Misplaced Pages

Talk:Ephebophilia

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 151.36.77.13 (talk) at 18:50, 2 July 2022 (Contradiction with another article: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 18:50, 2 July 2022 by 151.36.77.13 (talk) (Contradiction with another article: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ephebophilia article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 2 months 
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconSexology and sexuality Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconLGBTQ+ studies
WikiProject iconThis article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPsychology Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


There is no real evidence

A few proposals to improve the Ephebophilia page:

1. instead of citing Blanchard, whose text just cites Kraft-Ebing, we should cite Kraft-Ebing directly. Readers should also know that Kraft-Ebing was a German physician writing 100 years ago.

2. one very important fact is that since Kraft-Ebing wrote about ephebophilia in 1924 no research has ever shown his ideas to be correct. Uncritically repeating a vague assertion from 100 years ago, when no other scientist has ever confirmed his ideas is a disservice to Misplaced Pages users.

3. almost everyone who writes about ephebophilia cites Dr Michael Seto, but everyone omits the fact that Seto has no evidence for its existence. Seto's work is much more recent. He assumes that ephebophilia is real, and says it's age of attraction is 15-17 (not 15-19 as the 100 year old work of Kraft-Ebing states). Seto does not claim to have any evidence to show ephebophilia really exists.

4. it is misleading to publish information about ephebophilia as if it is established scientific fact. There's more evidence for the existence of the Yeti than for ephebophilia. The total lack of science behind this concept should be made clear to Misplaced Pages users.

HughGardner (talk) 13:14, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Agreed with all this. Blanchard is a pseudoscientist, and an ephebophile is just a pedophile with a thesaurus. StrexcorpEmployee (talk) 22:09, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Add needed

In the section about "Etymology and definitions" at the end, where it's said "Although ephebophilia is not a psychiatric diagnosis, the term pedophilia is commonly used by the general public and the media to refer to any sexual interest in minors below the local age of consent, regardless of their level of physical or mental development", should be added also that is also used by general public to refer to any person under the age of majority, not only the age of consent. So, "Although ephebophilia is not a psychiatric diagnosis, the term pedophilia is commonly used by the general public and the media to refer to any sexual interest in minors below the local age of consent and even the local age of majority, regardless of their level of physical or mental development." 151.36.12.92 (talk) 15:46, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Contradiction with another article

Why it is written that to be considered ephebophilia the minimum age must be at least 15 but the article about pedophilia states that to be considered pedophilia the boy or girl must be under 16? Isn't this a contradiction? 151.36.77.13 (talk) 18:50, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Categories:
Talk:Ephebophilia Add topic