Jump to content

Talk:List of paraphilias: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Fix
Suggested add: new section
Line 53: Line 53:
What are you guys opinions? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:LJFIN2|LJFIN2]] ([[User talk:LJFIN2#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/LJFIN2|contribs]]) 02:39, 7 November 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
What are you guys opinions? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:LJFIN2|LJFIN2]] ([[User talk:LJFIN2#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/LJFIN2|contribs]]) 02:39, 7 November 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:One has to distinguish the concept of autogynephilia itself from the hypothesis that it can cause gender dysphoria and transgender identity. While the latter is controversial, the former is not so much. In fact, autogynephilia is mentioned in the DSM-5 in the context of [[transvestic fetishism]]. <span style="font-family:Palatino">[[User:Crossroads|'''Crossroads''']]</span> <sup>[[User talk:Crossroads|-talk-]]</sup> 04:31, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
:One has to distinguish the concept of autogynephilia itself from the hypothesis that it can cause gender dysphoria and transgender identity. While the latter is controversial, the former is not so much. In fact, autogynephilia is mentioned in the DSM-5 in the context of [[transvestic fetishism]]. <span style="font-family:Palatino">[[User:Crossroads|'''Crossroads''']]</span> <sup>[[User talk:Crossroads|-talk-]]</sup> 04:31, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

== Suggested add ==

[[Financial domination]]. [[Special:Contributions/64.231.158.212|64.231.158.212]] ([[User talk:64.231.158.212|talk]]) 09:32, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:32, 31 December 2021

A revert I'm unhappy with

I added the following at the outset: Recently-coined names for paraphilias (abasiophilia, algolagnia, etc.) typically have a Greek origin.

This was reverted by EvergreenFir because it was not documented.

Documentation is not required for items easily verifiable. Anyone who goes to a dictionary can see these terms are coined from Greek. Is a source saying so really required?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Deisenbe (talkcontribs)

"Transvestophila" name change

I have no clue where the name "Transvestophilia" came from, but Transgender people are not Transvestites, so the term to describe fetishism towards Transgender people should be something more along the lines of "Transgendophilia" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.181.142 (talk) 06:46, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pictophilia

It is medical folklore from bygone days. Diagnosing someone with pictophilia is malpractice. Otherwise we reach the absurd conclusion that about three quarters of US men feeling sexual needs are paraphiles, and so it is the majority of US population which feels sexual needs. In such light, pictophilia is a laughable diagnosis.

What about negative effects or being addicted? Pornography addiction has never been shown to exist. And the obsessive compulsive diagnosis makes it redundant.

DSM-5 code for pornography use? Not any. ICD-10 code for pornography use? Not any. ICD-11 code for pornography use? Not any. So, of course it isn't paraphilia. There is a code for OCD, there is none for pictophilia.

On page 705 of DSM-5, pictophilia would have been the most obvious paraphilia to mention, but it did not get mentioned.

That would have solved the whole dispute about the existence of the porn addiction. There is no consensus that porn addiction exists. tgeorgescu (talk) 15:43, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of these aren't mentioned by name in the DSM, to my knowledge. That can still be named as paraphilias in the scientific literature, even if not a specific diagnosis. And even though some attractions are very common, an extreme, paraphilic version can still exist. We list mazophilia even though heterosexual men typically find breasts attractive, for example. You need to cite sources specifically about pictophilia to change that text. Crossroads -talk- 04:53, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The American Psychiatric Association, in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM), draws a distinction between paraphilias (which it describes as atypical sexual interests) and paraphilic disorders (which additionally require the experience of distress or impairment in functioning).
So, you see, pictophilia means that 70%-80% of all US men feeling sexual needs are pictophiles, but only a tiny minority of them suffer of pictophilic disorder. tgeorgescu (talk) 22:36, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it means that pictophilia is a focus on pornography to an extreme degree. That would be an atypical sexual interest. Crossroads -talk- 23:04, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

should autogynephilia be removed?

Autogynephilia is the paraphilia in which a male is attracted to himself as a woman in my opinion this should be removed because it pseudo science used to justify transphobia.

the term autogynephilia cam from a study done in the 1980s where the reserchers claimed that there are two types of transgender people "homosexual transvestic men" and "autogynephiles" (they seemed to be unaware of transmen and non-binary people). They claimed that autogynephiles are men who have gender dysphoria that are attracted to woman the "evidence" for this is that "autogynephiles" fantasize about having sex as a woman but if someone sees themself as a woman then they would fantasize about being a woman so it's not a paraphilia. The study was controversial even when it first came out and no reputable phycological organizations (world health organization, American physiatrist association, and others) recognize this model of transgenderism. I think "autogynephiles" are just lesbian and bisexual transwoman who are labeled as sexaully perverted to make them seem invalid

What are you guys opinions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LJFIN2 (talkcontribs) 02:39, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One has to distinguish the concept of autogynephilia itself from the hypothesis that it can cause gender dysphoria and transgender identity. While the latter is controversial, the former is not so much. In fact, autogynephilia is mentioned in the DSM-5 in the context of transvestic fetishism. Crossroads -talk- 04:31, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested add

Financial domination. 64.231.158.212 (talk) 09:32, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]