304:
anyway when the sun supernovas (explodes) and burns out, which is certainly going to happen, but there is the argument that humans might develope spaceships and colonize distant planets. However, this is very unlikey because the closest planet that could possibly sustain life is probably more than a thousand lightyears from the Earth. If by some improbable miracle humanity found a planet that could sustain life, they would have to restart civilization from scratch and eventually find another life sustaining planet in order to continue the human race, but that's only if there is a life sustaining planet that we can propel a spaceship to reach with the limited and decreasing resources this Earth has. Even if we could send a spaceship to a planet that could suatain life, it would take several millenia, probably more than ten thousand years, to reach it because light takes a thousand years to travel a thousand light years. If light takes that long to travel from where Earth is to these life sustaining planets, how long do you think it would take for a spaceship traveling considerably slower than light to reach there? Maybe they have problems or maybe humanity has problems, maybe this pathetic cycle should end once and for all? If people have souls then it won't all be over when they die, but if they don't then its too bad. What's so great about humanity, we may have great technology but it probably won't save us from inevitable extinction. Maybe they just want to get this futile travesty over sooner and end the human comedy, or tragedy, now? This doesn't matter anyway because they have their own desires and unique values, they just happen to value chastity and purity more than the continuation of the human race. What's wrong with that? They have the right to their opinion, they have the freedom to value certain things more than other things, they don't have to justify their opinion with logic because they have the freedom to have their own unique identity. Do you have a reason for why your favorite color is your favorite color, or why you like one type of music more than another, or why you prefer one thing to another. The truth is that one opinion isn't better than the other, it's just different. The question why can be asked an infinite amount of times and it never brings us any closer to answering the real truths, but the question how has provided many answers (physics was born from the question how does this objects behave when this force acts upon it). The solution can only be found when humanity changes the very foundation of its logic, thinking, and the it looks at things. If you can't find the solution to a problem using one mode of logic or way of looking at things, you adjust your logic or your way of looking at things. Gravity was originally an absurd concept, until people adjusted their way of looking at things. Viruses and bacteria were originally considered ridiculous nonsense, but when people adjusted their way of looking at things it became a perfectly accepted fact. Maybe you should try different ways of looking things, and maybe they should try different ways of looking at things, too. You may begin to understand why they value the things they value, and if they try to see things your way they might start to believe humanity isn't such a horrible thing. However, in their credit, people are not great enough to decide whether humanity is worthy enough to survive, its rather conceited of humanity to think it knows what it believes to be thruth when it has no proof, so the answer is up to a higher power. So, no they're not, they just value decency over the existence of humanity, which is indecent and evil.
2452:
social phenomenon that it deserves coverage in a separate article. However such an ideology or philosophy or world-view does not exist only at a
Russian internet site, but has previously existed in various forms scattered at various historical periods (especially when ascetic Gnosticism was influential). Before the 20th-century, these manifestations of antisexualism were mainly expressed in religious terms. The importance of the Russian website is that it provided a virtual gathering place where "A community of self-identified coalesced... aided by the popularity of online communities... the anonymity of online communication and general popularity of social networking online has facilitated the formation of a community built around a common identity" (to paraphrase the
1177:
well educated on the matter read the page) and may well prompt users to add the citations required. Whilst some facts may not be easily proved, it does excuse the whole page from the rules on verification, and once citations have been found for most statements, the tags can be moved down to just those statements that are uncertain. This page really needs to go forwards with this, rather than just avoiding it altogether. Constructive criticism should not be seen as counter-productive, as this suggests that being productive is to force a particular point of view. A way should be found to describe the subject fairly referencing books on the subject, the same way other issues of sexuality are discussed on wikipedia, rather than labelling the wiki's policy as being in the wrong.
1102:
antisexual site is not independent from antisexuality. We can't have an article about any person or group of persons who decide to make a web page and proudly declare they have founded some sort of organisation. The question is: are they important enough? Has anybody else, any scholar or respectable journalist, ever been interested in them? Also, even if there were no such requirement, the site of the organisation can be at best a source about itself, not about antisexuality in general. If there is antisexualism in religion as you say, for example, that would need to be sourced too. --
130:
109:
140:
2139:
how he's relevant, but presumably it would be the same with him). However, that's not the issue. The issue is whether FAQ-type documents which are claimed to be the distillation of numerous forum postings by self-identified antisexuals can be used as evidence for the existence and goals of self-identified antisexuals. There are definitely problems with this from the
Knowledge (XXG) perspective, but they're not quite the same problems as would be for one random individual expressing purely personal opinions...
1363:
rather than in individual families). The existence of the League served as an important public reminder of the Party's disapproval of all attachments and activities which could diminish exclusive loyalty to the Party, and that everything other than "normal intercourse between man and wife, for the sole purpose of begetting children, and without physical pleasure on the part of the woman" was forbidden sexcrime, which could be punished by death.
214:
785:
people who are trying to change their entire society). Since Origen and Ann Lee were not trying to tell others to change the way they lived, nor were they making scientific arguments, it is unsurprising that few people have written critiques of their positions. Be that as it may, Knowledge (XXG) is not a soapbox or chatroom. Lena, you are welcome to contribute to
Knowledge (XXG) but you must follow our policies such as
2304:"The terror of being mistaken for a queer dominates the straight mind because this terror constitutes the straight mind. It is precisely that culturally produced and reinforced horror of/fascination with abjected homosexuality that produces and maintains 'the straight mind' as such, governing not so much specific sexual practices between men and women (after all, these things happen) as the institution (arguably
1385:
bonds, and loyalty to a sexual partner, represented an alternative to loyalty to the party. That's quite different from what Ince is talking about. (The party may also have wanted to deny sex to people just to make them miserable as part of the "boot-in-the-face-forever" program.) Anyway, who knows? I don't. So let's not include individual editor's interpretations of literature, and I've removed the passage.
321:- I'd assume the crux of their argument is opposition to sex on, ahem, what could be contrued as less than 'functional' or 'industrious' grounds. The thrwarting of literal 'reproduction', I'd envisage, isn't really the aim of their wrath so much as all that bewildering cultural layering upon the entity of 'sexuality' and 'sexual behaviour' with which we remain so familiar. Quite a poser to consider, tho'...
78:
2495:"antisexual" or "against sex", then how could he be described as an antisexual? (I don't know if he he was OK with married people having sex -- if he wasn't, he would have had to address the population-maintenance issue I would suppose -- I'm just saying that certainly a person who is OK with married people having sex would not be an antisexualist, I wouldn't think.
49:
21:
2551:
when anti-sexualism was most broadly influential was the 2nd-4th centuries A.D., when ascetic gnosticism permeated much of ancient
Mediterranean civilizations, and a number of prominent figures from Origen to Jerome could be found in both Christian and non-Christian schools of thought, proclaiming that perpetual virginity was far holier than marriage...
933:
combination of religious enthusiasm and "gender dysphoria" (i.e the priests of Cybele), to get a position as a palace eunuch, or to express a philosophy of sexual asceticism (i.e. effectively antisexualism). In Origen's case, his motive was clearly the third of these, and there were no priests of Cybele or palace eunuchs in the United States in 1865...
