I'm pretty sure this is a joke:
"This includes attraction to both gymnosperms and angiosperms. Some arborphiles are also attracted to bryophytes; however, this symptom is less frequent. Oftentimes, an arborphile will claim saplings as his or her own offspring. You can observe arborphiles in their own natural habitat in national parks during nocturnal flights of fancy."
No reputable references from normal sexology authors about such kind of paraphilia. I browsed several thousand webpages to find a minimal rerefence to something remotely serious. The main rules for wikipedia are wikipedia:verifiability ad No original research. `'mikka (t) 22:55, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
- I see. "Dendrophilia" as a paraphilia has had some press in Sweden and Norway in the last days because of a new book coming out, so I just assumed verifiability based on the scientific sound of it (which is clearly not sufficient!) and the age of this article under the paraphilia category. The lack of citable material may be due to lack of research into an unusual subject, or indeed (as Occam's Razor would suggest) perhaps "dendrophilia" is not scientifically regarded as paraphilic. Haakon 23:19, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
- This swedish book is a joke in many respects, just as hundreds of various "philias" and "phobias" popped up in the internet. Until it is reported in a medical publication there is no way to tell whether this is a real "philiac" or a hoaxer laughing at idiots who swallow all this stuff or, better, a porno site peddler who generates the stuff for the real parafiliacs, those who like to read and listen about various kinky stuff. `'mikka (t) 19:13, 16 April 2006 (UTC)