather (talk) 07:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Your points on this topic continue to miss the mark, in my opinion, because of how you are restricting the term synonym, including your disregard for my pointing out with WP:Reliable sources that partial and full synonyms exist and that therefore your use of the terms in this case are needlessly strict. Other sources speaking of partial and full synonyms are this 1998 Spoken Language Reference Materials source (page 228) and this 2000 Handbook of Multimodal and Spoken Dialogue Systems: Resources, Terminology and Product Evaluation source (page 451). Flyer22 (talk) 07:17, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Suppose title A redirects to article B—that does not mean that A is a synonym for B, it just means that someone looking for A will find relevant information at B. It appears that Cocksucker and Dicksucker have been boldly changed to point to Wiktionary entries. That should be reverted because someone may be looking for an article yet be unaware of the correct word to get to the page—that's the purpose of a redirect. It is most unlikely that someone looking for "dicksucker" would be particularly concerned about whether the page they ended up on was for an action rather than a person who may perform the action. Johnuniq (talk) 07:47, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

It is not incorrect to make redirects which are not strictly synonyms, e.g. Fucker see Fuck which includes the note: "Redirects from related words are not properly redirects from alternative spellings of the same word, but at the same time they are also different than redirects from a subtopic, since the related word is unlikely to warrant a full subtopic in the target page. For more information follow the category link." Perhaps this kind of note would be useful here.--Johnsoniensis (talk)

I'm not getting involved here. Blowjob did need to redirect to Fellatio, but anyone typing Dicksucker into Wikipedia deserves to land at a pot luck page. You guys should both cool it, or you'll wind up at ANI going down in the anals of history for the great Cocksucker and Dicksucker war of 2014. Alsee (talk) 08:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

LOL, yes, this dispute is similar to a Wikipedia:Lamest edit war matter. Flyer22 (talk) 08:54, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Note: I've alerted Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography to this discussion. Flyer22 (talk) 03:28, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I can't remember the bizarre route that got me to this - even more bizarre - discussion (ah yes I can, it was via grammar!), but there is now the anomalous situation that 'Cocksucker' redirects to the definition, but 'Cocksuckers' (plural) redirects to fellatio. In so far as I would wish to offer an opinion, could it not be a 'disambiguation type page', pointing to definitions / WP fellatio page / other meanings. I have sympathies with Johnuniq's argument that words don't have to be synonyms to be redirects, and would remind Alsee that there ARE people (often not native English speakers), who type words into WP because they genuinely have NO idea what they mean and don't have anyone to ask. Pincrete (talk) 23:25, 8 January 2015 (UTC)