2378:. Money is a controversial figure with a strong point of view, and judging by his article he appears to have pretty sketchy ideas, but at least he's a trained and accomplished sexologist. He used the term "antisexualism" several times, sometimes in article titles, according to Google Scholar. I don't have cites and can't access the articles.
1181:
both scientifically supported and challenged, which would again make it easier to pick out areas in need of clean up. I may add this sometime this week when I have time and depending what the reaction is. I can see how the page has got to where it is now, but "ignore all rules" does not mean we should ignore the lapse itself.
819:
changed the way both Blacks and Whites lived. I think there is an important distinction between a person or group fo people who try to create a voluntaristic community of like-minded people who share a particular path to (God, truth, self-actualization) versus a movement that seeks to change the way all people live.
2875:
That's an interesting question. Is there a requirement for an article to have an overarching RS? Genuine question - there are loads of articles on
Knowledge (XXG) which suffer from that problem - having lots of individually sourced assertions, which don't really stitch together into a coherent whole.
2474:
I would dispute that. If you google "antisexualism" or "antisexual" you will get the quotes I listed above, and others like that. There's no question that by far and overwhelmingly the use of term is in passages like that. The definition used in the article is sourced to Ince, and Ince certainly is a
2120:
It may or not be true that the writers are blowing smoke or trolling, that all the posts are made by the same person using different pseudonyms, and so forth. Probably not, but we can't have any confidence of this. Even if the material was reliable, it's a primary source and it'd be original research
784:
The problem with the article is that it is not very clear. Origen and Ann Lee did not believe that everyone should be castrated or celibate. The point is, there is a difference between describing as a social movement a particular group of people or trend that is distinct from others, and a group of
724:
think antisexualism is wrong violates this rule. Antisexualism doesn't make any claims in itself, individuals who are antisexual are opposed to sexuality. If there are any specific arguments you want to put there, we can discuss them here first, but saying it's "extreme" is your own point of view and
2517:
We don't have to resolve the dispute among the independent sources, we just neutrally describe what the sources say. I'm hoping that Ince is cited in an RS somewhere soon, so that he can be cited here. At the moment, without academic credentials or other broad publications (news or mag article) and
2415:
I'm not sure what to say after the dicdef.... all the rest of the material in the lede falls more under the umbrella of "positive antisexualism", see below. But I'm sure one or two good quotes can be worked on to make a reasonable if very short article. It's really just a dicdef but we can pad it, I
2056:
Well, it's a free website and I don't see any advertising, so their business model is probably volunteer work and donations. They're probably more concerned with advocacy than making money. To the extent that they have a business model it would be supporting their base, I guess, rather than strictly
1425:
So, are we stuck with unsourced (and probably highly innaccurate) POV essay as a
Knowledge (XXG) article? Maybe! But let's keep at it -- you never know. I'm not going anywhere, so let's do it all again! Let's start by taking a look at the "Reasons for antisexualism" section. I've already tagged this
1180:
Secondly I see no reason why the page shouldn't have a more neutral point of view, many pages gives the advantages and criticisms of a number of things on wikipedia, and this goes to increase the quality of the page since it allows readers to form their own opinions. Many of the claims here could be
1101:
guideline requires that a topic "has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works that are reliable and independent of the subject." There's a discussion/edit war about that guideline right now, but nobody disputes the necessity of a work that is *independent* from the subject. Now, that
439:
Knowledge (XXG) is not taking a position on the matter, but just summarizing the arguments used by the advocates. Though this is not particularly the place for a debate on polygamy, those who called it "destructive" might have been referring to the fact that in the real world polygamy all too often
2679:
again because although it later appeared to be sourced, the single source appeared to make nine points (in
Russian, btw, and were difficult to translate) whereas the article listed fourteen points. Where did the other points come from? In addition, much of it was still written in the second person.
2451:
I think it's pretty indisputable that "antisexual(ism)" defined as a pathological psychological condition, or occurring as a derogatory accusing epithet uttered by "sex-positive" individuals, would not need a separate
Knowledge (XXG) article. It's only as an ideology or philosophy or world-view or
2166:
the existing refs to make clear what was going on to all. I agree that the forum source is not reliable as a secondary source, and is sketchy as a primary source about itself. At best, it could be mentioned, "The
Russian forum website Antisex Stronghold exists as a self-described clearinghouse for
1654:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Male dominated families can be harmful entity for society, which is similar to the theory of Marx and Engels that male dominated family structures which reduce females to objects of reproduction and household chores are more a form of 'prostitution' than
1176:
Whist I don't think the page should be nominated for deletion for it's shortcomings, I don't think this excuses it from being tagged for it's lack of neutrality and sources. These tags increase awareness that the factual content may be questionable (important if children, young adults or anyone not
1124:
I saw what he said there. What he said amounts to the idea that because the topic "antisexualism" doesn't satisfy wikipedia's criteria for verification, we should ignore wikipedia's criteria for verification. My understanding is that if the topic "antisexualism" doesn't satisfy wikipedia's criteria
806:
However, Origen and Ann Lee viewed celibacy as the ethically and religiously highest calling, and Origen was part of that Quasi-Gnostic-Ascetic current of opinion of the early centuries A.D. which regarded marriage as an extremely poor second-best to celibacy from a spiritual point of view. As the
2138:
First off, it's dubious that "opposition to romantic love" as such is the major motivation. And it's absolutely incontestable that Yuri
Nesterenko writing as an individual giving his own personal personal opinions on stuff is completely non-notable for Knowledge (XXG) (not sure who Peyotero is or
1912:
Well, Peyotero (one-word name) is given as the author. This is a nom de plume I assume. It's a forum thread. Another writer (TheCursed, also a nom de plume I assume) is the source of the "addiction to a person" quote. If we expand the authorship to "Peytero and TheCursed" or "Peyotero, et al" this
1362:
The Junior Anti-Sex League, in George Orwell's dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, was a group of young adult Party members devoted to banning all sexual intercourse, and replacing its procreative functions with the use of artificial insemination (children would be raised in public institutions,
1271:
Come on people. This article is an essay, period. This is nonsense. I tagged if for refs a while back, and my patience is now exhausted. I have removed the entire (and entirely unreferenced) section "Reasons for antisexualism" for starters. That is just for starters, but if anyone wants to discuss
1265:
references for the great bulk of this article, and that is simply not sustainable. Not only that, but many of the assertions are not only unreferenced, but appear to be unreferenced risible nonsense. Apparently some unreferenced people somewhere have claimed that "Technological advances render sex
864:
To explain myself more specifically, while anti-sexualist religions or religious tendencies have existed for a long time, and there have probably always been individuals with anti-sexualist views, it seems that anti-sexualist individuals not tied to one specific religion only sought each other out
2550:
Herostratus -- I don't want to rake up old grievances, but you flamed out on the AfD by conspicuously displaying your almost complete historical ignorance on the subject-matter of this article, and I really don't think that a repeat performance would accomplish anything here. In fact, the period
2230:
Regarding the first, if you ask a (celibate) priest "Father, I'm married, and I want children. Should I have sex?" he'll likely answer "Yes, and plenty". So that priest is not antisexualist, by the definition given. Asexuals and erotophobia have personal predilections of their own but don't, as a
1421:
OK, well, let's see where we stand. After work described in the three sections above, the article has been reverted (with no proper explanation or engagement on the talk page) to its original form as an unsourced (and probably highly innaccurate) POV essay, once by an editor with 3 edits to date,
1400:
Sorry I didn't see this before, but I think the article was redirected at the time that I would have looked here. Actually, what's quoted above is a pretty direct paraphrase of passages in the novel, so it would be far more of a primary sources problem than an original research problem. There's
1384:
If I recall correctly, the Party didn't actually object to sex or find it disgusting or unpleasant; Julia said something like "Those Party bastards are the one's visiting prostitutes the most!", so quite the opposite. Rather, the party wanted to stamp out sex for political reasons: because sexual
1290:
An editor restored the material with an edit summary of "The article is a stub. Why just that unreferenced part was deleted?" Well, it's true (I guess) that stubs have lesser reference requirements, but this article is not a stub (yet). Just that part was deleted because I haven't vetted the rest
303:
Maybe they're misanthropes(people who hate people) who hate humanity and desire its extinction. Why do they want humanity extinct? Maybe they're disgusted with how evil the human race is. Maybe they're nihilists who think that humanity's attempt to survive is futile and that everyone is going die
2334:, you could not have an authoritarian government, because people would be free from shame, and would trust their own sense of right and wrong. Such people are unlikely to march to war against their wishes, and we would like to think they would be unlikely to agree to operate the death camps too."
