Talk:Leslie Fish

Untitled

the article might ought to mention some of the things Leslie Fish touches on in her <a href="http://www.prometheus-music.com/eli/fishltr.html">autobiography</a>, like breeding cats for intelligence. --Popefelix 23:41, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've added a considerable amount of material, and I tried to be as factually correct as I could be. However, any corrections would be appreciated. My source for information regarding her relationship with Frohman is from Frohman's obituary. I have to admit that I don't have any specific information on any men she may have been involved with, so I may be mistaken regarding that [EDIT: I later decided to remove all except the reference to Frohman]. I specifically did not refer to her as either lesbian or bisexual, as I don't know what she considers herself; I suspect that she'd laugh at the whole idea of putting labels on sexuality at all. --Schol-R-LEA

Leslie would, indeed, laugh at the idea of putting labels on sexuality but I can personally attest to the fact that her interest has not been confined to either gender, pre- or post-Mary Frohman. I speak, here, as her passably observant sibling. I'm not a confidant, though, so my knowledge could be termed "out of date." Likewise, I don't want to "out" her by clarifying what she might prefer to leave unclarified. For example, nowhere do I find Leslie mentioning exactly WHERE in NJ we grew-up. She may prefer to leave some descriptions generic. I will disclose, however, that her A.B.(BA?) is in Creative Writing, from The U. of M., Ann Arbor. Her first good guitar was a wine-colored Gibson Hummingbird, purchased around 1961 and sold about 2 years after she acquired her 12-string, "Monster"-- a converted 6-string guitar with a steel resonator pan. She does BEAUTIFUL drawings of horses. And she named our first collie "Robin Adair."MFish1228 (talk) 10:34, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

There's a page (not much more than a flier, really) for Fan Haven here. I'm torn between outlinking to it, and turning an edited version into a Wikipedia page; I suspect it might look too much like an ad as the latter. Any suggestions? Anansii 07:54, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

The flyer's certainly not a reliable source; I'd link to it, at most. FanHaven hasn't really reached notability stage yet. Heck, there's an editor in the U.K. (claims to be a fan) who feels that even Hugo-nominated fanzines don't meet notability standards! --Orange Mike 14:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh it's reliable enough as far as it goes - Leslie Fish wrote it, and told me so in person. Agree on notability. I was just a bit iffy about adding yet another outlink to the page. Anansii 01:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leslie Fish. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091124181027/http://www.filkontario.ca/hof/inductees/fishl.html to http://www.filkontario.ca/hof/inductees/fishl.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:49, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leslie Fish. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071109015056/http://www.filkontario.ca/hofcitations1.htm to http://www.filkontario.ca/hofcitations1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:40, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Controversy section

Whomever disputed this section's neutrality did not leave any discussion as to why.

1. Fish's quotes are sourced/cited. No words have been put in her mouth.
2. Her claims in each of her blog and social media post have no substantiation beyond anecdotal evidence that is generally vague, at times to the point of statements such as "Again, never mind where or when or with whom"
3. The claims in the blog, being based on personal, anecdotal evidence, thus contain several rhetorical fallacies: -false equivalencies: she uses a tale about claiming that if her parents didn't get her she'd commit suicide to "prove" that children needing gender affirming care are lying and manipulating their parents. -consensus bias: she assumes the overall population has the same thoughts and opinions on LGBTQ people, particularly transgender people and drag performers. -Mind projection: Fish assumes the way she thinks the transgender experience plays out is, in fact, what is actually happening with and to trans people, and decided that her candy manipulation anecdote was scientific proof of the psychology of trans adolescents, although she has no background in gender science, human behavior nor child psychology. -misinformation: Leslie claims multiple times through several posts and blogs that gender-affirming care for children involves transition surgery, which she calls "castration". Transition surgery is only a small part of gender-affirming care for transgender people, transgender children under 12 do not undergo transition surgery, experts do not advise genital transition surgery on minors, and only allow "top" surgery in special cases, and the percentage of children who make up those cases between the ages of 15 and 17 is 0.000021%Gender-affirming surgery . Simply put, FIsh's repeated claims that Transgender adolescents are castrated are not based on factual evidence. -presumptions: Fish makes several presumptions in her blogs and posts. In one, she presumes upset Pride Parade participants went to a bar after the event was canceled: "The parade was cut short, and the participants went home -- or to the nearest bar -- early." Fish presumes that children in need of gender-affirming care are, in fact manipulating and playing "tricks", although she never provides any answer as to WHY children would be manipulating their parents in order to face the harsh social backlash of living as openly transgender.
4. Fish indeed copied and pasted sections of her 2023 blog into her Facebook post of August 27th, 2025.
5. Fish did claim that Transphobia doesn't exist: " In any case, the myth of "transphobia" is totally false...The term "transphobia" is only a political buzz-word, meant to manipulate people who -- if you please -- are afraid of being called "phobic", or any of the other current political epithets."
6. Fish's posts and blogs have indeed caused controversy.
7. Everything in the section consists of a discussion of the rhetorical fallacies she repeatedly employs, quotes from her blogs and posts or neutral descriptions of her anecdotes, blogs and posts.

