970:"In terms of the technical definition of exhibitionism, almost all reported cases involve males. A number of mental health professionals, however, have noted that gender bias may be built into the standard definition. Some women engage in a form of exhibitionism by undressing in front of windows as if they are encouraging someone to watch them. In addition, wearing the lowcut gowns favored by some models and actresses have been described as socially sanctioned exhibitionism. One textbook description of exhibitionism says 'women exhibit everything but the genitals; men, nothing but.'"
271:
250:
281:
376:
355:
786:." This argument is not particularly lucid. The website you cite is the professional practice website for a forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Steve Hucker. Not only is Hucker an advocate of the courtship disorder theory, he has even published on the topic (co-authoring with Kurt Freund, the creator of the concept: Freund, K., Scher, H., & Hucker, S. (1983). The courtship disorders.
1031:âFreundâs insight was that several paraphilias seem to constitute an exaggerated or distorted form of normal MALE responses for a particular phaseâ (p. 118 of Lalumière, M., Harris, G. T., Quinsey, V. L., & Rice, M. E. (2005). The causes of rape: Understanding individual differences in male propensity for sexual aggression. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
219:
190:
386:
1213:
talking to them; (3) tactile interaction with them, such as by embracing or petting; (4) and then sexual intercourse.â' How's that a 'species-typical courtship process in humans'? Apart from the examples of smiling and talking for phase 2, this phased courtship process could apply to any virtualy any mammal or bird. --
1212:
Quote from article: 'According to the courtship disorder hypothesis, there is a species-typical courtship process in humans consisting of four phases. These phases are: â(1) looking for and appraising potential sexual partners; (2) pretactile interaction with those partners, such as by smiling at and
1044:
All I have done was to convey on the page that which is contained in the RSâs. You are, of course, entirely within your rights not to believe what is on the page or in the RSâs, but you exceed your rights to want to change the page according to your beliefs rather than what is in RSâs. That said, I
933:
You aren't going to convince me that these "paraphilias" are the exclusive domain of men -- the best you can do is link to some hard sources that specifically claim so, and reproduce the exact quote here, such that we may state their unlearned view in this encyclopedia and attribute that view to that
917:
Just to be crystal clear: are you claiming, here, that (A) exhibitionism, voyeurism, toucherism, frotteurism, telephone scatologia, and biastophilia do not exist (0.00000000%) in women, as the article now states? Or is the article incorrect, and (B) at least some of these paraphilias exist in women?
736:
Also, perhaps more information to contextualize this theory for the reader would be useful. How common is "courtship disorder?" How many men are said to have it? How many women? Does it vary by location? Culture? Time period? How is it dealt with by society? The only information the layperson
1135:
Finally, as far as balance goes, when I was reading some of , they list courtship disorder as one of several models for explaining these paraphilias. The section on courtship disorder is followed by one discussing a possible obsessive-compulsive explanation, for instance. Since the article here even
591:
to write in this way about a term that seems to have no wide usage, call it "courtship disorder," and apply it only to males. It's like someone inventing a condition called "illogical argument disorder," and defining it as applying only to women. If someone did such a thing, the article would need
563:
That sentence has four sources for it, but it is absolutely meaningless -- even if the clause was true (about paraphilias co-occuring), it isn't clear why that is evidence for the theory. It isn't clear whether (and which) sources are talking specifically about evidence for "courtship disorder," or
921:
You are using "male-only" and "20:1 ratio" interchangably -- these are not equivalent ideas. What are the ratios for voyeurism? Exhibitionism? Where are the sources? How common is "courtship disorder?" What reliable source states the percentage of men afflicted with "courtship disorder?" This
631:
Of all the experts who have written about courtship disorder (dozens), only one disagreed with it. I have no opposition to naming that pub (the author was Ron
Langevin), but I decided against it, since the field is nearly unanimous in the opposite direction and including it in such a short article
1157:
Regarding the gender-typed definition, it is not the exactly case that courtship disorder is meant only to explain patterns in men while leaving patterns in women unexplained. Rather, there is no consensus among experts about whether the paraphilias comprising
Courtship Disorder ââeverââ occur in
519:
I'm not sure what it is that you think is original research; nearly every sentence on the page has a source, and the sources are all very high end academic journals. Googling on "courtship disorder" yields 1,500 hits (mostly from academic sources), and the courtship disorder theory is included in
1197:
Regarding the question of if the term applies only to males, I don't have access to most of the sources, so instead of reading those, I did Google searches to find articles that I could access. After checking around a couple dozeon sources, all of the ones I read specifically discussed courtship
1103:
The paraphilias listed above (exhibitionism, voyeurism, toucherism, frotteurism, telephone scatologia, and biastophilia) occur most often in men, but not exclusively. Courtship disorder is a theorized underlying condition that may be the root cause for these paraphilias appearing in men. This is
774:
a paraphilia, and I did not say that it was. Courtship disorder, goes the theory, is an underlying problem that results in symptoms of one or more of the specific paraphilias named (exhibitionism, voyeurism, etc.). Nonetheless, to add what you said you are having trouble finding, I have added
699:. So at best, this seems a vague association of certain paraphilias and a theory that states these are impossible in women or that women never have these paraphilias. That sounds okay, but again the views need attribution and so perhaps I should isolate and discuss specific instances of this.