1125:
for verification, we should ignore the topic "antisexualism" and delete the article. Policies are supposed to be observed, otherwise they are not policies. According to the other logic, I could formulate my own crazy ideology on a web page and then require wikipedia to have an article about it.--
715:
In the case of the Swedish Nazi, that person is just factually wrong. For antisexuals, the arguments section just has facts that cause them to have the opinions they do. What their arguing is why they want to be antisexuals, not that there is a specific number of antisexuals in the world or in a
453:
the article was not making clear that destructiveness is merely an opinion of those who oppose polygamy. plus you seem to be holding some kind of false misconception about polygamy, that is arranged marriage (and is even that really such a bad thing? others would disagree). polygamy and arranged
2484:
Granted, in that case it's just a dictionary definition, and we're not suppose to have articles that are just dictionary definitions, but 1) we don't have to be fanatical about that, and since some people seem to want the article, we'll just have to get around that with a little padding, and 2)
1015:
Polygamy isn't only "a matter of gender inequality" when it's legal for only one gender. You're incorrect because, first of all, whether or not it's legal has nothing to do with the word, and, secondly, polygamy can be practiced by both males and females (which means there is no inherent gender
2612:
As I already explained at the AfD, there are plenty of specific sources on Origen, or on Jerome, or on ascetic gnosticism, or on the Skoptzy, or on the Shakers, or on Orwell's Junior Anti-Sex League, etc. What's been hard to find, is sources focusing on antisexualism in itself as a phenomenon
1964:
They seem to have an opinion, yes. Peyotero is mostly writing about his personal experience, and ends with "I'm looking for inspiration and support - Strength is in union. Cheers to antisexualism!", which sort of thing you won't see in neutral material. TheCursed has "I am both against sex and
818:
Okay, well in terms of my point about social movements, the question I would think is, did they see themselves as part of a movement to change all of society so that everyone lives according to their views? Some social movements do just this: in the US, for example, the Civil Rights movements
2494:
The problem for this second part is refs. For example, take Kellog. He's listed in the article as a prominent antisexualist. I'm not familiar with Kellog and will look into it but if 1) he was OK with married people having sex, and 2) we don't have a notable source directly describing him as
1079:
The article is partly a loose paraphrase of the "Anti-Sexual FAQ" linked in the external links section; unfortunately, most of the sources for non-religion-specific anti-sexual communities of interest will be Internet sources, for the reasons explained above (did you read it?). And the word
2248:
has rippled through extremist groups of the women's liberation movement and attacks men for treating women as venereal objects in what is described as a 'sexist society'. Beauty contests, the use of the sexual sell in advertising, and prostitution are all seen as evidence of male chauvinist
932:
Nowadays a few people have themselves castrated for "kinky" reasons (as reported in wire-service articles which seem to recur about 2-3 times a year), but it's very hard to imagine such a motive in ancient times (or even in 1865). In ancient times, people had themselves castrated out of a
1068:
The article cites no sources using the term "antisexualism". None of the beliefs ascribed to "some" or "all" antisexuals is attributed to a concrete person or supported with a citation. Thus, all of the info may potentially be original research. I suspect it should be deleted altogether.
1236:
OK, but in that case this article needs to be referenced. People watching this article need to add some good references in a reasonably timely manner. Later on - not now, but after a while - I propose to through here and redact all the material that is not sourced to a good reference.
1333:
Even then, it's not at all clear that Lovecraft's quote is indicative of "erotophobia" to a point similar to racial and religious bigotry in the sense that Ince means. It's not at all clear that Lovecraft's quote is part of a considered philosophy rather than a cherry-picked one-off
989:
From the article, "Some of the claims made by antisexuals include..." Actually I should change this to, "Some antisexuals claims..." instead, but, as AnonMoos said, it isn't necessarily true, but the article is just pointing out arguments sometimes made by people for antisexualism.
2435:
I don't think we can use this website as a reference, though. It's an advocacy website. Maybe something can be used, or there are links to material that can be used. Obviously it'd be nice if someone who, unlike me, gives a rat's ass about of any this was willing to help out...
1376:
original research -- after all, the book had the Youth Anti-Sex League, so it prima facie shows antisexualism in action. If this were true, I'd not object to the passages, we don't object to "the sky is blue" type passages as original research. However, I'm not so sure it
750:
2. “Sexuality can lead to discrimination, based on perceptions of sexual immorality and intolerance of certain sexual preferences.” It such caces it is the INTOLERANCE that is the problem. If all harmless sexual activities where accepted the problem would disappear.
1788:
Anyway, the source has 9 bullet points and the article has 14, so there's some new material, probably about 5 points worth. I think the bits about Marx and technological advances and the "more a burden than a joy" (huh?) is some editor riffing rather than violating
2644:
Fair enough - perhaps it is a phenomenon with only periodically rekindled interest and reportage. If there are no scholarly historical overviews, we're simply stuck presenting only what extant sources say, spotty though their overarching long term coverage may be.
807:
article says, before the modern period you had prosyletizing antisexual religions, while now you also have a secular social reform reform movement which seeks to gain support for itself. Otherwise, I'm not sure I see the great differences which you're implying.
758:
4. “Some antisexualists make no distinction between consent and coercion, seeing sex as a means of oppression.” This distinction is very important due to the enomous diffrence in the precived emotions of at least one of the ivolved. The victime ecperience a
754:
3. “Sexual desires could be false assumptions that are foisted on you by society...” Sexual drive is NOT a social construct: it exist as a genuine feeling towards other people! If you doubt that you might as well doubt that hunger is genuine feeling.