One, thus, cannot say with any seriousness that this section isn't neutral. Nothing mentioned or discussed is other than Fish's own words, a list of her faulty logic and rhetoric or the scientific consensus disproving her statements. Wavewench (talk) 02:09, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

I believe there is some reason that someone would think so. I don't disagree that the statements are controversial and placed in the article, and I certainly agree with the points stated. However, it feels like the way it's written is meant to prove that she's transphobic through rhetoric rather than simply present her statements (which, honestly, are damning enough on their own). There's a small but important distinction there. Presenting her statements is appropriate, even stating they're transphobic is appropriate, but the bits questioning her logic (much as I would do such outside of Wikipedia) don't feel encyclopedic in nature.

I certainly don't believe NPOV has been violated. Again, simply presenting her statements would reveal more than enough to the discerning reader. But - while I don't feel comfortable doing so myself - perhaps Template:Essay-like or Template:Original research feel appropriate, and revisions can be made to fit Wikipedia's style and tone without removing the relevant information. Alternately, sources can be found to support the argument stated. 174.115.209.181 (talk) 17:18, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

That entire section is completely horrendous. It's an entirely opinion-based/OR essay with zero sources cited for any of the alleged fallacies or errors. It should have been posted on the author's personal blog, not on Wikipedia. Pachyderminator (talk) 02:33, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Can I just take it out? Someone can rewrite it into something more wikipedia-like and add it back in. Benevolent Prawn (talk) 03:39, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

I was going to add a cleanup template, but if you want to just take it out, I don't object. There should be something there, but it needs a complete rewrite and some WP:RS's. Pachyderminator (talk) 03:49, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Sigh, yeah IDK if we need this, controversy is in the eye of the beholder and she definitely became more right wing in her later years. There is a memorial page by Gary McGath (garymcgath.com/memoriam-leslie-fish/) that mentions some of the same issues fwiw. ~2025-38092-93 (talk) 01:57, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

No question this reads as a hit piece. A couple people getting their feelings hurt on Reddit does not meet the guidelines for controversy.

There is no evidence of actual controversy. ~2025-40548-49 (talk) 19:32, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Restoring the controversy section

Fish’s views in the past five to ten years have been extremely controversial, especially on topics relating to transgender people and to Islam. The controversy section that was here a couple days ago may have been a little too detailed, but removing it entirely just after her death was a disservice to readers. I’ve now restored a much shorter version. It still needs secondary sources, but so do many many things in Wikipedia (including other things in this article); I hope that editors who are concerned about that section will work to improve it (or just add a reliable-sources-needed template!) rather than deleting it again. Elysdir (talk) 18:52, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

The main problem wasn't the length, but that it was non-neutral and opinion-based. Those issues remain in the shorter version. I've removed the words "widely criticized" and "unsubstantiated" as well as this sentence:

She attempted to support her claims using anecdotal evidence, false equivalencies, consensus bias, mind-projection fallacies, and misinformation.

