Talk:Homosexuality and psychology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Homosexuality and psychology article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

LGBT Portal This article is within the scope of 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, visit the project page. Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, which collaborates on Psychology and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs.

[edit] Bailey quote

The following quote was removed:

J. Michael Bailey interprets the data to indicate that "increased psychopathology among homosexual people is a consequence of lifestyle differences associated with sexual orientation...such behavioral risk factors associated with male homosexuality such as receptive anal sex and promiscuity."

It had the summary "rv -- the source is from an editorial that has been criticized, that isn't representative of the professional view, and that has been mischaracterized by your phrasing." Where is the criticism? I think the wording makes it clear that it is only Bailey's opinion, not representative of the professional view, and I tried to quote it so that I didn't mischaracterize it. Can you be a bit more specific? If not, I'm putting it back in. Joshuajohanson (talk) 07:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, I've been away. I suspect (but am not sure) that you haven't actually read the article (which requires a subscription), but have instead read NARTH's gloss of it here. But, NARTH takes the quote completely out of context. In the article, Baily suggests four possible reasons for the data, and doesn't specifically advocate any of them (in fact, he seems most amenable to the view that social oppression is the cause). The reason you want to emphasize ("receptive anal sex and promiscuity") is listed last, and Bailey goes on to criticize that suggestion in the very next sentence of the article. Fireplace (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I can't access the full Bailey article either, but I would not trust NARTH to accurately and neutrally represent a study on homosexuality, as they are an fundamentalist supported group, fringe among social scientists (psychiatrists, psychologists, therapists, social workers, and behavioral scientists), and are notoriously very anti-gay. It's like expecting a tobacco company to be forthcoming on the health risks of smoking on their own. Fireplace's comment rings true, and I endorse. — Becksguy (talk) 20:51, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation Fireplace. You are right, I don't have access to the full article. I agree that NARTH can't be completely trusted. I would like to read the whole article someday, but for now, I trust you. If it was mischaracterized, it wasn't me who did it. I really am trying to accurately represent things, and I think there is a very liberal twist to everything on wikipedia, but that doesn't mean the conservative twist is any more accurate. I thank you for your explanation. That really was what I was looking for. Joshuajohanson (talk) 06:47, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Charles Socarides.jpg

The image Image:Charles Socarides.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:21, 19 May 2008 (UTC)