852:
We can only report what the antisexualists have said about themselves and their views, in those places where they happen to have expressed those views. What is your plan to get around such limitations? Do you have any concrete suggestions to offer.
1317:
Lovecraft was not a sexologist, sociologist, essayist, philosopher, social commentator, or academic. He was a pulp fiction writer and is known only for that. He is notable, but in an entirely different field. We don't include the musings of
360:. In other words it reduces fretrility as much as sexual drive, if it does not make the person entiarly sterile which might well be the case. We have a long way to go before we can take away sex drive without reproductional consequences.
246:, a collaborative effort to improve Knowledge (XXG)'s coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the
1933:
Well, this is not possible to tell, as the writers are using pseudonyms. So it's not possible to vet their credentials. Peyotero claims to be 16, and neither Peyotero nor TheCursed claim any academic or professional credentials, I don't
738:
1. “Sexuality asserts itself in the human mind by releasing neurochemicals comparable to addictive drugs into the brain.” This is true but misleading. The brain have a system of reward to motivate us to do things we benefit from in
1426:
for references in the spring (and got no response, or references) but let's try again -- maybe something will come up this time. So let's go through it sentence by sentence, I'll give each sentence followed by my questions about it:
1782:
The first part is a mechanical translation from the source, but the second sentence ("This is a position...") is not in the source. (This means it's unsourced and is presumably just some editor blowing smoke, but that's a different
481:
Well it's not an issue first of all, it's a view. I guess there could be a section with reasons against antisexualism, but I don't think it would be too informative about antisexuality and it would be getting a bit off-topic IMHO.
1164:. As it stands, this is a well-written article that does a good job at documenting antisexualism. How about not trying to be counter-productive? If there aren't any sources listed, try to find some and help improve the article. --
1494:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Sexual desire can cause people to place primitive instinct ahead of intellect (people across the world continue to have unsafe casual sex despite their awareness of the dangers of
1266:
obsolete", opposee procreation because "Mother-roles are a construct used to subjugate women", then we throw Marx and Engels in there, and if Marx and Engels were antisexualists there ought to be some reference showing that.
1401:
another sentence present -- "Though the League was founded and countenanced by the all-powerful totalitarian Party, the Party leadership did not allow it to succeed in its goals" -- which provides some necessary context...
2424:
But then, getting down to the meat of the article, there is this interesting website, antisex.info. In the DicDef above, "antisex" is basically a pejorative, usually (not always) thrown about for some polemic purpose.
891:
Removed Hodgkinson mention from article, since it seems from her website that she's a "Refraining from sex can be positive" advocate, which is rather different from true anti-sexualism ("sex is almost always bad"):
2046:
Yes, definitely. The name of the publication is "Anitsexual Stronghold" and it certainly seems that their agenda is something along the lines of promoting antisexualism and/or providing support for antisexualists.
2577:
And source(s) would be good for that, too. Most of the difficulty, in my opinion, is avoided by soberly sticking with what sources say. That way, it's never personal. In case that seems weird, just check out
1794:
I'm unsure of what to do here, so I didn't do anything. I haven't removed the material as copyvio, but maybe it should be removed for that reason. We're supposed to be pretty conservative regarding copyright.
1559:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Sexual desires could be false assumptions that are foisted on you by society, hence you may need to look at how your sexuality is ideologically and institutionally
1151:
Repeating: the problem is not "internet sources" vs "paper sources", the problem is "Foo talking about himself" vs "reliable independent sources (scholars, respectable journalists) talking about Foo". --
1895:
Yes, pretty much. It's complicated, as a quote is used ("addiction to a person") and that's from a commentor, not the original poster, but this could be solved by using "et al", see immediately below.
1632:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Mother-roles are a construct used to subjugate women, hence they may oppose procreation. This argument chimes with certain feminist and queer theories (
2109:("Links to... chat or discussion forums/groups"). Allowing pseudonymous internet forum posts to be used as refs would be highly idiosyncratic, and would be huge headache generally, which is why
608:. But he same substances are released by eating good food or getting praised. Yet nobody claims that food should be unappetising or that you should never praise anybody! In fact, this system
1252:
Well, I haven't seen any progress here. There is one additional reference, but for some reason right now I can't get it to load. But it is is to a forum, which forums are not reliable sources.
589:
this coincide with the time when the child can keep the adult’s walking pace.) Soon after that she will get a new ovulation. The father of the first child have to compete with other men to
1673:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Sexual behavior evolved for human reproduction. If life is more a burden than a joy, one does a service to would-be offspring by not having them.
196:
374:
than men. But I have no reason to believe that women on average have much less sexual drive. Consequently, antiandrogens don’t reduce women’s sexual drive to the same degree. Something
1466:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Sexuality can complicate relationships (as when people are hostile towards each other because they are sexually attracted to the same person).
1766:
There is a link between unrestricted reproduction, resource depletion and environmental decay. This is a position ideologically connected to deep ecology, antinatalism and Malthusianism.
1606:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: There is a link between unrestricted reproduction, resource depletion and environmental decay. This is a position ideologically connected to
2475:
activist rather than a scholar, and he used the term as (most of) the other people using it do. To ignore the main meaning and use of the term would be out of the question, I would say.
2938:
186:
2269:, the instinct of personal isolation, the actual repulsiveness to us of the idea of intimate contact with most of the persons we meet, especially those of our own sex." This is from
1004:
exist it is only legal for one gender. In the vast majority of cases it is the men which are allowed to have more than one wife at the same time. As such polygamy is a matter of
692:
I don’t like when extreme ideas are presented without any counter-arguments. The followers might come with “factual” arguments which are simply wrong. One example is a Swedish
281:
2943:
2933:
162:
747:
mimic the function of the neurochemicals involved giving us pleasure without effort. However, the simularities can help explaining why some people becomes addicted to sex.
573:. A woman’s all male friends, neighbours and colleagues compete for having sex with her. The winner chose by the woman have sex with her only once. If they don’t use any
2953:
1960:
Does he have an opinion on the matter? On the continuum running from "utterly disinterested investigator or reporter" to "complete polemicist", where does this person fit?
1545:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Sexuality can lead to discrimination, based on perceptions of sexual immorality and intolerance of certain sexual preferences.
271:
1451:, although they say it is not impossible to become asexual and they seek asexuality, but the reasons for their antisexuality are often based on their reasoning or morals.
2401:
This is a great improvement, but "anti-oppression" and "sex negative" are kind of loaded and not too NPOV, so let's see if we can go that article one better, how about:
2802:
2798:
2784:
2699:
1182:
59:
31:
865:
and formed a comunity during the Internet age. Therefore many of the sources on non-religion-specific anti-sexualist advocacy will necessarily be Internet sources.
2958:
2948:
235:
2428:
But this Russian site actually advocates antisexuality as a positive good. Unlike celibates and asexuals, they not only don't want to have sex but they they think
352:
Such substances reduces sexual drive drastically. But they don't make it disapear entiarly unless the person allready have a low leveal of sex drive. The use of
247:
153:
114:
2740:
766:
5. “Some antisexualists see a link between unrestricted reproduction, resource depletion and environmental decay.” This is an outdated idea reminding me of
700:
living on welfare. In reality Sweden have 250 thousand Muslim inhabitants and nobody knows how many live on welfare. Other examples of extreme ideas are
471:
Perhaps this page should also list some counter-arguements to this idea, as to give a better example of what range of opinions there may be on this issue.
