Talk:Homophobia

Map

File:Status of gay persons.jpg

This map shows the status of gays and lesbians worldwide, analysing democracy, development, visibility, legal aspects, political presence. Some aspects like the colors of bug and divided countries may result unprecise as the mocolored United States (as there is a huge difference betweem some states). The cities classification show accurately the most integrating cities.Status of gay persons = (Human Development Index 2013 + Democracy Index 2012) + Legal recognition + (Gay Pride index 2011 + Gay visibility up to 10 + Political visibility up to 10) /3

Aless2899 (talk) 22:42, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Insertion of this image on other articles in currently being disputed so such a request should not be taken until the matter has been resolved. From my reading, it seems the image fails the policies on original research.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 23:47, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Image should be deleted as WP:OR - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:35, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I second Knowledgekid87. Too much original research to incorporate into any article. -- Ross Hill • Talk • Need Help? • 00:39, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

thirded EvergreenFir (talk) 03:14, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Even the strongest consensus here will not lead to the file's being deleted; it is hosted on Commons and would need to be nominated for deletion there. I think the image is inappropriate for this or any other Wikipedia article, not so much because it's OR per se (we tend to allow more leeway with things like maps and graphs, as long as the information they convey is clearly presented, verifiable, and not misleading) but because it's vague, confusing, and arguably speculative. I'd encourage Aless2899 to consider working on a revised version, based on simpler criteria that are less subjective, and to solicit feedback before adding it to articles. Rivertorch (talk) 07:05, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Rivertorch - I understand the use of contributors creating maps that compile information for heuristic purposes, but this seems to be completely WP:OR in that the user created their own index. AFAIK, the formula they used is not used anywhere else. If it is, a citation would be very useful and I would totally accept it as a heuristic. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I can't think offhand of an article where I'd accept it, heuristic or not. The formula used to appears to be based on subjective criteria, some of them hard to quantify or even to classify, and that means it wouldn't be a good candidate to illustrate any Wikipedia article, imo. Still, I think it's a fascinating map that with some tweaks might conceivably be useful for another project (e.g., Wikivoyage? idk). I see that discussion has also taken place at User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 150#Wikipedia's obvious biases and prejudices where, if you skim past the offensive nonsense, you'll find some points relevant to what you're saying. In any event, there's not much point discussing the map here: consensus is not to include it in this article, and that's unlikely to change. Rivertorch (talk) 17:00, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Concerning the word Homophobia (and Heterophobia)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hey guys. Reading through these archives a bit and seeing that this comes up now and then. I invite you all (probably to my detriment) to join the discussion here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#The_meaning_of_words_and_that_meanings_destruction For my personal opinion I believe both articles are named incorrectly and should be merged or filed under "Discrimination and/or hatred of Homosexuals" and "Heterosexuals" respectively. Peace and love to you all! :) 46.59.34.174 (talk) 16:09, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Homophobia is not just discrimination. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:33, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. It includes hatred, prejudice and what not too. But all those things have their own place. Prejudice can be filed under the general article of homosexuality and so can religious opposition. For example under "criticism of homosexuality" or something. Same as for heterosexuality or heteronormativity. This is not about you guys who edit this article but about everyone and I posted a similiar notice under terrorism and I am discussing it under chemophobia and somewhat under an other article too. It is about what words are, how they are constructed and in which context we should use what word and why. I'm posting here and under terrorism because I see it has been an issue in the past. I see you are a student of sociology with a PhD! Please comment there concerning my note that psychologists use it with a different meaning than some sociologists. Please explain why you as a sociologist use it as you do and why you believe the suffix -phobia is a good one if it is and what criteria you sociologists use in the formation of new concepts and words in your studies. If you want to :P 46.59.34.174 (talk) 17:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Is this not also currently considered to be the main article covering opposition to homosexuality, opposition of the type that does not include fear or hatred? North8000 (talk) 18:24, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Propose closing this thread. Rivertorch (talk) 19:00, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2013

Where is the 'Response'? This is clearly a bias page. On the page for 'Gay Agenda' you have a 'Response', and again are clearly bias. This is not balanced or simply fact based reporting. 50.45.147.246 (talk) 18:53, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

 Not done - Please be specific about what edit you are requesting. (bias is a noun or a verb; I think the word you are looking for is the adjective biased)- MrX 19:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Heterophobia

It shows definite bias to assume the term "Heterophobia" is used only by "LGBT rights opponents". It should be changed to more neutral wording, unless neutrality is no longer a concernScatach (talk) 21:02, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. HiLo48 (talk) 21:22, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

What do the reliable sources define it as? That's what we are concerned with. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:21, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I looked and am not sure which source would be bestScatach (talk) 18:41, 12 January 2014 (UTC)