Content deleted Content added
Jokestress (talk | contribs) →Androphilia and gynephilia: comment |
James Cantor (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
*'''Redirect''' to [[Sexual orientation]] (of course). "Androphilia" (the sexual attraction to men) and "gynephilia" (the sexual attraction to women) are both perfectly legitimate terms and are indeed used by RS's. The ''combination'' of the terms, however, is [[WP:OR]], and the content is "sexual orientation." By analogy, [[Acid]] and [[Base]] are pages, but [[Acid and Base]] is a redirect to [[Ph]]. The cites Jokestress added are examples of ''uses'' of the individual words, which is not the issue. ("Acid" and "base" are used by experts, but do not establish "acid and base" as a topic independent of [[Ph]].) Finally, Jokestress' edits also claim on that mainpage that I personally have been advocating for other terms, which is both demonstrably incorrect and a BLP violation, as I already indicated there.[[User:James Cantor |— James Cantor]] ([[User talk:James Cantor|talk]]) 15:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC) |
*'''Redirect''' to [[Sexual orientation]] (of course). "Androphilia" (the sexual attraction to men) and "gynephilia" (the sexual attraction to women) are both perfectly legitimate terms and are indeed used by RS's. The ''combination'' of the terms, however, is [[WP:OR]], and the content is "sexual orientation." By analogy, [[Acid]] and [[Base]] are pages, but [[Acid and Base]] is a redirect to [[Ph]]. The cites Jokestress added are examples of ''uses'' of the individual words, which is not the issue. ("Acid" and "base" are used by experts, but do not establish "acid and base" as a topic independent of [[Ph]].) Finally, Jokestress' edits also claim on that mainpage that I personally have been advocating for other terms, which is both demonstrably incorrect and a BLP violation, as I already indicated there.[[User:James Cantor |— James Cantor]] ([[User talk:James Cantor|talk]]) 15:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC) |
||
:*'''Comment'''. This article is about a notable debate in psychology regarding terminology. For several decades, there has been a push to use ''androphilic'' and ''gynephilic'' as alternatives to ''homosexual'' and ''heterosexual'', especially when discussing sex and gender minorities. As an example of the problem, some psychologists use the term "homosexual transsexual" to describe what others call a "heterosexual transsexual." To avoid this confusion, [[Ron Langevin]] proposed ''androphilia'' and ''gynephilia'' in the 1980s. Since then, many scholars have discontinued use of terms like "homosexual transsexual." One exception is the nominator of this AfD, [[User:James Cantor]], who used the term in his most recent published work in ''[[Archives of Sexual Behavior]]'' (cited in the article). This article has been included in the transgender sidebar as a key topic for quite some time. The debate should certainly be covered at [[sexual orientation]], but there is too much published on the debate to paste all this into that article. It should be mentioned in summary style with a pointer to the main article. [[User:Jokestress|Jokestress]] ([[User talk:Jokestress|talk]]) 16:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC) |
:*'''Comment'''. This article is about a notable debate in psychology regarding terminology. For several decades, there has been a push to use ''androphilic'' and ''gynephilic'' as alternatives to ''homosexual'' and ''heterosexual'', especially when discussing sex and gender minorities. As an example of the problem, some psychologists use the term "homosexual transsexual" to describe what others call a "heterosexual transsexual." To avoid this confusion, [[Ron Langevin]] proposed ''androphilia'' and ''gynephilia'' in the 1980s. Since then, many scholars have discontinued use of terms like "homosexual transsexual." One exception is the nominator of this AfD, [[User:James Cantor]], who used the term in his most recent published work in ''[[Archives of Sexual Behavior]]'' (cited in the article). This article has been included in the transgender sidebar as a key topic for quite some time. The debate should certainly be covered at [[sexual orientation]], but there is too much published on the debate to paste all this into that article. It should be mentioned in summary style with a pointer to the main article. [[User:Jokestress|Jokestress]] ([[User talk:Jokestress|talk]]) 16:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC) |
||
::*'''Comment'''. If there actually were a notable debate, we would have RS's saying so instead of Jokestress' just saying so (again). Also, Jokestress would not have to be fabricating information about me (or anyone else). I have actually used '''both''' the heterosexual/homosexual terminology '''and''' the androphilia/gynephilic terminology in my writings. (If there's a better indicator of neutral, no one has described what it might be.) Nonetheless, the issue is what the RS's say, not what [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/health/psychology/21gender.html?scp=1&sq=michael%20bailey&st=cse| Jokestress' well-documented harassment of scientists she dislikes] says, which includes, I repeat, BLP violations.[[User:James Cantor |— James Cantor]] ([[User talk:James Cantor|talk]]) 16:46, 20 July 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:46, 20 July 2011
Androphilia and gynephilia
- Androphilia and gynephilia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable and long unsourced, despite multiple searches; content belongs in Sexual orientation — James Cantor (talk) 15:42, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. I have just added sourcing. Jokestress (talk) 15:44, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- Redirect to Sexual orientation (of course). "Androphilia" (the sexual attraction to men) and "gynephilia" (the sexual attraction to women) are both perfectly legitimate terms and are indeed used by RS's. The combination of the terms, however, is WP:OR, and the content is "sexual orientation." By analogy, Acid and Base are pages, but Acid and Base is a redirect to Ph. The cites Jokestress added are examples of uses of the individual words, which is not the issue. ("Acid" and "base" are used by experts, but do not establish "acid and base" as a topic independent of Ph.) Finally, Jokestress' edits also claim on that mainpage that I personally have been advocating for other terms, which is both demonstrably incorrect and a BLP violation, as I already indicated there.— James Cantor (talk) 15:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- Comment. This article is about a notable debate in psychology regarding terminology. For several decades, there has been a push to use androphilic and gynephilic as alternatives to homosexual and heterosexual, especially when discussing sex and gender minorities. As an example of the problem, some psychologists use the term "homosexual transsexual" to describe what others call a "heterosexual transsexual." To avoid this confusion, Ron Langevin proposed androphilia and gynephilia in the 1980s. Since then, many scholars have discontinued use of terms like "homosexual transsexual." One exception is the nominator of this AfD, User:James Cantor, who used the term in his most recent published work in Archives of Sexual Behavior (cited in the article). This article has been included in the transgender sidebar as a key topic for quite some time. The debate should certainly be covered at sexual orientation, but there is too much published on the debate to paste all this into that article. It should be mentioned in summary style with a pointer to the main article. Jokestress (talk) 16:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- Comment. If there actually were a notable debate, we would have RS's saying so instead of Jokestress' just saying so (again). Also, Jokestress would not have to be fabricating information about me (or anyone else). I have actually used both the heterosexual/homosexual terminology and the androphilia/gynephilic terminology in my writings. (If there's a better indicator of neutral, no one has described what it might be.) Nonetheless, the issue is what the RS's say, not what Jokestress' well-documented harassment of scientists she dislikes says, which includes, I repeat, BLP violations.— James Cantor (talk) 16:46, 20 July 2011 (UTC)