388:
I have always woundered if they would ever go mad with idiology and literly kill anthing to do with sextuality, and their behabour becomes almost like the
1203:... are the people who are staunchly opposed to all forms of sex perhaps just cranky because they're not getting any? It's something worth considering ;)
883:
The list of antisexualist lacks to mentione to Liz Hodgkingson, a very famous british woman writer with a strong bias against sex and all related issues.
2412:
How about this? Are there any objections to this? (Possibly it should be "antisexual" rather than "antisexualism", which would mean moving the article.)
1913:
would solve the quotation-source problem. (Alternatively, the quote could be removed. For now I'll assume that "Peytero and TheCursed" are the authors.)
956:
638:
It is my informed view. I wrote my contributation in indignation over people having such dysfunctional ideas. However, I think a list of more or less
242:
219:
2408:
is a term used by advocates of sexually liberal practices to describe sexually conservative societies, persons, ideologies, preferences, or practices.
2384:
Some of this is just idiocy, some of it isn't, but that's not important. It's reasonably notable. The problem teasing out a definition from all this.
2860:
This article seems like a string of unrelated things strung together. Is there a reliable source which links these disparate movements and trends?
1730:("A 'derivative work' is a work... such as a translation") lead me to believe that translation doesn't create a new copyright under US law or the
1141:
We have plenty of articles on Internet phenomena, where verification by means of printed paper sources would often be extremly sketchy at best...
2880:, which I came away from more confused than I started. Is there a policy about needing RS for the article, over and above individual assertions?
1422:
once by an editor with 2 edits to data, and another editor has averred that removing the unsourced material again will likely get me in trouble.
440:
becomes a matter of old men marrying off their teenage daughters to each other (without too much respect for the wishes of the girls involved).
777:
Eventually, I wounder if people really “oppose procreation”. Do they wish for the extincion of humanity!? Such opinions are simply amazing!
649:
It's not necessary, but if you want to, then I think we should discuss what "scientific counter-arguments" you were thinking of here first. --
2396:
The word erotophobia has been used by anti-oppression activists to describe sex negative attitudes as a form of discrimination and oppression
2910:
1218:
1038:. But in the societies where polygamy is legal it is almost always so for only one of the genders. That is why I consider it a matter of
411:
1204:
1875:(The ref comes at the end of the lede, so it may be intended to support other material in the lede, but I'm not assuming this for now.)
917:
1754:
translation -- that is, a basically word-for-word translation rather than a loose translation of the general sense. This applies to
1531:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Sexual desire can cause people to lie and cheat in the pursuit of sexual relationships.
1185:
1992:
It's an internet forum, "Anitsexual Stronghold". It's Russian, but has English sections, and the material referenced is in English.
1578:, encourages and justifies obliviousness to the unfairness of discrimination against people who are deemed unattractive by others.
628:
Interesting, but if those are only your own personal views, then they don't really belong on the Knowledge (XXG) article page...
1592:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: There is no difference between consent and coercion; sex is a means of oppression.
910:
People can chose to castrate themselves for a variety of reasons; the fact that they did so doesn't make them antisexualists.
89:
2741:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140301083100/http://www.mk.ru/editions/atmosphere/article/2007/11/08/71125-zhizn-bez-seksa.html
2347:
2318:
1731:
968:
1816:
1815:
A user did add a ref, to Antisexual Stronghold. I've been working up a ref vetting checklist, which is explained in detail
331:. This is an impossible dream unless we can find out a way to get ride of human sex drive without making people sterile.
2750:
2239:
OK, Here are some uses of "antisexualism" and related words, picked more or less at random from Google and other places.
1998:
Is it a peer-reviewed scholarly journal, or a magazine (or newspaper) known to have an effective fact-checking operation?
2845:
612:
to reward us with pleasure only when we do things that we profit from in evolutionary terms. Don’t accuse me for being
562:
about how human sexuality would have been if our ancestors only had sex for getting children. It goes about like this:
55:
27:
2744:
1776:Бесконтрольное размножение приводит к перенаселению Земли, истощению ресурсов и ухудшению состояния окружающей среды.
1372:
is that it's unreferenced. It's original research, somebody's interpretation of the book. One could claim that it's
1049:
You're right, in the majority of cases it is a matter of gender inequality. I'm just saying it's not something that
569:
once every four years. They are compleatly aware of it and even publicly announce it by emitting a especially sexy
1851:
Find out if there is an antisexualist movement that is (at least in part) motivated by opposition to romantic love.
1097:
Sorry I didn't notice the external link, but the sources should be indicated with footnotes. More importantly, the
454:
marriages do NOT go automatically hand in hand. rather you are thinking of various random outlier sects and cults.
327:
I think they ether wish that people only had sex for getting children or that all children would be conceived by
2801:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
2914:
1222:
504:, but most of this variation is shown by a minority of people. The sexual pattern of the majority have served
493:
I think a list with counter-arguments would be very suitable since at several of their opinions is contrary to
2026:
Don't know. It's not a print publication, and it's offered free. FWIW their Alexa rank is 1,619,352 worldwide.
415:
400:
of destroying something you see the evil (and all that you see to it), in and you become the villan yourself.
95:
77:
1656:
2836:
2732:
1575:
1208:
328:
2906:
1762:
of the material. There is some material intertwined that isn't in the source. For example, the article has
1189:
1098:
913:
429:
this article is not npov, for instance polygamy is certainly not a "destructive" behavior as they claimed.
407:
2885:
921:
824:
794:
145:
2432:
shouldn't have sex either. Or anyone. I haven't looked into this website yet in any detail, but plan to.
2820:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
2808:
2500:
2441:
2126:
1824:
1800:
1705:
1390:
1343:
1296:
1277:
1242:
767:
161:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
2731:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
2360:
that spreads its octopus tentacles into the politics of what could become a new and dictatorial era of
1944:
Don't know, same problem (pseudonyms). Peyotero claims to be 16, so it that's true he may be a student.
1152:
1126:
1103:
1070:
884:
472:
401:
2518:
without being cited in other RS (news, mag, book), Ince and the forum are on thin ice as sources, per
343:
312:
2775:
1513:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Sexuality asserts itself in the human mind by releasing
1739:
1637:
139:
129:
108:
48:
20:
2291:
2105:
This pretty clearly isn't usable as a ref. It'd not even be an acceptable external link per #10 of
2036:
Don't know. They're a website. Can't find any neutral third-party analysis, at least not right off.
960:
2706:
2618:
2556:
2461:
2277:(1890), according to an editor at this article's earlier AfD. I don't have any more info on this.
2144:
1406:
964:
938:
559:
2805:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1819:. It's not done but let's deploy it for a test drive on this ref. It's long, so I've hidden it.
1743:
2903:
It seems biased against antisexuals, by the article calling them “coitophobic” and “prudish”.
