Talk:Sex-positive movement

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Relwood96.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Klinem. Peer reviewers: Lyndseyclos, Laurenabb, Angelicastabile.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2021 and 9 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jimenabisso2, Oliviatherese.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Heartless/"soulless" Physical Hedonism in Criticisms section

The term "heartless" is used in the sense of lacking love, affection, or other emotional content. Since the quote from Morality in Media describes opposition to pornography as "protect[ing] healthy sexuality with the key ingredients of love, tenderness...", the use of "heartless" in the description of what Morality in Media and similar groups claim pornography and masturbation promote seems to be quite appropriate. John254 05:25, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some Sources

  • Milton Diamond and Ayako Uchiyama in „Pornography, Rape and Sex Crimes in Japan“ (International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 22(1): 1-22. 1999) online „Pornography, Rape and Sex Crimes in Japan“:

    Our findings regarding sex crimes, murder and assault are in keeping with what is also known about general crime rates in Japan regarding burglary, theft and such. Japan has the lowest number of reported rape cases and the highest percentage of arrests and convictions in reported cases of any developed nation. Indeed, Japan is known as one of the safest developed countries for women in the world (Clifford, 1980). (...)...: Despite the absence of evidence, the myth persists that an abundance of sexually explicit material invariably leads to an abundance of sexual activity and eventually rape (e.g., Liebert, Neale, & Davison, 1973). Indeed, the data we report and review suggest the opposite. Christensen (1990) argues that to prove that available pornography leads to sex crimes one must at least find a positive temporal correlation between the two. The absence of any positive correlation in our findings, and from results elsewhere, between an increase in available pornography and the incidence of rape or other sex crime, is prima facie evidence that no link exists. But objectivity requires that an additional question be asked: „Does pornography use and availability prevent or reduce sex crime?“ Both questions lead to hypotheses that have, over prolonged periods, been tested in Denmark, Sweden, West Germany and now in Japan. Indeed, it appears from our data from Japan, as it was evident to Kutchinsky (1994), from research in Europe, that a large increase in available sexually explicit materials, over many years, has not been correlated with an increase in rape or other sexual crimes. Instead, in Japan a marked decrease in sexual crimes has occurred.

  • Berl Kutchinsky, Pornography and Rape: Theory and Practice? in: International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, Nr.14, 1991, p. 47-66 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nemissimo II (talk • contribs) 10:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC).--Nemissimo II 10:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hmm

the criticism doesn't even argue that pornography has anything to do with romance: While it might very well be that increased pornography lessens romance/love (the implied statement), I'm not at all sure about that; I have feelings tending in both directions. —Isaac Dupree(talk) 02:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section

The "Criticism" section reads like a combination of original research and blatant self-promotion for the Morality in Media / Obscenity Crimes web site. Further, I don't see the points it raises as even being relevant - this isn't an article about "Attitudes to sexuality"; it's specifically about the Sex-positive movement. I think this section should be removed entirely. For the sake of balance, perhaps it could be replaced with an appropriate link under "See also"...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.113.25 (talk) 05:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It's gone. Zazaban (talk) 08:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted part of this back in. I agree that the first paragraph, basically the Morality in Media stuff, was using a source that was not really a direct criticism of sex-positivity, and hence original analysis and editorial POV. However, the second paragraph was definitely a sourced, published criticism of the concept of "sex-positive" and as such belongs here. In fact, I would go so far as to say deleting it makes the article POV. The removal of a distinct "criticism" section might be called for, as I know such sections are discouraged by WP policy.
I want to add that I think you should properly take the time to read and evaluate material before carrying out a wholesale deletion. I think if you had read the content of the second paragraph and its source material (which is linked to), you'd note that it definitely meets standards for inclusion. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The second paragraph was already gone when I removed the section. I have no idea who deleted it, but it wasn't me. I agree that it should be there. Zazaban (talk) 06:55, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if I seemed to single you out for that edit. Just saying whoever removed that should have done some more careful editing, especially considering they removed that paragraph rather than the clearly poorly-sourced one. Cheers. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 16:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge

The term Sex-negativity appears to be used solely in the context of Sex-positive movement. There is plenty of room to develop both concepts at the latter (better sourced) article - would there be any objections to merging the former article here? - 2/0 (cont.) 16:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not from me. I was going to do just that. Talk:Sex-negativity#Merge.
It's been about 6 weeks with no objection. Shall I just do it? - DHooke1973 (talk) 21:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
True, the term Sex-negativity appears to have been coined and used solely by the discourse surrounding "sex-positivity" - thus, the merge seems appropriate. However, the discourse about negative attitudes toward sex seems far more mainstream - yet it appears to have no other Wikipedia entry. In essence, I think the sex-negativity article might be expanded beyond the context of the sex-positive movement. melamst 22 April, 2010
Most of the article was already here, but I went ahead and merged some of the rest; there is more content in the history, but it does not appear usable. If the term gains wider circulation, we can always spin it out again. - 2/0 (cont.) 19:16, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Factory

I am wondering why this isolated example of an early sex-positive location merits its own section? It reads like Warhol and The Factory were the founding father and headquarters of hippy-era sex-positivism respectively. If Wikipedia wants to tackle its image as dismissively US-centric, this section needs to go. In the context of the article nothing more than a mention seems appropriate. To include a random quote from an orgy attender (Ondine) while the section on ancient cultures remains blank? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.160.18.105 (talk) 20:21, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Heart and Box" illustration