624:
References 10-13 are all cited repeatedly in the literature on the paraphilias as evidence for the courtship disorder hypothesis. If you think it would improve the article, I can certainly pull together additional references for a section along the lines of 'Freund noted that these particular
571:
That section has a title which refers to the "acceptance" of this theory, when there is no source discussing a consensus among scientists in this field. The article seems written as a journal article, claiming the authors' point of view as fact. We must avoid this, and attribute views to the
852:
Also, I am attempting to understand other things you, and the authors published in reliable sources are claiming; for example, are you claiming that exhibitionism, one of the paraphilias mentioned, is unknown in women? Do you have a source for that statement? Is the question itself rendered
647:
Every author who has ever written on the paraphilias has noted that they are nearly entirely phenomena of males (except for sexual masochism). This has been true for more than a century and without exception. It is not clear to me why one would find a statement of a very well known and well
1111:
Not all of the journals that your sources come from were available in full text online from my university, but I was able to skim through some of them. Is it true that sources 11-14 are describing the statistical co-occurrence of these paraphilias without mentioning courtship disorder as an
1022:âWe tested the senior authorâs hypothesis that, IN HUMAN MALES, several anomalies in preferred erotic activity are closely interrelated and can be seen as modes of one and the same âunderlyingâ disturbanceâ (p. 369 of Freund, K., Scher, H., & Hucker, S. (1983). The courtship disorders.
1115:
Statistically in men, the paraphilias inside courtship disorder spectrum co-occur with each other more frequently than with paraphilias outside the courtship disorder spectrum. Courtship disorder offers an underlying common cause for these paraphilias in men to explain this co-occurrence
800:
If you would like to try to look up epidemiological studies on courtship disorder, I would certainly encourage you to do so. Such information would certainly improve the page. I do not believe there exists any rule requiring such sections in order for a WP page on the topic to exist,
625:
paraphilias co-occur; Freund developed this model to explain why; other experts cite the theory frequently in writing about the taxonomy of paraphilias; other experts have replicated Freund's observation that these paraphilias co-occur'. Is that the kind of thing you are suggesting?
790:
369-379.) I am perfectly happy to respond to any comment or criticism you have, but I think it only fair for me to ask you to slow down a bit and put a little more effort into researching what you are claiming before you claim it and fault me for not seeing things your
878:
the paraphilias that comprise courtship disorder (exhibitionism, voyeurism, toucherism, frotteurism, telephone scatologia, and biastophilia); masochism is not on the list. (Incidentally, the number of women who have masochism are outnumbered by men by about 20:1.)
1112:
explanatory factor, while 15-19 are ascribing the co-occurrence to a root cause, such as courtship disorder among others? If so, I think I see your intent, James, but I also see what
Blackworm's objection was. What if you split that first sentence a bit like this:
1158:
women. A handful of case studies have appeared in the literature (because such cases are so rare, each merits a case report), but experts always debate whether such women actually have a paraphilia or have some other disorder that is masquerading as a paraphilia.