2821:
2881:
2344:
2315:
1039:
1005:
820:
790:
520:
2579:
2106:
717:
674:
That doesn't seem very appropiate for a page about antisexualism. If you want to write about
2650:
2587:
2531:
2496:
2437:
2338:
2295:
2176:
2122:
1820:
1796:
1701:
1633:
1574:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Sexuality, which is usually based on notion of
1386:
1339:
1292:
1273:
1238:
586:
2828:
2114:
1965:
romance..." near his opening so again this would indicate a point of view, pretty strongly.
786:
2865:
1727:
1226:
1212:
1165:
1116:
1054:
1021:
991:
726:
683:
679:
660:
650:
483:
158:
2523:
2110:
839:
1687:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Technological advances render sex obsolete.
1480:
of the claims some antisexuals make include: Sex may hinder one's spiritual development.
1261:
references, and leaving aside that a whole section of the article is fiction, there are
2787:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
2391:
article handles this very much better. The aptly named "Political use" section begins:
1514:
771:
234:
213:
2827:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
2794:
2751:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140302205455/http://moulin-rouge.telion.ru/2006/05/140/1
2519:
1746:
warns against "machine translation from some foreign text". I don't know if this is a
2927:
2724:
2702:
2614:
2552:
2457:
2327:
2270:
2140:
1870:
1615:
1402:
1327:
1323:
1161:
1142:
1085:
981:
934:
896:
866:
854:
843:
808:
629:
582:
574:
441:
367:
353:
311:
Well i suppose some might permit it for baby-making, but otherwise artificial ways.
2877:
2370:
by Jennifer Germon.) Tidal wave of octopus tentacles, yikes, that does sound scary.
1611:
1607:
740:
594:
551:
513:
339:
307:
Are these people idiots? How do they think the human race is supposed to continue?
2745:
http://www.mk.ru/editions/atmosphere/article/2007/11/08/71125-zhizn-bez-seksa.html
2646:
2583:
2527:
2388:
2223:
2172:
2032:
What about the publisher? What kind of outfit are they? What's their reputation?
539:
455:
430:
2252:
2861:
2793:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
2754:
2485:
anyway, there is another use for the term "positive antisexualism" as it were.
2375:
2217:
1319:
953:
How is polygamy "destructive"? It doesn't fit in with sadism and unsafe sex.
639:
621:
524:
517:
393:
375:
357:
135:
1700:
Well, turns out all the questions are pretty similar. Are there any answers?
735:
I have thoughtfully checked their arguments again. Here comes my criticism:
1723:
893:
701:
581:. The father-to-be stays with her and helps to support her until she stops
566:
547:
535:
528:
509:
501:
371:
370:
had the same effect on sexual drive in both sexes! Women produce much less
2330:
theorized that without the suppression of sexuality and the imposition of
1217:
This isn't a place to debate about anti-sexualism. Please don't be toxic.
2211:
1272:
that we can do that before moving on. Discuss, please, before reverting.
1081:
1035:
1031:
1017:
1001:
675:
664:
616:! Humans shows extremely little genetical variation for such a numerous
578:
543:
527:. The idea that sex don’t have to be fun probably originated as way for
505:
2698:
Tolstoy should probably be mentioned in the article, according to this:
2453:
1929:
What are his academic credentials? What is his professional experience?
1448:
705:
617:
609:
590:
555:
2918:
2889:
2869:
2850:
2710:
2688:
2654:
2591:
2560:
2535:
2504:
2465:
2445:
2312:
Straight with a Twist: Queer Theory and the Subject of Heterosexuality
2231:
class, have a political opinion about other people's sexual activity.
2180:
2148:
2130:
1828:
1804:
1709:
1410:
1394:
1347:
1300:
1281:
1246:
1193:
1168:
1155:
1145:
1129:
1119:
1106:
1088:
1073:
1057:
1024:
994:
984:
972:
942:
925:
899:
869:
857:
846:
827:
811:
797:
729:
686:
653:
632:
593:
her once more.” This is ONLY a idea of how it would have been IF our
486:
475:
458:
444:
433:
419:
346:
315:
2381:
There's a lot more like this. Google, Google Books, Google Scholar.
774:
and an intension to have few children the supposed link breaks down.
697:
613:
531:
497:
2203:
is opposition or hostility towards sexual behavior and sexuality..."
2167:
antisexual advocacy.", but would need an independent RS to support
2284:"So far we have been considering pro-sexual elements in religion;
2259:. I don't have the book and that's all I can get from the preview.
744:
605:
570:
508:
well during our 200,000 years of existence. This includes hidden
494:
397:
389:
980:
Did you notice the discussion of that very point directly above?
624:
sense don’t exist. 2007-01-01 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
1496:
1431:
The antisexual movement promotes antisexualism as a way of life.
760:
693:
601:
2084:
Yes, to the extent that they have standing to address anything.
1655:
one of ethical family values. Some Marxists have advocated the
71:
43:
15:
516:, long term (not necessary lifelong) couples, and the joy of
2760:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
1950:
What about reputation? Are there any big character markers?
550:
celibacy had become the norm. Complete celibacy (not even
2735:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1873:, with some describing it as an 'addiction to a person'".
682:, please go to their pages and write about them there. --
2728:
2676:
1716:
763:
as something compleatly different than consensual sex!
2214:-- That's based on a decision not to have sex oneself.
2080:
Does the source have standing to address the material?
1715:
Well, hmmm, it seems like a lot of this is taken from
2356:"The neutering of gender is part of a tidal wave of
696:
who claimed that there where one million Muslims in
157:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
2797:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
171:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Sexology and sexuality
2067:Just to reiterate, it's an internet forum thread.
1080:"antisexualism" is easily found on pages such as
554:) will always be a drawback unless the person is
2420:Positive antisexualism per Antisexual Stronghold
1869:"Antisexuals can also be opposed to the idea of
663:and the psychological consequences of complete
2939:Low-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
2783:This message was posted before February 2018.
2336:- Easton, Dossie, and Liszt, Catherine. 1997.
1016:inequality). What you're thinking of is legal
2249:depersonalization of women into sex objects."
2052:What's their business incentive for veracity?
1517:comparable to addictive drugs into the brain.
1045:2007-03-10 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
1011:2007-02-22 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
716:certain country. Remember, we have to follow
711:2007-03-11 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
670:2007-02-22 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
645:2007-02-16 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
334:2007-03-11 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
256:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Alternative Views
8:
2008:If not, is there any reason to believe that
780:2007-03-26 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
381:2007-03-16 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
363:2007-03-15 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
2944:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
2934:Start-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
2755:http://moulin-rouge.telion.ru/2006/05/140/1
174:Template:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality
75:
2904:
2341:: A Guide to Infinite Sexual Possibilities
1864:What's the material that the ref supports?
642:counter-arguments would be very suitable.
600:Antisexualists point out that sex release
500:. Sure, there is much variation in human
208:
103:
2954:Low-importance Alternative Views articles
2723:I have just modified 2 external links on
1891:Does the ref indeed support the material?
1694:Question: what's the reference for this?
1680:Question: what's the reference for this?
1666:Question: what's the reference for this?
1647:Question: what's the reference for this?
1625:Question: what's the reference for this?
