Talk:Homosexuality

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Homosexuality article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25: 30 days

Template:Vital article

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Homosexuality. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Homosexuality at the Reference desk.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting.

Homosexuality was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 5, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
August 2, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted
January 9, 2010	Good article nominee	Not listed
January 26, 2011	Good article nominee	Not listed
Current status: Delisted good article

This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

LGBT studies B‑class

	LGBT portal This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Philosophy: Ethics / Social and political B‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

B

This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics
	Social and political philosophy

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Sociology B‑class High‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Sexology and sexuality B‑class Top‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Psychology B‑class High‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Etymology

The etymology section in this article is within the scope of the Etymology task force, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of etymology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EtymologyWikipedia:WikiProject Linguistics/EtymologyTemplate:Etymology sectionEtymology articles

This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.

Same-sex sexual orientation not same-gender gender orientation.

Speaking as a gay man, I am very concerned about Wikipedia having very strange articles about homosexuality and homosexual sexual orientation.

Homosexuality is nothing more than and nothing less than sexual attraction to persons of the same sex.

It has absolutely nothing to do with "gender", despite what the gender identity activists want it to mean. 2406:E001:5023:E901:4057:8FFE:8AB2:DD31 (talk) 06:56, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Argue using sources, not your own reasoning.--Megaman en m (talk) 15:11, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.britannica.com/topic/homosexuality

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/homosexual

https://dictionary.apa.org/homosexuality

https://www.nytimes.com/1973/12/23/archives/the-issue-is-subtle-the-debate-still-on-the-apa-ruling-on.html

It is a consensus the homosexuality is same-sex attraction. Please correct this definition. Beardyfaceoma (talk) 07:12, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Homosexuality is same sex attraction. As defined here:https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/homosexuality This definition correctly describes the actual phenomenon and the lived experience of homosexuals. Providing correct descriptions of phenomena is the point with any encyclopedia. The sources (1,2,3) are not peer reviewed scientific articles but rather opinion pieces by different organisations. These can thus not be viewed as reliable sources. Therefore I ask the authors of this edit, to provide reliable sources for your claim that homosexuality should be defined as same gender attraction. Also, please show me any scientific study which corroborates same gender attraction as a distinct phenomenon.

 Amator hominum (talk) 07:52, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Attempting to redefine it as "same gender attraction" is egregious (but to many, veiled), homophobia. It is hate speech. It guess hand in hand with the "LGBT" groups telling young gays and lesbians to "unlearn their genital preferences. Conversion efforts from our so called "advocates" - horrifyingly sickening.

The "gender" stuff needs to be removed from the definition, and WE DON'T NEED any more extraordinary sources to do so! Their inclusion is UNDUE, sourced to veiled-HOMOPHOBIC activist sources. 2600:1702:4960:1DE0:51E:ADFC:AB48:F127 (talk) 08:44, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is absolutely abhorrent and homophobic that my sexuality is being rewritten to include people who are opposite-sex attracted. Gender needs to be removed from this definition.Colevasquez (talk) 19:39, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

As per the consensus on this talk page, please change "Homosexuality is romantic attraction, sexual attraction, or sexual behavior between members of the same sex or gender.[1][2][3]" to "Homosexuality is romantic attraction, sexual attraction, or sexual behavior between members of the same sex.^[1]^[2]^[3]" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colevasquez (talk • contribs)

Not done No such consensus has been demonstrated on this talk page. - MrOllie (talk) 19:51, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The first sentence is wrong. Homosexuality is romantic attraction, sexual attraction, or sexual behavior between members of the same sex. NOT gender. The cited references (1,2,3) do not represent the scientific consensus on the matter but rather the opinions of lobby organisations or individuals.

The Oxford learners dictionary defines it correctly as follows: "the state of being sexually attracted to people of the same sex" https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/homosexuality

Furthermore the following section "Scientists do not yet know the exact cause of sexual orientation, but they theorize that it is caused by a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences and do not view it as a choice. Although no single theory on the cause of sexual orientation has yet gained widespread support, scientists favor biologically-based theories." Indicates a lack of understanding of the scientific method on the authors part. Scientist do not "theorize".They design experiments to see if a certain hypothesis informed by observations is corroborated by data. In thid case several biological factors who by themselves could only partly explain homosexuality. Also in science a theory is corroborated by it's replicability and it's power to predict the phenomena in question. Not, as implied by the cited section above, by the number of people supporting it.

I have been a donor to Wikipedia for many years and I expect a higher standard.

Best regards Amator hominum Amator hominum (talk) 06:58, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. This will be a contentious change to the lead. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:46, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I seriously doubt that there is a consensus to add gender to the definition of homosexuality. Which can easily be verified by checking the definition of homosexuality used in other languages. I maintain the sources used to make this addition are not reliable. The addition of gender to the definition rather seems to be informed by a change in policy on behalf of the editors than additional information. It thus violates WP:5P1 and WP:5P2. Amator hominum (talk) 14:48, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The definition of HomoSEXuality has not changed to include gender. The Oxford dictionary has not succumbed to pressure for inaccurate definitions and neither have many dictionaries. Also, homosexuals do not sometimes have sex or relationships with the opposite sex. This is Heterosexual or bisexuality only. Please do not alter definitions, it has far reaching consequences 90.243.46.223 (talk) 21:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source required

The discrimination section claims that "Negative stereotypes characterize LGB people as less romantically stable and more likely to abuse children, but there is no scientific basis to such assertions.", however this claim is not accompanied by a source. I've seen people show data relating child abuse or pedophilia to homosexuality, and I believe that a source would help make this claim more sound. Aimarekin (talk) 01:49, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.britannica.com/topic/homosexuality

[2] ttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/homosexual

[3] ttps://dictionary.apa.org/homosexuality

[1]

[2]

[3]