Talk:Conventional sex

Vanilla an insult?

"Thus the term "vanilla" is sometimes used as an insult, to describe someone who is overly conventional, or unwilling to take risks, in both sexual and non-sexual contexts." I've never ever heard vanilla used in this context. I think this is just plain wrong. If noone can find a citation for this, I propose to delete that line (and edit the subsequent paragraph). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.97.225.52 (talk) 17:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

This is very insulting. It's just sex. Move to delete article. 204.65.0.24 (talk) 18:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

That you find something about the article "insulting" is not a reason we delete articles. Our criteria are outlined at Wikipedia:Deletion policy. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm surprised nobody talks about etymology. "Vanilla" comes from "vagina", isn't it what it originally means when one says "vanilla sex"?

Woman-on-top

I was wondering about the picture that illustrates the article. Does woman-on-top hetero sex counts as "vanilla sex" in conservative cultures? SaintCahier 17:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

yup, it would. however plain old boring missionary sex would be an even better example picture. Mathmo 16:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

As the article explains, "Different cultures, subcultures, and individuals have different ideas about what constitutes vanilla sex." Hyacinth 18:34, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

However, it's probably not the right picture for this article, as at least a significant number of cultures would view it as not vanilla. Really need a picture of the most boring missionary-style activity you could find. Fan-1967 18:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I removed the photo. IMHO, it'll be pretty hard to find a photo that's culture-neutral. --Umalee 22:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

File:Missionary style.svg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Missionary style.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Missionary style.svg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Uh, lolwut?

Okay, having an image of a vanilla ice cream on a sex-related article makes no sense and made me burst out laughing. Sure, it's related, but doesn't illustrate anything or add to the article. PLEASE somebody with more authority/experience than myself do something about this. Thank you. --216.180.4.112 (talk) 20:19, 12 December 2012 (UTC) *still snickering*

LOL. I also thought that it was inappropriate when I saw that it was added. Right now, I more so consider it as unneeded than inappropriate. But the editor who added it appears attached to its inclusion. Flyer22 (talk) 21:37, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Koavf, regarding this edit, editors keep removing that image, no doubt per the reasoning above. So why do you keep adding it? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:20, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

@Flyer22 Reborn: if someone else removes it, I won't readd it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)