1599:Question: what's the reference for this?
1585:Question: what's the reference for this?
1567:Question: what's the reference for this?
1552:Question: what's the reference for this?
1538:Question: what's the reference for this?
1524:Question: what's the reference for this?
1506:Question: what's the reference for this?
1487:Question: what's the reference for this?
1473:Question: what's the reference for this?
1459:Question: what's the reference for this?
1439:Question: what's the reference for this?
523:. All those traits are at least partly
58:on 8 February 2011 (UTC). The result of
2613:extending across historical periods...
2207:OK, so this doesn't mean any of these:
1919:Does he have a Knowledge (XXG) article?
1330:on mammalian taxonomy. Same thing here.
210:
105:
30:on 8 January 2014 (UTC). The result of
2959:WikiProject Alternative Views articles
2949:Start-Class Alternative Views articles
2314:, p.27. University of Illinois Press.
1954:Don't know, same problem (pseudonyms).
1811:Vetting Antisexual Stronghold as a ref
1082:http://www.antisex.info/en/iamnews.htm
259:Template:WikiProject Alternative Views
2772:to let others know (documentation at
1322:on international monetary policy, of
1112:
1008:not of destructive sexual behaviour.
323:-- 21:05, 17 October 2006 81.109.36.8
7:
2113:clearly forbids refs like this, see
1357:The article contained this passage:
512:every three to five weeks, constant
240:This article is within the scope of
151:This article is within the scope of
2195:The current def in the article is:
1750:translation, but parts of it are a
1368:The problem with the passage about
1113:Talk:Antisexualism#Not verified tag
94:It is of interest to the following
1742:doesn't address translations, but
154:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality
14:
2727:. Please take a moment to review
2288:, however, existed side by side."
2220:-- that's lack of desire for sex.
2191:Just to clarify some basic points
1198:
546:. Originally being the ultimate
233:
212:
138:
128:
107:
76:
47:
19:
2310:-- Thomas, Calvin, ed. (2000).
2308:) of heteronormativity itself."
2012:has checked the author's facts?
1881:Is it contentious or contended?
1772:This is taken from the source:
906:Antisexualist list (castration)
879:Antisexualist list (Hodgkinson)
404:10:51 P.M 15 September 2008
276:This article has been rated as
191:This article has been rated as
177:Sexology and sexuality articles
54:This article was nominated for
26:This article was nominated for
2466:20:27, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
2446:05:43, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
2368:Gender: A Genealogy of an Idea
2181:03:30, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
2149:11:40, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
2131:18:10, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
1847:What are we trying to do here?
1829:18:10, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
1805:04:09, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
1732:Universal Copyright Convention
1710:06:37, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
1411:11:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
1257:But leaving leaving aside the
1042:in the was majority of cases.
1000:In almost all societies where
708:and religious fundamentalism.
659:I thought about the nature of
577:she will almost always become
420:14:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
1:
2919:04:30, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
2876:My personal antifavourite is
2265:"...what might be called the
1835:Vetting Antisexual Stronghold
1313:Re the H.P. Lovecraft quote:
1247:16:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
1213:08:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
1111:See what AnonMoos said here:
995:21:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
985:04:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
973:02:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
943:08:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
926:06:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
900:00:39, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
870:08:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
858:03:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
847:02:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
838:the article does not provide
654:21:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
487:19:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
476:04:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
459:11:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
445:04:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
434:01:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
243:WikiProject Alternative views
165:and see a list of open tasks.
2899:Is Terminology section NPOV?
2851:18:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
2711:18:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
2689:07:56, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
2298:, a famous and seminal book.
1940:How does he make his living?
1169:19:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
597:history had been different.
316:18:54, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
2890:00:01, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
2870:23:26, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
2655:02:55, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
2592:02:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
2561:01:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
2536:19:17, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
2505:18:58, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
2002:No. It's an internet forum.
1447:Antisexuals are not always
720:and presenting reasons why
633:17:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
2975:
2814:(last update: 5 June 2024)
2720:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1338:This is why I removed it.
1326:on quantum physics, or of
1301:00:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
1282:05:50, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
1156:23:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1146:16:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1130:13:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
1120:02:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
1107:17:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
1089:18:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
1074:13:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
1058:16:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
1025:02:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
828:11:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
812:17:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
798:14:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
730:16:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
725:violates the NPOV rule. --
347:07:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
282:project's importance scale
262:Alternative Views articles
197:project's importance scale
2671:Reasons for antisexualism
2235:Antisexualism as a DicDef
2022:What's their circulation?
1194:03:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
770:. With widespead use of
687:13:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
275:
228:
190:
123:
102:
2275:Principles of Psychology
2257:The Promiscuous Teenager
1395:05:51, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
1348:18:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
1227:05:25, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
887:11:08, 18 December 2006
604:-like substances in the
2716:External links modified
2042:Do they have an agenda?
1657:abolition of the family
1576:physical attractiveness
842:per wikipedia rules. `'
743:terms. Most addictive
329:artificial insemination
2251:That's from a book by
2226:-- that's fear of sex.
1923:Not under those names.
168:Sexology and sexuality
146:Human sexuality portal
115:Sexology and sexuality
84:This article is rated
2255:and Harmon L. Smith,
2057:adhering to veracity.
1744:Knowledge (XXG):Cv101
1199:I'm just wondering...
959:comment was added by
768:Thomas Robert Malthus
378:are quite happy for.
88:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
2795:regular verification
2332:anti-sexual morality
2286:anti-sexual elements
2267:anti-sexual instinct
1659:and communal living.
1417:References needed II
1030:Alright, I mixed up
366:Oops, I wrote as if
2856:Is this article OR?
2785:After February 2018
2764:parameter below to
2292:Marriage and Morals
1636:, pro-celibacy and
356:is called chemical
2839:InternetArchiveBot
2790:InternetArchiveBot
2374:Another source is
1640:), but not others.
560:thought experiment
90:content assessment
2921:
2909:comment added by
2815:
2687:
1232:References needed
1040:gender inequality
1006:gender inequality
976:
928:
916:comment added by
885:User:Ed War Avila
620:: “races” in the
558:. I have made a
521:sexual activities
467:Arguments against
410:comment added by
402:EmperorofFatilism
296:
295:
292:
291:
288:
287:
253:Alternative Views
220:Alternative Views
207:
206:
203:
202:
70:
69:
42:
41:
2966:
2849:
2840:
2813:
2812:
2791:
2779:
2686:
2684:
2339:The Ethical Slut
2296:Bertrand Russell
2253:Daniel Gianturco
1722:. My reading of
1721:
1183:Ignore all Rules
954:
911:
840:reliable sources
834:Not verified tag
587:hunter-gatherers
422:
338:You mean these:
264:
263:
260:
257:
254:
237:
230:
229:
224:
216:
209:
179:
178:
175:
172:
169:
148:
143:
142:
132:
125:
124:
119:
111:
104:
87:
81:
80:
72:
51:
44:
23:
16:
2974:
2973:
2969:
2968:
2967:
2965:
2964:
2963:
2924:
2923:
2901:
2858:
2843:
2838:
2806:
2799:have permission
2789:
2773:
2733:this simple FaQ
2718:
2696:
2682:
2673:
2422:
2237:
2193:
2188:
2160:
2135:
2134:
1982:The publication
1837:
1836:
1813:
1728:Derivative work
1719:
1499:, for example).
