Talk:Houseboy

December 2006

hello everbody . houseboy is a term used in todays society. it is a term that gay men use. a houseboy is a servant. he is usualy younger than his emploier. he is very attractive usualy. often his responsabilities include cleaning, errands, cooking, and entertaining guests. often emploiers also expect sex or sexual favors from their houseboy. sometimes a houseboys responsabilities included having sex w their emploiers. in this wy he may also be concidered a prostitute. some houseboys are also their to have sex w their emploiers guests and friends. to have a houseboy is a sign of wealth bc it is expensive to support another person and the hoouseboys responsabilities are often trivial. an example from fiction of a houseboy living in our time can be found in the movie " the bird cage" KawaiiDeru 17:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)KawaiiDeruKawaiiDeru 17:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

I just fixed the flow and grammar and structure of this article, without really changing any content, but it really could use some references. Huw Powell (talk) 01:05, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Multiple Issues

I see multiple issues with this article. First of all, it lacks any reference or source. While for some matters this may be less relevant, I am honestly bothered by the part about the gay community. While it may, or may not, be true that some gay individuals/couples treat their houseboy the way as described this is most definitely not a given and, if one were to belief the movies, it is certainly not only occurring within the gay community. I'd argue the separate reference to the gay community has no place in this article, there is no reason to assume gay people, or those of any minority sexual orientation, would treat their domestic workers or any staff differently as opposed to straight people. It should be noted that descriptions such as these are based on stereotype rather than fact and absolutely cannot be defended otherwise, thereby also helping to perpetuate these stereotypes. Especially considering the lack of sources I find it hard to believe the original author aimed to portray a truthful description of facts. Please consider editing; while I am technically a Wikipedian I never edit and feel uncomfortable to do so on my own. KatQ (talk) 21:33, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Added a section and refs. I take it that adresses your concern, @KatQ:?

BTW, if you feel uncomfortable editing on your own, why not get a WP:MENTOR or let someone adopt you? ;) Paradoctor (talk) 03:49, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Anachronistic?

It seems like this term is an archaic or anachronistic designation that's not widely used anymore. I think this should be mentioned in the article. Alialiac (talk) 23:20, 9 February 2025 (UTC)