823:
You claim that "male-only paraphilias" is redundant, yet simultaneously claim that the paraphilia masochism is present in women. This is a contradiction. I am trying to remove contradictions from
Knowledge. Could you please rephrase? Thank you.
484:
This article seems filled with original research. Much of the referenced material and analysis is presented in support of this theory, rather than this theory specifically being addressed in a variety of reliable sources, as demanded by
Knowledge
1173:
Nearly forgot: OCD has never been a widely described explanation for the paraphilias, but John Money's love map concept is probably the next best known behind
Courtship disorder. So, I have also added this to page as well (and the wikilinks for
678:
1500 Google hits isn't that much, but that in itself isn't enough to disclaim notability -- I'm looking for more third-party sources discussing this as a recognized paraphilia. Looking at a few top hits for "paraphilias," I get no mention of it
998:, and the RS's say that courtship disorder is a phenomenon of males. If you have an RS that says something else, then letâs integrate it. What you personally have experienced is irrelevant (as is what I personally have experienced).
592:
to be written carefully to avoid any appearance that
Knowledge supports the term. I believe this article should be written in that way as well, as the claim that a "courtship disorder" is "male only" is quite similarly offensive.
520:
nearly every major academic book on the paraphilias. (I could add them, of course, but once the best known or the first mention is made, adding others seems redundant to me. Nonetheless, they can be found without much difficulty.)
635:
I am not quite sure what would convince you of notability, but if you can name a criterion (other than the simple google search I mentioned already), I'll see what I can do to fulfill it. Meanwhile, to accuse me of attempting to
1013:âVoyeurism, exhibitionism, making obscene telephone calls, toucheurism frotteurism, or an erotic preference for rape IN MEN who are not really sadisticâŚâ (p. 172 of Freund, K. (1988). Courtship disorder: Is the hypothesis valid?
1104:
supported by these specific paraphilias co-occurring together more often than with others, suggesting a common source. While these paraphilias do occur in women, they would arise from some factor other than courtship disorder.
1048:
Your statement that âYou aren't going to convince me that these âparaphiliasâ are the exclusive domain of menâ is unfortunate. It suggests that no number of sources I produce will be of any good. So, I suggest that we seek a
153:
1053:. Currently, the main page here says in two places that courtship disorder is a disorder of males. Write out what you those sentences should say instead, and weâll let another editor provide a fresh point of view.
525:"Paraphilic rape" is when an individual has a sexual preference for rape over typical sex; that is, such individuals are relatively uninterested in consenting sexual behavior. Paraphilic rape has also been called
561:"The evidence for the Courtship disorder theory is that the paraphilias inside courtship disorder spectrum co-occur with each other more frequently than with paraphilias outside the courtship disorder spectrum."
762:
that are nearly entirely male (as I said). Of all the paraphilias, only one (masochism) appears to exist in women (as I said). Masochism is not one of the paraphilias included in courtship disorder, leaving
757:
entirely of males?...Which is it?": You are free to disagree with me (and the existing research) all you like, but antagonistic word-play is not going to get either of us, nor this page, anywhere. It is the
1264:
1136:
says courtship disorder is "one of the predominant models", maybe we could throw some links to other models in the last section as well, to provide balance. Would that be helpful, Blackworm?
1126:
Secondly, regarding the gender-typed definition, since courtship disorder is theorized based on the statistical co-occurrence of this set of paraphilias in men, does a similar co-occurrence
1232:
The language used in this article is too difficult to understand for a layperson. Knowledge is not a scientific journal and needs to be understandable to users of a general encyclopedia.
1292:
327:
955:
I don't see anything about exhibitionism being defined as "male-only" in the DSM-IV. Please quote the sentence in the DSM where you believe this claim is made, with the page number.
337:
1154:
Incidentally, I am very impressed with the thought and effort you put into your comment. I have not run into many editors who look up the cited refs before making their comments.
794:
Langevin is not, in my opinion, a notable exception. Because he is the single dissent against an otherwise unanimity of supporters, he is, in my opinion, FRINGE in his opposition.
901:
I take it from your silence about the other issues that you found the new text, new references, and explanations I provided in response to your prior questions to be satisfactory.
