Talk:Homophile

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject LGBT studies (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Sociology / Social Movements  (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the social movements task force.
 

POV[edit]

Took down the POV-Check sign after adding to the article and fixing some things.Dave 18:15, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

The history section still needs some work - it reads like a promotional pamphlet.124.197.15.138 (talk) 21:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

SIR[edit]

The Society for Individual Rights (SIR) in San Francisco did not close in 1972 as indicated. I attended the 10th anniversary celebration in early 1974 prior to transferring with my employment from San Francisco to Los Angeles in the spring of 1974, so the date is "seared into my memory" (to quote the esteemed Mr. Kerry). I also had contact by mail with the SIR office at some point in 1976 after relocating to the east coast, so I do know that the organization existed at that time. Lee Spencer( P.O. Box 65117, Fayetteville, NC 28306) email: bill-of-rights@bill-of-rights.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.191.11.253 (talkcontribs)

Thanks for picking that up. I got those dates from various websites; I should have been more cautious. ntennis 15:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm still not sure that 1976 is right, but it is the latest date that I could find. I was not able to find an authoritative unambiguous reference. Google is not good at that. There is a chance that 1976 is just the last document in their collection. Wuzzy 15:48, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Images[edit]

Fair use rationale for Image:Arcadie cover 1975.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Arcadie cover 1975.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ONE magazine cover.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:ONE magazine cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Lack of sensitivity[edit]

Looking at the intro statement: "the term was in common use in the 1950s and 1960s by homosexual organisations and publications; the groups of this period are now known collectively as the homophile movement." I see a problem with this. If these groups wished to be called homophile rather than homosexual, and they purposefully used that word to distinguish themself, then why is it that Wikipedia is labeling these groups 'homosexual organizations'? Shouldn't the 'homosexual' be dropped, since they dropped it themself? Tyciol (talk) 16:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Alternatives[edit]

What would you call a person who enjoys the company of homosexuals (not sexually, but socially) in general, if not a homophile? A person who likes English culture is an Anglophile, a person who likes cats is an ailurophile, so a person who likes GLBT culture but doesn't have homosexual sexuality could logically be termed a homophile. (The slang term "fag hag" is too gender-specific.) 71.34.3.105 (talk) 10:04, 13 August 2011 (UTC)


I agree. It is entirely logical that a person who enjoys the company of homosexuals is a homophile. A group of supporters and friends of homosexuals - who are not themselves homosexuals - can (should) be called homophile. But an Anglophile is someone who likes England, but isn't English. A group made up predominantly of homosexuals cannot be called homophile, applying the same logic. It can only be called homosexual.124.197.15.138 (talk) 21:41, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
I think you might have missed the message of this article - that the word "homophile" is a synonym for "homosexual". While "homo" might be a common (and sometimes offensive) shorthand for "homosexual", it's not the whole word, and so logically shouldn't become the base of the word you're trying to create. Therefore following the logic of this article, I think the word for "a person who enjoys the company of LGBT individuals" would be "homophilephile". But that's just silly. Wilhelmp (talk) 20:04, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Ich concur! 203.129.49.157 (talk) 08:29, 9 December 2015 (UTC)