Talk:Human sexuality

Vandalism

Someone vandalized the beginning of the article. Seeing as I can't remove it, it has to be a hack. Please have someone come fix this.

Archiving

Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep the last ten threads.--Oneiros (talk) 22:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done--Oneiros (talk) 19:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Definition of "Intercourse"

As given in the article, the definition is this: Intercourse: the act, sometimes referred to as penetration, in which the male reproductive organ enters the female reproductive tract with a view to achieving orgasm.

This seems to me to be absurdly restrictive. Anal intercourse, then, is not intercourse? Penetrative sex between two people of the same sex is not intercourse? Penetration with a prosthesis is not intercourse? Oral sex is ... what, exactly? No, no, I cannot agree that intercourse is limited to vaginal sex between man and woman, necessarily focussed on orgasm as a goal.

I'm tempted to just edit this absurdity out of hand, but frankly I'd like to hear some consensus on what the essential core of intercourse is. I'm inclined to centre it in penetration; that is, intercourse occurs when one person's bodily member -- tongue, fingers, penis, or a substitute such as a dildo -- enters another's bodily orifice, for the purpose of sexual gratification (which may or may not entail or result in orgasm for either partner). Others may disagree. But I cannot accept that such a limited definition as the article carries now can or should stand. --Getheren (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I would concur, even the wikipedia article on sexual intercourse appears to coincide with your statements. Maybe that section of the article should be edited more. Seeing that the "Creating a partnership" section does not appear to be taken from an single source and appears more to be a amalgam of several other wikipedia articles. At the very least it should be more representative of the wikipedia article it links to. That section also appears to be linked to the "Human Sexual Behavior" article, but that article has nothing on courting, nor flirting, nor seduction. We might want to source this section a lot better, or possibly take it down as a whole.ZgokE (talk) 23:24, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Homosexuality undergoing revision

The article Homosexuality is undergoing revision. The revised version is available in the Sandbox and the project documentation and coordination is taking place in the Sandbox's talk page.

I would appreciate if people joined in. I'm currently looking towards forming a team for the revision and future maintenance of this article.

Thank you,

Pdorion (talk) 08:18, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

New World Encylcopedia

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Human_sexuality

That link has a much better article on human sexuality than this wikipedia. You may want to take some notes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheThomas (talk • contribs) 20:05, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Nurture vs nature debate

That is some stupid crap that is currently quoted in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheThomas (talk • contribs) 20:08, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

And unless I'm mistaken, the whole "second born more likely to be homosexual or bisexual due to in-utero chemicals" pretty clearly seems to be an argument for nature. Not only that, it's an unsupported claim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.140.157.69 (talk) 05:41, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

To claim the fact that some twins share similar sexual orientations because of genetics, as an argument for "nature," discounts how having similar upbringings can affect sexual orientation. Like most things, evidence usually indicates a combination of environment and genetics. For example, in Greek and Roman culture it was considered normal to have homosexual relationships with other males. In modern American culture, this is largely considered taboo. People cannot simply be defined as gay or straight based on a genetic makeup. They may be more or less inclined to have homosexual attractions due to genetics, but especially since sexuality develops over time, I'd say there is plenty of room to argue either side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeraldojuice (talk • contribs) 21:10, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

This article is rated "Start-class"

To me that says that there needs to be an outpouring of information onto this page. Once the basic facts are down, more focus need be given to editorializing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheThomas (talk • contribs) 20:22, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Polysexual

Why is there no mention of there being people who are polysexual, this article presupposes the idea that sex is binary and doesn't allow for intersexuals to be a part of sexuality (that is, if we accept that narrow concepts in it). For more information on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polysexual http://frank.mtsu.edu/~phollowa/5sexes.html

Even if you don't agree that there are more than two sexes (according to the current classifications of what is is to be a man or a woman) it ought to be included in the article as this is about a belief system. The belief that there are 2 sexes vs the belief that there are more than 2 sexes within the human species. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.86.111.140 (talk) 00:00, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Asexual

I think that the possibility of asexuality should be included in this article, perhaps in the sexual attraction section. The way the article is written, it doesn't seem to allow for the possibility of no sexual attraction to naturally occur in humans. One possible link on the subject is AVEN, the Asexual Visibility and Education Network (http://www.asexuality.org/home/). Alternately, a link to (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality) could be included. 128.211.192.105 (talk) 02:35, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The definition

"The ways in which people experience and express themselves as sexual beings; the awareness of themselves as males or females; the capacity they have for erotic experiences and responses." I think the second part of the definition is confusing. Sexual identity or sexual self-identification is our awareness as males, females or third sex etc... Այնշախոր (talk) 06:08, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Relevant Resources

Here are relevant resources that I will be using when revamping this article.

1) “Sex Matters: The Sexuality and Society Reader” by Mindy Stombler, Dawn M. Baunach, Elisabeth O. Burgess, Denise Donnelly, and Wendy Simonds. 2) “Human Sexuality Today” by Bruce M. King 3) “Effecting Science, Affecting Medicine: Homosexuality, The Kinsey Reports, and The Contested Boundaries of Psychopathology in the United States, 1948-1965” by Howard Hsueh-Hao Chiang. 4) “Sexes: Masters and Johnson on Homosexuality” by Time Magazine 5) The Kinsey Institute Online Website

Aprilmehta (talk) 16:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)