1194:
I'm an uninvolved editor, but I'm not responding as part of the 3O process. To avoid interrupting the 3O discussion, I've added section headings to separate comments by others.
1297:
489:. Some of these problems may be addressed by removing sentences, others perhaps by rewording the sentence to attribute the view to the theory's proponent(s). The theory's
147:
844:
Perhaps the source of the confusion is that you believe the title "male-only paraphilias" or "male paraphilias" implies all paraphilias are male. Thus I propose the title
200:
673:"Courtship disorder is a theoretical construct in sexology in which a certain set of paraphilias are seen as specific instances of anomalous courtship instincts in men."
303:
1287:
737:
is left with, is an impression that men somehow are inclined to brutally rape women and gain pleasure from their suffering. I'm not sure that is generally accepted.
978:
reported cases involve males, as is currently stated or implied by this article. Please bring quotes from sources saying women cannot be voyeurs nor exhibitionists.
564:
if they're simply making claims about the co-occurence of certain behaviours without mentioning "courtship disorder" or "courtship disorder spectrum" (in which case
797:
The phrase "male-only paraphilias" does not better reflect the content. In fact, the phrase is redundant, analogous to a a title like "testicular cancer in males."
1254:
Have the biased author's writings even been peer reviewed? or is he just some hack of a writer trying to promote his own work? This article is utterly worthless.
294:
255:
1307:
442:
432:
1257:
I nominated the article for deletion, but I'm not entirely sure if it worked. I've never done this before, and the instructions didn't make much sense.
79:
44:
1312:
775:
several high-end, entirely third party RS's citing courtship disorder theory. There are many more, and they are all included in the google search
720:
Indeed more third-party would be welcome. Again, perhaps the problems lie with the slant of specific passages. I will attempt to isolate them.
937:
And no, my silence on the other issues is only due to the pressing, urgent need to address this contradiction, i.e. the patently false, arguably
1121:
This splits the reporting of a statistical phenomenon in 11-14 from its explanation by Freund, which is what I think
Blackworm found bothersome.
776:
1036:âFreund thought these distortions reflect disturbances in a MALE mating system that consisted of four phasesâ (p. 120 of Seto, M. C. (2008).
464:
In the interests of disclosure, I am a professional sexologist, and I am the primary author of one of the references quoted on the main page.
408:
85:
1302:
1233:
1130:
exist in women, thus there is no evidence of an underlying cause in women? If this is true, it would help to make this point explicitly.
1268:
891:
710:
issues. If you have a source that states that dozens of authorities support the theory, that of course should be included as well.
895:
890:
describe the content of this page or that section. Sources for exhibitionism as male-only are very many. The best known is the
399:
360:
168:
930:
have known many women who are voyeurs and exhibitionists. 28% of
Internet porn surfers are women (or is that not voyeurism?).
135:
99:
30:
104:
20:
74:
770:
Regarding "I'm looking for more third-party sources discussing this as a recognized paraphilia." Courtship disorder is
230:
1045:
have no opposition to integrating into the page RSâs that say that courtship disorder is not a disorder only of males.
706:
then there seems to be no reason not to include
Langevin's position. It would indeed help the article's bent, and the
65:
576:, again calling into doubt the notability or acceptance of this theory. It seems like this article is an attempt to
129:
196:
1237:
534:
If you have any specific recommendations for what to change, feel free to suggest how best to incorporate them.
501:
125:
1198:
disorder with regards to males; I did not find even one that discussed the disorder as applying to females. --
1074:
1050:
109:
1180:
1164:
1086:
1059:
907:
810:
656:
542:
470:
286:
175:
974:
I'm sure you're as happily surprised by this information as I am. I'd like to see your sources claiming
1218:
236:
568:
would be engaging in original research by drawing the conclusion that this is evidence for the theory).
529:. The other major "motivator" for rape, according to sexologists, is anti-social personality disorder.
1214:
1151:
Thank you, AlekseyFy; that was extremely helpful. I will try dividing the sentence as you suggested.
1260:
1203:
280:
270:
249:
218:
189:
1141:
983:
960:
946:
858:
829:
742:
725:
611:
597:
509:
161:
55:
407:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
302:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
70:
24:
141:
1251:
It's EXTREMELY sexist, and doesn't have a single bit of a verifiable source worth half a fuck.
