Talk:Heterophobia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class.
WikiProject on Sociology This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to Sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Heterophobia, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] General discussion

This article survived two no-consensus votes for deletion. For the archived discussions see:

Francs2000 | Talk 14:51, 7 August 2005 (UTC)


I'm confused. I know heterophobia (apart from the etymologically inaccurate "fear of heterosexuals/heterosexuality", which should be named *heterosexophobia or maybe even *homosexism) in the older, broader sense of "fear of the other/fear of difference". It encompasses sexism, racism, homophobia(!), antisemitism and so many more. Should I add that, or am I the only one?

The cited "fear of the opposite sex" strikes me as just a variant of that cheap homophobia-analogous neologism. In fact, the two given meanings seem to be pretty close, at least in respect to feminism. Accusing a feminist woman of hating men, or accusing her of hating women who love/have sex with men are not so far apart IMO.

Wikipedia is not the place to enforce alternative ideas about what should be the word for something whose existing word is not etymologically accurate; it is a place to document the word that is actually used, whether the word's etymology really supports the meaning or not. I have added a paragraph to the article which addresses your concern, but I couldn't support splitting the article up under alternative titles that aren't actually in wide use. Bearcat 17:48, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Sadly, the sloppy and misunderstandable usage as "fear of heterosexuality" has begun to spread outside the sexology community. The word appears in the invitation to Queeruption 2006 in Tel Aviv: "Queeruption welcomes and celebrates all gender identities and sexualities, with no toleration to sexism, macho behavior, racism, hetrophobia[sic], homophobia, transphobia, discrimination based on different abilities or ages and any form of aggression."[1] --84.188.130.224 17:14, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

The article says does not have much currency outside of sexology; it doesn't say it's unknown. One anecdotal reference doesn't disprove the statement. Bearcat 18:49, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Is there evidence that the word "heterophobia" has ever been used in publication to mean anything than "fear/hatred (or simple dislike) of heterosexuals"? Never mind what its Greek etyma mean, how has it been used in English? The most likely etymology is not that it was built from Greek heteros "different" and phobia "fear" but rather that it was built by analogy to homophobia, which is a portmanteau of the English words homosexual and phobia. I'm asking for sources to back up the claim that it has been used to mean "fear of difference" or "fear of the opposite sex". --Angr/tɔk tə mi 20:57, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Since no sources have been provided indicating any other usage than "fear/hatred of or discrimination against heterosexuals", I have removed the other defintions. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 15:10, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
Strictly speaking, xenophobia is fear of the outsider and is a far more acurate term for the general problem that leads to misanthropia or hatred of humanity.--TheRealZajac 10:16, 24 February 2006 (UTC)


Question: How could a bisexual be heterophobic? Wouldn't their fear of having a hetersexual relation prevent them from doing so and thus make them homosexual?

[edit] Attention needed

This article could be improved by dividing it into sections; see Wikipedia:Guide to layout#Structure of the article.
-,-~R'lyehRising~-,- 18:19, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

This article is not capable of being improved. Insist on deletion.--71.192.239.26 19:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

It's been nominated for deletion before — twice, in fact — and survived both times. I don't think it warrants an article either, but we're pretty much stuck with it...so we have very little choice but to make it work somehow. Bearcat 19:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Third paragraph

The third paragraph cites an opinion piece and apparently is based entirely upon it. As this Wikipedia content has been based solely on a POV news article, it deserves deletion. If someone can find a way to back up the information in the paragraph with something more than one op/ed article written in the first person (which is how the cited article is written), go ahead, but until then I'm deleting it since, as stated, it is all fruit of the poisoned tree (so to speak). Ginnna 18:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Bearcat, you reverted to add the third paragraph and you put as a note that it's merely an "example" of an opinion (I agree, it is an example of an opinion, ONE MANS opinion) but the paragraph also clearly says that it is a term used "by some" to mean "such and such".
What exactly constitutes a "some" and what does this opinion piece prove other than the term is used by THE AUTHOR to mean, in HIS opinion, "such and such"? Who's to say that anyone else (i.e. the supposed "some") besides the author did ever or will ever use this word to mean what the author and the paragraph suggests it means?
He might suggest that the ONE cited source (a book, by the way, that is merely full of somebody ELSES opinions on the matter) used to "back up" his opinion shows that "some" are concurring with his view, but that he might GUESS about concurrence from ONE other persons opinion piece just doesn't seem good enough to justify claiming that "some" (whatever unquantifiable number that may represent) use and mean the term in the exact way he does.
If we're keeping the paragraph (and I'm not sure why we'd consider it worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedic article because, as stated, it demonstrates that the word is understood by ONE MAN, not "by some", to mean "such and such"), we should at least reword it so that it doesn't say "by some" because I believe that's a form of Weasel Words. If, within a few days, no one either suggests a way to satisfactorily reword it or suggests an adequate alternate solution on the talk page, I'm going to delete it again (which I currently believe to be the appropriate course of action).
Please feel free to add input before that time so that a decision can be reached. Thanks. Ginnna 09:30, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
The point is that the paragraph is not about "one man's opinion"; it cites one example of a documentably widespread opinion. If you want more examples: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25]. More can be listed, but that should give you some idea.
To be perfectly frank, I've maintained since day one that this whole article should be deleted, and my opinion hasn't changed. I've had to monitor it because of an ongoing profusion of vandals intent on proving that "heterophobia" is the ultimate social evil of all time...but that doesn't mean I wouldn't be much happier having this piece of crap deleted altogether. But it's survived two AFDs, so we're stuck with it. Bearcat 10:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for responding so quickly. I checked out the links provided (yeah... I think I pretty much went to all of them) and I found that there were a lot of blogs (several of which only mention the word heterophobia in passing and not as defined by the third paragraph), a lot of editorials (several of which, again, mention the word once or twice in passing and sometimes not in the way that the third paragraph claims it is used), a few message boards (several times a consensus couldn't even be reached as to the meaning), and what is "www.amazinginfoonhomosexuals.com" doing in there? I wouldn't trust them for ANYTHING close to validity or objectivity, would you?
So... if we total up enough blogs and opinion pieces and a few message boards, THEN we can say that the term is used "by some" to mean what the third paragraph implies it means? How many blogs and opinions and boards do we have to total up to constitute a "some"? Is there a policy on this? Can I follow some sort of guideline to figure out if these "sources" actually COUNT towards contributing to the "some"? Is it really "ok" to define, in an encyclopedia no less, a word to mean something as used by "some" when the "some" merely includes a scattered bunch of not so easily identifiable INDIVIDUALS, none of which seem to be qualified to give us an authoritative and/or expert definition of the word and it's usage?
Look, if we "can't" delete the third paragraph then we "can't", but the links provided only demonstrate that a moderate percentage of the "usages" seem to bear a very tenuous resemblence to each other and that the rest don't mention it enough to even constitute a citation.
I don't have any more time to talk about this at the moment, but I suppose my submission will have to stand as is for the time being. I apologize if I come across as rude but I just don't see the sense in saying that "some" use the word when "some" clearly doesn't mean much. Ginnna 17:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Heterophobia" as part of another Project

It sure doesn't belong with "GBLT studies". /laughing, not knowing what to make of this. Nkras 06:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Why not? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/e/t/Talk%7EHeterophobia_2570.html"