This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
斷袖之癖 may be derogatory, but 斷袖 by itself is not, and there are other similar expressions like 斷袖分桃, 斷袖之寵, 斷袖之契 and 斷袖之好 that art not nececessarily derogatory either.
Xihe14:35, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Reply
斷袖 is almost never used by itself -- and I'd call the other terms that you listed almost all derogatory in context that they are used, implying that it is improper for a ruler (and therefore, since Chinese traditional paradigms revolved around rulers, extendable to everyone) to engage in homosexual relationships. I'd call that derogatory. --Nlu (talk) 15:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Reply