1176:
1160:
1082:
1078:
1055:
903:
806:
652:
538:
466:
391:
51:
680:
504:; failing to explain the theory in common terms. For example, what is "paraphilic rape?"
1199:
299:
1100:. First, to be sure that I'm clear on the previous discussion, is the following correct?
972:
684:
1137:
1038:
Pedophilia and sexual offending against children: Theory, assessment, and intervention.
979:
956:
942:
854:
825:
783:
738:
721:
707:
696:
607:
593:
588:
505:
500:
Less importantly, this article is also written using specialized language and apparent
1281:
556:
526:
486:
1005:
say that paraphilias are disorders of males. The page says (as the RSâs say) that
1097:
995:
923:
490:
375:
354:
779:. It is unfortunate that you did not probe further than what you said you did.
404:
381:
276:
1272:
1241:
1222:
1207:
1184:
1168:
1145:
1090:
1063:
987:
964:
950:
911:
862:
833:
814:
746:
729:
660:
615:
601:
546:
513:
474:
922:
article's claim that these paraphilias only exist in men is challenged and
853:
irrelevant by a similar definition of "exhibitionism" as being male-only?
691:
related in somewhat more general terms, though it does seem to imply it is
493:
also seems in question. As this article is linked to from the article on
938:
931:
497:, it has high exposure, but that level of exposure may be inappropriate.
1001:
To highlight a point that seems to keep getting lost: The page does
994:
I am not claiming anything. I am citing RS's, in accordance with
628:
I am not wed to the section's title. Suggestions for better ones?
494:
898:(which also includes the 20:1 statistic for sexual masochism).
212:
184:
15:
606:
Also thank you for your edit explaining paraphilic rape.
702:
If Langevin is a notable exception, and this is indeed a
683:, I see some mention of something related to courtship
160:
870:
No, I said that "male-only paraphilias" is redundant
403:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
298:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1040:
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
1015:Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 528,
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
1293:High-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
717:That would more accurately reflect the content.
555:Original research may also take the form of a
1096:Hello, I am responding to your request for a
1073:I will go ahead an prepare the request for a
174:
8:
941:information stated as fact in the article.
782:Regarding "no mention of courtship disorder
572:author. Note that most of the sources have
312:Knowledge:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality
1298:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
315:Template:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality
1258:
671:entirely of males? But the article says,
349:
244:
695:), and no mention of courtship disorder
559:of sources. For example, the sentence:
1288:C-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
918:A, or B? I suspect the answer is (B).
687:(and in fact very similar information,
648:documented sex difference as offensive.
632:seemed (to me) to give it undue weight.
351:
246:
216:
1265:2601:405:8402:ABB0:25C3:1926:DA5B:D35A
767:a disorder of males only...as I said.
644:notability does not strike me as AGF.
7:
397:This article is within the scope of
292:This article is within the scope of
235:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
1308:Mid-importance psychology articles
295:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality
199:on 8 December 2015. The result of
14:
1247:This article needs to be deleted.
892:Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
1024:Archives of Sexual Behavior, 12,
896:American Psychiatric Association
788:Archives of Sexual Behavior, 12,
417:Knowledge:WikiProject Psychology
384:
374:
353:
279:
269:
248:
217:
188:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
1313:WikiProject Psychology articles
437:This article has been rated as
420:Template:WikiProject Psychology
332:This article has been rated as
318:Sexology and sexuality articles
195:This article was nominated for
693:strictly a paraphilia of males
1:
411:and see a list of open tasks.
306:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1273:18:45, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
1208:22:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
1185:20:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
1169:20:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
1146:22:14, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
1091:15:08, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
1064:19:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
988:18:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
965:18:31, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
951:18:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
912:13:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
863:00:50, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
834:23:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
815:22:13, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
747:19:38, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
730:19:29, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
661:15:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
616:15:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
602:15:12, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
584:its notability as it should.
547:02:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
514:00:57, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
475:00:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
1303:C-Class psychology articles
1242:22:39, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
1329:
1223:21:50, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
1009:is a disorder of males:
443:project's importance scale
338:project's importance scale
850:Gender-based paraphilias.