I edited the caption underneath the image that has been included with this article because it erroneously stated that the illustration was symbol for polyamory, non-monogamy, and "LGBT" (I added parentheses here because it made me ask, "LGBT what? Issues? people? Organizations?" Unclear wording!). My edit makes it clear that it is not an official symbol of anything. However, in examining the image file, it appears that it is just something someone made and uploaded. I frequent lots of poly websites and message boards and have never seen that symbol before. After seeing the file, I thought it should be deleted altogether, but thought maybe I'd throw that out to other editors first before doing so. I think having that image there and mentioning poly, etc., is confusing and inaccurate for this article. What do you folks think? nycdi (talk) 03:44, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Ethical Slut

It seems really weird to me how the article is very general, about the sex-positivism movement as a whole... Then suddenly in the end there's a line on this random book, which may be a great book, and may even be appropriate, but I don't think it's justified to be included. Maybe if this one book was considered by many to be particularly important to the movement, it would justify the special mention (it even has it's own heading!), but the justification given for that is weak. I would argue that the heading should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dex Stewart (talk • contribs) 16:50, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I'm removing the section, particularly as the sentence "It is credited with raising awareness of the possibility of consensual non-monogamy as a lifestyle, and providing practical guidance on how such long-term relationships work and are put into practice." is uncited. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sex-positive movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:21, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updating and Cleaning Up this Page

Hi everyone,

I am working on this page for a class project, and there are a few changes that I would like to propose. As it is now, the article is somewhat disorganized and confusing to follow. I would love to go through and copy edit it for clarity and remove language that is not neutral. Also, some sentences and paragraphs do not have citations, I think that those areas should either be removed entirely or have sources added to them. The main thing I would like to contribute is a comprehensive update on the sex positivity movement as it exists today with updated information that is relevant and accurate. Below I have copied some sources that I have found that I think could be impactful for this update. I would love to hear your feedback and see what you think. I am looking forward to working on this page, if you all have any suggestions as I am working on this page please let me know.

What Does Sex Positivity Look Like Today? We Asked Five Sexperts Burke, Sarah. “What Does Sex Positivity Look Like in 2018.” Broadly, 24 Jan. 2018, broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/yw59ej/what-does-sex-positivity-look-like- today-we-asked-five-sexperts.

The 'Sex-Positive' Movement on College Campuses Pearce, Jean. "The 'Sex-Positive' Movement on College Campuses." Human Events, vol. 60, no. 4, Jan 26, 2004, pp. 36, ProQuest, http://libproxy.highpoint.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/235845808?accountid=11411.

Sex-positive assessment and treatment among female trauma survivors Baggett, L. R., Eisen, E., Gonzalez-Rivas, S., Olson, L. A., Cameron, R. P. and Mona, L. R. (2017), Sex-Positive Assessment and Treatment Among Female Trauma Survivors. J. Clin. Psychol., 73: 965–974. doi:10.1002/jclp.22510

Sex Ed Is Negative, Sexist and Out of Touch: Study Oaklander, Mandy. “Sex Education Is Negative, Sexist and Out of Touch: Study.” Time, Time, 12 Sept. 2016, time.com/4488013/sex-education-sexism-abstinence/.

Teaching Good Sex Abraham, Laurie. “Teaching Good Sex.” The New York Times Magazine, 20 Nov. 2011, www.nytimes.com/2011/11/20/magazine/teaching-good-sex.html.

Klinem (talk) 21:52, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to the addition of two people added to the see also section

Hi, Naarter, could you please explain why you added Belladonna and Bobbi Star to the see also section? It would be much more helpful to include them in the main text with supporting citations. Helper201 (talk) 21:15, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Because they both expressed sex positive opinions in relationship to porn with Bobbi Star expressing that she is a sex positive feminist. The two erotic actresses both befriended, worked together professionally and both stated they are inclined towards sex positive ideologies. Given the feminist porn wars and modern day sex positive movements Belladonna's appearance on national media which was made to show the negative aspects of porn may be seen as an argument in favor of anti-porn feminist as well which could conflict her former statements of wanting to become a sex positive speaker after her retirement. Ultimately such editions shine light on the sex positive movement, feminist sex wars, anti-porn feminist and all its relations. https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrEk5d0fs9h5T4AkyxXNyoA;_ylu=Y29sbwNiZjEEcG9zAzQEdnRpZAMEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1641017076/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fslutever.com%2fbobbi-starr%2f/RK=2/RS=Y_Yvik7Nt_JxRCl.bZf0KAgImN4- https://lasvegasweekly.com/news/2010/jan/10/day-life-bobbi-starr/#/0 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0678416/

I can provide more links if you wish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naarter (talk • contribs) 22:05, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response, Naarter. More links would be helpful. The first source from Slutever.com I'm not sure if we could use as I'm unsure of its reliability, so would like to hear from other editors on that, though it is good in terms of it explicitly calling Bobbi Starr sex-positive. Which brings me to the next source. Unfortunately it fails WP:SYNTH as I couldn't find the phrase "sex-positive" used at all in the article. In terms of Imdb it should not be used for citations as it is a user generated website, per WP:CITEIMDB. You are welcome to provide more sources and I would welcome input from other editors. Thank you for trying to help Wikipedia in expanding the article. All the best. Helper201 (talk) 23:41, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Sexuality in Latinx Pop Culture

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2023 and 2 June 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jocorxx (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Intro to Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies-16

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 February 2023 and 19 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Clxmh (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Jyallen (talk) 15:11, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Sex-positive_movement"