That simply is not encyclopedic. Further development of this section should use reliable sources (not just Fish's own writings) to establish the notability of the controversy and certainly to back up any errors or fallacies that Fish may have made. Pachyderminator (talk) 19:28, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Age and birth date/year - befoer 1951 / 1942

She said that she met Martin Luther King at age 17 (Source https://lesliefish.com/about.htm), and as he died 1968 she must have been born before, thus 1951 or earlier.

On https://lesliefish.com/woody.htm she write that she met Woodie Guthrie in dance classes of Marjorie Mazia aged 6 at the local "Y"(?). As MM opened her own dance school 1952 (https://www.facebook.com/terry.pastercomeau.3/posts/%F0%9D%90%8C%F0%9D%90%9A%F0%9D%90%AB%F0%9D%90%A3%F0%9D%90%A8%F0%9D%90%AB%F0%9D%90%A2%F0%9D%90%9E-%F0%9D%90%8C%F0%9D%90%9A%F0%9D%90%B3%F0%9D%90%A2%F0%9D%90%9A-%F0%9D%90%96%F0%9D%90%A8%F0%9D%90%A8%F0%9D%90%9D%F0%9D%90%B2-%F0%9D%90%86%F0%9D%90%AE%F0%9D%90%AD%F0%9D%90%A1%F0%9D%90%AB%F0%9D%90%A2%F0%9D%90%9E-%F0%9D%90%8D%F0%9D%90%9E%F0%9D%90%B0-%F0%9D%90%98%F0%9D%90%A8%F0%9D%90%AB%F0%9D%90%A4-%F0%9D%9F%8F%F0%9D%9F%97%F0%9D%9F%92%F0%9D%9F%8E-before-she-became-woody-guthries-wife/1501864391229161/) Leslie must have attended her classes before 1952, thus born before 1946. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vtanger (talk • contribs) 11:39, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Leslie was absolutely not born in 1953 (she always obscured her actual age). Hoping to get permission this week from her family to insert her actual birth year. Eg1n (talk) 15:24, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with this, 1953 is just about certainly wrong. I was going to post something like that here myself. I went by "never ask a lady her age" but I knew her IRL for a long time (not super closely but we met any number of times). Among other things, the stories she told came from the wrong era for that. I'd remove that date from the lede and wait for Eg1n to update. ~2025-37914-08 (talk) 08:27, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

I removed 1953 but left in age 72, as described in edit summary. ~2025-38092-93 (talk) 01:52, 3 December 2025 (UTC) Added: 37914-08 and 38092-93 are both me. The new math. ~2025-38092-93 (talk) 01:59, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

Leslie was born on March 11th, 1944. I updated her age, but am not experienced enough with Wikipedia to add back her correct birthdate.

Family has given permission for her correct information to be shared posthumously. Eg1n (talk) 15:27, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for this update. ~2025-38367-99 (talk) 08:51, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

a few more bits to add

I have been given some more information about her songs, and about associating with Woody Guthrie, with citations -- but I'm not sure just which section to put them in.

Eli Goldberg, of Prometheus Music, sent me the following:

============

"Leslie’s childhood visits to Woody Guthrie were profiled in the 1967 book, "The American Folk Scene: Dimensions of the Folksong Revival” (page 198).

References: a. Book information: https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_American_Folk_Scene/ffNzPfcmZt8C?hl=en&gbpv=0&bsq=%22leslie%20fish%22%20woody b. One can log in and borrow it (to read/review) here: https://archive.org/details/americanfolkscen0000davi

A copy of Leslie’s “Carmen Miranda’s Ghost” album sold for $1175 on Dec 8th, 2020, making it almost certainly the most expensive filk tape ever sold.

This would actually also rank it close to the most expensive tapes ever sold on Discogs around that time (although it wasn’t purchased there).

References: 1. https://www.reddit.com/r/filk/comments/k9fkvl/almost_certainly_a_record_for_most_expensive_filk/ 2. https://web.archive.org/web/20210310012734/https://blog.discogs.com/en/top-100-most-expensive-cassettes/

============

Please advise; thanks! Silverhill (talk) 05:23, 12 December 2025 (UTC)