436:
369:
331:
264:
243:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
888:Gender-based paraphilias
587:Finally, it is arguably
715:Male-only paraphilias.
400:WikiProject Psychology
309:Sexology and sexuality
287:Human sexuality portal
256:Sexology and sexuality
225:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
100:Neutral point of view
874:, which discussions
580:its notability, not
105:No original research
713:How about a title,
423:psychology articles
1007:courtship disorder
884:Paraphilias in men
882:Neither the title
846:Paraphilias in men
765:courtship disorder
231:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
25:Courtship disorder
1275:
1263:comment added by
480:Original research
457:
456:
453:
452:
449:
448:
392:Psychology portal
348:
347:
344:
343:
211:
210:
183:
182:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1320:
1075:WP:third opinion
1051:WP:third opinion
934:reliable source.
574:the same authors
425:
424:
421:
418:
415:
394:
389:
388:
387:
378:
371:
370:
365:
357:
350:
320:
319:
316:
313:
310:
289:
284:
283:
273:
266:
265:
260:
252:
245:
228:
222:
221:
213:
192:
185:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1328:
1327:
1323:
1322:
1321:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1278:
1277:
1249:
1230:
1228:Too complicated
1192:
1071:
482:
462:
422:
419:
416:
413:
412:
390:
385:
383:
363:
334:High-importance
317:
314:
311:
308:
307:
300:human sexuality
285:
278:
259:Highâimportance
258:
229:on Knowledge's
226:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1326:
1324:
1316:
1315:
1310:
1305:
1300:
1295:
1290:
1280:
1279:
1248:
1245:
1234:98.165.151.225
1229:
1226:
1191:
1190:Other comments
1188:
1177:â James Cantor
1175:
1161:â James Cantor
1159:
1149:
1148:
1132:
1131:
1123:
1122:
1119:
1118:
1117:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1083:â James Cantor
1070:
1067:
1056:â James Cantor
1054:
1042:
1041:
1033:
1032:
1028:
1027:
1019:
1018:
993:
991:
990:
967:
953:
935:
919:
904:â James Cantor
902:
886:nor the title
868:
867:
866:
865:
839:
838:
837:
836:
818:
817:
807:â James Cantor
803:
802:
798:
795:
792:
780:
768:
750:
749:
734:
733:
732:
718:
711:
700:
676:
653:â James Cantor
650:
649:
645:
633:
629:
626:
621:
620:
619:
618:
604:
585:
569:
550:
549:
539:â James Cantor
536:
535:
531:
530:
522:
521:
481:
478:
467:â James Cantor
465:
461:
458:
455:
454:
451:
450:
447:
446:
439:Mid-importance
435:
429:
428:
426:
409:the discussion
396:
395:
379:
367:
366:
364:Midâimportance
358:
346:
345:
342:
341:
330:
324:
323:
321:
304:the discussion
291:
290:
274:
262:
261:
253:
241:
240:
234:
223:
209:
208:
201:the discussion
193:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1325:
1314:
1311:
1309:
1306:
1304:
1301:
1299:
1296:
1294:
1291:
1289:
1286:
1285:
1283:
1276:
1274:
1270:
1266:
1262:
1255:
1252:
1246:
1244:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1227:
1225:
1224:
1220:
1216:
1210:
1209:
1205:
1201:
1195:
1189:
1187:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1171:
1170:
1166:
1162:
1155:
1152:
1147:
1143:
1139:
1134:
1133:
1129:
1125:
1124:
1120:
1114:
1113:
1110:
1109:
1102:
1101:
1099:
1098:third opinion
1095:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1069:Third opinion
1068:
1066:
1065:
1061:
1057:
1052:
1046:
1039:
1035:
1034:
1030:
1029:
1025:
1021:
1020:
1016:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1008:
1004:
999:
997:
989:
985:
981:
977:
973:
971:
968:
966:
962:
958:
954:
952:
948:
944:
940:
936:
932:
929:
925:
920:
916:
915:
914:
913:
909:
905:
899:
897:
893:
889:
885:
880:
877:
873:
864:
860:
856:
851:
847:
843:
842:
841:
840:
835:
831:
827:
822:
821:
820:
819:
816:
812:
808:
805:
804:
799:
796:
793:
789:
785:
781:
778:
773:
769:
766:
761:
756:
752:
751:
748:
744:
740:
735:
731:
727:
723:
719:
716:
712:
709:
705:
701:
698:
694:
690:
686:
682:
677:
674:
670:
667:
666:
665:
664:
663:
662:
658:
654:
646:
643:
639:
634:
630:
627:
623:
622:
617:
613:
609:
605:
603:
599:
595:
590:
586:
583:
579:
575:
570:
567:
562:
558:
554:
553:
552:
551:
548:
544:
540:
537:
533:
532:
528:
524:
523:
518:
517:
516:
515:
511:
507:
503:
498:
496:
492:
488:
479:
477:
476:
472:
468:
459:
444:
440:
434:
431:
430:
427:
410:
406:
402:
401:
393:
382:
380:
377:
373:
372:
368:
362:
359:
356:
352:
339:
335:
329:
326:
325:
322:
305:
301:
297:
296:
288:
282:
277:
275:
272:
268:
267:
263:
257:
254:
251:
247:
242:
238:
232:
224:
220:
215:
214:
206:
202:
198:
194:
191:
187:
186:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1259:â Preceding
1256:
1253:
1250:
1231:
1211:
1196:
1193:
1172:
1156:
1153:
1150:
1127:
1072:
1047:
1043:
1037:
1023:
1014:
1006:
1002:
1000:
992:
975:
969:
927:
900:
887:
883:
881:
875:
872:on this page
871:
869:
849:
845:
787:
771:
764:
759:
754:
714:
703:
692:
688:
675:Which is it?
672:
668:
651:
641:
640:rather than
637:
581:
577:
573:
565:
560:
527:biastophilia
499:
483:
463:
438:
398:
333:
293:
237:WikiProjects
204:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
1215:Gloriousgee
848:or broadly
760:paraphilias
753:Regarding "
589:non-neutral
148:free images
31:not a forum
1282:Categories
1200:Jack-A-Roe
1079:WP:silence
928:personally
924:unverified
491:notability
460:Disclosure
414:Psychology
405:Psychology
361:Psychology
1138:AlekseyFy
1017:172â182.)
980:Blackworm
957:Blackworm
943:Blackworm
939:misandric
855:Blackworm
826:Blackworm
739:Blackworm
722:Blackworm
608:Blackworm
594:Blackworm
557:synthesis
506:Blackworm
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1261:unsigned
1026:369â379.
801:however.
638:increase
578:increase
197:deletion
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1077:as per
894:of the
708:WP:NPOV
704:theory,
642:reflect
582:reflect
441:on the
336:on the
227:C-class
154:WPÂ refs
142:scholar
755:Nearly
689:except
669:Nearly
502:jargon
487:policy
233:scale.
126:Google
926:. I
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1269:talk
1238:talk
1219:talk
1204:talk
1181:talk
1174:it).
1165:talk
1142:talk
1087:talk
1060:talk
996:WP:V
984:talk
961:talk
947:talk
908:talk
876:only
859:talk
830:talk
811:talk
791:way.
784:here
777:here
743:talk
726:talk
697:here
685:here
681:here
657:talk
612:talk
598:talk
543:talk
510:talk
495:rape
471:talk
328:High
205:keep
203:was
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1128:not
1003:not
976:all
772:not
433:Mid
176:TWL
1284::
1271:)
1240:)
1221:)
1206:)
1183:)
1167:)
1144:)
1089:)
1081:.
1062:)
986:)
963:)
949:)
910:)
861:)
832:)
813:)
745:)
728:)
659:)
614:)
600:)
566:we
545:)
512:)
473:)
156:)
54:;
1267:(
1236:(
1217:(
1202:(
1179:(
1163:(
1140:(
1116:.
1085:(
1058:(
982:(
959:(
945:(
906:(
857:(
828:(
809:(
741:(
724:(
655:(
610:(
596:(
541:(
508:(
469:(
445:.
340:.
239::
207:.
172:¡
166:¡
158:¡
151:¡
145:¡
139:¡
133:¡
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.