Talk:Gossip

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Etymology[edit]

Early politicians required feedback from the public to determine what the people considered important. Since there were no telephones, TV's or radios, the politicians sent their assistants to local taverns, pubs, and bars. They were told to "go sip some ale" and listen to people's conversations and political concerns. Many assistants were dispatched at different times. "You go sip here" and "You go sip there." The two words "go sip" were eventually combined when referring to the local opinion and, thus we have the term "gossip."

F*** "Folk" Etymology[edit]

I have removed this because it is unsourced and unnecessary.

I provided a sample source, and explained above the usefulness (though not the necessity) of including the folk-etymology. -- Pedant17

If a word has a well established "academic" (real/true) etymology why include one made up in a saloon bar.

Because the made-up version, whatever its provenance, may lead to confusion and false belief if we do not note and refute it here. -- Pedant17 00:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The usage based on this can be traced back to 1567, at least. At that time "politicians" in England had no need to carry out informal opinion polls. The electorate was very limited, and if they bought them beer it was to make it easier to tell them how to vote, or reward them for doing so.

True. It all goes to re-inforce the silliness (or the chronoclastic nature) of the folk-etymology. -- Pedant17 00:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are other sites for debunking. Wikipedia is not the place.

Wikipedia provides a very suitable place where one can expose and unmask false (but widespread) etymologies systematically and with well-sourced references. People believe this stuff. We can note their belief while countering it. -- Pedant17 00:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If Wikipedia had to include everything that needed de-bunking it would swamp it.

Did anyone suggest that Wikipedia need include everything needing debunking? -- Even if it did, I don't accept that such refutations would swamp Wikipedia. -- Pedant17 00:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GBH 09:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am very surprised that there is no reference in this article to the punishment of gossips in early modern England and Colonial America. If gagging was not enough, gossips were fitted with a brank or gossip's bridle which covered the head and stopped the tongue from moving. http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/Spring03/branks.cfm rumjal 02:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Page has blatant advertising for a proprietarz website!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.83.117.210 (talk) 23:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

==What game am I thinking of?==.

Remember back in elementary school, how the teachers would shove the desks aside and have the children sit in a circle, so that she could tell the left kid some gossippy slander, and by the time everyone whispered it into their neighbor's ear, by the time it got back around to the teacher, it had changed substantially? Years later, in high school, the teachers would reference this game to emphasize how gossip can change dramatically compared to someone who's experienced the subject of the gossip first-hand?

What is that called? I've done searches for "rumor circle," "rumor mill," and "gossip circle," and I keep coming up dry.--Wikieditor1988 (talk) 14:51, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I heard it called "telegraph" or "telephone". Bearian (talk) 00:21, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

chinese whispers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.7.78.208 (talk) 04:10, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with portrayal of gossip[edit]

I feel very strongly about not purporting gossip as a benign behavoir either overtly or covertly and disguised as a relatively recent scientific development needing further understanding. If you have read any book written a century ago on the developement of peaceful, harmonious, productive, relationships among individuals, clans, communities, and countries, the bible "any bible", catholic or protestant, and the five major religions, and studied more recent publications and writings of religion or culture than these, you will not find an outright or vailed positive definition of what gossip is and the adverse consequences of it. There is not, nor has been in the past, present or future a productive aspect of gossip. Any of the statements you have listed in regard to this article on "Gossip" as having positive intentions or consequences is a sinster form of psychological manipulation and social aggression to make an adverse behavior into an acceptable and benign behavior. Moreover to imply an known adverse behavior, such as gossip, as trivial and resulting in positive relationships among individuals or in communities is contemptable in and of itself.


Excerpt copied from the toppic on GOSSIP in wikipedia.org. In the last decade, gossip has been researched in terms of its evolutionary psychology origins.[1] This has found gossip is an important means by which people can monitor cooperative reputations and so maintain widespread indirect reciprocity.[2] Indirect reciprocity is defined here as "I help you and somebody else helps me". Gossip has also been identified by Robin Dunbar an evolutionary biologist as aiding social bonding in large groups.[3]

Gossip can serve to:[1] • normalise and reinforce moral boundaries in a speech-community • foster and build a sense of community with shared interests and information • build structures of social accountability • further mutual social grooming (like many other uses of language, only more so) • provide a mating tool that allows (for example) women to mutually identify socially desirable men and compare notes on which men are better than others.

• Various views on gossip • Some people view gossip as a lighthearted way of spreading information. • A feminist definition of gossip presents it as "a way of talking between women, intimate in style, personal and domestic in scope and setting, a female cultural event which springs from and perpetuates the restrictions of the female role, but also gives the comfort of validation." (Jones, 1990:243) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.22.147.207 (talk) 20:00, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

^^()() I'm doing a presentation as part of a teaching and training award. I've chosen the topic "gossip". My view of interpersonal actions is that motives are unconsciously positive; Though perhaps the steps we take may be ill-informed. If yo choose to see things in negative terms, you will derive negative experience. I stand out in a crowd; and therefore have been talked and whispered about. However, I have been strengthened by the social testing gossip provides. It helps to homogenize a group and to set moral and ethical guidelines. As a middle manager, I would love to extract the power of gossip and inject into 'real information' transfer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.90.248.223 (talk) 19:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

about gossipping[edit]

♥ gossip is idle talk or rumor , especially about the personal or private affairs of others the act of gossipping is known as dishing or tattling ♦

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Gossip. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 10:08, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

tattling?[edit]

Is this a difference in national variety of English, maybe? I know that, at the least, American English, the meanings of the two words are only loosely similar. Tattling usually refers to someone telling an authority (e.g. a parent, teacher, boss, police, etc) about something someome else is doing or has done which they should not be. Typically the word tattle implies that the indiscretion is something trivial or petty. Gossip, on the other hand, more often means two or more people, usually but not necessarily peers, talking about one or more other persons that are mutual acquaintances, usually relatng to subject matters seen as trashy or scandalous. Firejuggler86 (talk) 20:46, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kendall Jenner[edit]

I’d once a great relationship with @Kendalljenner & her sister @kimkardashian decided to get us separate because I told her that I’m Jewish and the point that I’m living in Israel 🇮🇱 & Kendall Jenner as I remember was loving me so much but I’m not a MUSLEM, SO I’M GUESSING THAT’S THE THING THAT I’M FEELING NOT OKAY ✅ BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOVE SOMEONE THAT’S VERY VERY HARD TO FORGET SUDDENLY EVERYTHING-Just like that 2A00:A040:19E:A21B:EDAE:3D31:133A:6565 (talk) 07:37, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Do Men gossip more than Women" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Do Men gossip more than Women and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 2#Do Men gossip more than Women until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Maurice Oly (talk) 20:58, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gossip&oldid=1199680316"