1419:
1355:
1311:
1234:
1229:
1201:
1066:
955:—The preceding
951:
908:
881:
836:
684:User:alexjohnc3
680:human sexuality
661:human sexuality
469:
405:
301:
261:
258:
255:
252:
251:
222:
176:
173:
170:
167:
166:
159:human sexuality
144:
137:
117:
85:
12:
11:
5:
2972:
2970:
2962:
2961:
2956:
2951:
2946:
2941:
2936:
2926:
2925:
2911:100.36.232.242
2900:
2897:
2895:
2893:
2892:
2857:
2854:
2833:
2832:
2825:
2758:
2757:
2749:Added archive
2747:
2739:Added archive
2717:
2714:
2695:
2692:
2672:
2669:
2668:
2667:
2666:
2665:
2664:
2663:
2662:
2661:
2660:
2659:
2658:
2657:
2631:
2630:
2629:
2628:
2627:
2626:
2625:
2624:
2623:
2622:
2601:
2600:
2599:
2598:
2597:
2596:
2595:
2594:
2568:
2567:
2566:
2565:
2564:
2563:
2543:
2542:
2541:
2540:
2539:
2538:
2510:
2509:
2508:
2507:
2489:
2488:
2487:
2486:
2479:
2478:
2477:
2476:
2469:
2468:
2421:
2418:
2410:
2409:
2399:
2398:
2372:
2371:
2352:
2351:
2323:
2322:
2300:
2299:
2280:
2279:
2261:
2260:
2236:
2233:
2228:
2227:
2221:
2215:
2205:
2204:
2201:Antisexualism'
2192:
2189:
2187:
2186:Moving forward
2184:
2159:
2156:
2154:
2152:
2151:
2103:
2102:
2098:
2097:
2096:
2095:
2090:Anything else?
2087:
2086:
2085:
2076:
2075:
2071:
2070:
2069:
2068:
2063:Anything else?
2060:
2059:
2058:
2049:
2048:
2047:
2039:
2038:
2037:
2029:
2028:
2027:
2019:
2018:
2017:
2005:
2004:
2003:
1995:
1994:
1993:
1984:
1983:
1979:
1978:
1977:
1976:
1971:Anything else?
1968:
1967:
1966:
1957:
1956:
1955:
1947:
1946:
1945:
1937:
1936:
1935:
1926:
1925:
1924:
1916:
1915:
1914:
1904:
1903:
1899:
1898:
1897:
1896:
1888:
1887:
1886:
1878:
1877:
1876:
1860:
1859:
1855:
1854:
1853:
1852:
1843:
1842:
1838:
1834:
1833:
1832:
1812:
1809:
1808:
1807:
1791:
1790:
1785:
1784:
1780:
1779:
1778:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1736:
1735:
1698:
1697:
1696:
1695:
1689:
1688:
1684:
1683:
1682:
1681:
1675:
1674:
1670:
1669:
1668:
1667:
1661:
1660:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1648:
1642:
1641:
1638:Green feminism
1629:
1628:
1627:
1626:
1620:
1619:
1603:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1594:
1593:
1589:
1588:
1587:
1586:
1580:
1579:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1562:
1561:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1553:
1547:
1546:
1542:
1541:
1540:
1539:
1533:
1532:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1525:
1519:
1518:
1515:neurochemicals
1510:
1509:
1508:
1507:
1501:
1500:
1491:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1482:
1481:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1468:
1467:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1454:
1453:
1443:
1442:
1441:
1440:
1434:
1433:
1418:
1415:
1414:
1413:
1366:
1365:
1354:
1351:
1336:
1335:
1331:
1310:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1285:
1284:
1268:
1267:
1254:
1253:
1233:
1230:
1219:100.36.232.242
1216:
1200:
1197:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1092:
1091:
1065:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1053:to be true. --
1028:
1027:
998:
997:
987:
950:
947:
946:
945:
907:
904:
903:
902:
880:
877:
875:
873:
872:
861:
860:
835:
832:
831:
830:
816:
815:
814:
801:
800:
772:contraceptives
733:
732:
690:
689:
657:
656:
636:
635:
491:
490:
489:
468:
465:
464:
463:
462:
461:
448:
447:
427:
425:
412:220.235.123.17
386:
384:
350:
349:
319:
318:
300:
297:
294:
293:
290:
289:
286:
285:
278:Low-importance
274:
268:
267:
265:
238:
226:
225:
223:Low‑importance
217:
205:
204:
201:
200:
193:Low-importance
189:
183:
182:
180:
163:the discussion
150:
149:
133:
121:
120:
118:Low‑importance
112:
100:
99:
93:
82:
68:
67:
60:the discussion
52:
40:
39:
32:the discussion
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2971:
2960:
2957:
2955:
2952:
2950:
2947:
2945:
2942:
2940:
2937:
2935:
2932:
2931:
2929:
2922:
2920:
2916:
2912:
2908:
2898:
2896:
2891:
2887:
2883:
2879:
2874:
2873:
2872:
2871:
2867:
2863:
2855:
2853:
2852:
2847:
2842:
2841:
2830:
2826:
2823:
2819:
2818:
2817:
2810:
2804:
2800:
2796:
2792:
2786:
2781:
2777:
2771:
2767:
2763:
2756:
2752:
2748:
2746:
2742:
2738:
2737:
2736:
2734:
2730:
2726:
2725:Antisexualism
2721:
2715:
2713:
2712:
2708:
2704:
2700:
2693:
2691:
2690:
2685:
2678:
2670:
2656:
2652:
2648:
2643:
2642:
2641:
2640:
2639:
2638:
2637:
2636:
2635:
2634:
2633:
2632:
2620:
2616:
2611:
2610:
2609:
2608:
2607:
2606:
2605:
2604:
2603:
2602:
2593:
2589:
2585:
2581:
2576:
2575:
2574:
2573:
2572:
2571:
2570:
2569:
2562:
2558:
2554:
2549:
2548:
2547:
2546:
2545:
2544:
2537:
2533:
2529:
2525:
2521:
2516:
2515:
2514:
2513:
2512:
2511:
2506:
2502:
2498:
2493:
2492:
2491:
2490:
2483:
2482:
2481:
2480:
2473:
2472:
2471:
2470:
2467:
2463:
2459:
2455:
2450:
2449:
2448:
2447:
2443:
2439:
2433:
2431:
2426:
2419:
2417:
2413:
2407:
2406:Antisexualism
2404:
2403:
2402:
2397:
2394:
2393:
2392:
2390:
2385:
2382:
2379:
2377:
2369:
2365:
2363:
2362:antisexualism
2359:
2358:antisexualism
2354:
2353:
2349:
2346:
2342:
2340:
2335:
2333:
2329:
2328:Wilhelm Reich
2325:
2324:
2320:
2317:
2313:
2309:
2307:
2302:
2301:
2297:
2293:
2290:This is from
2289:
2287:
2282:
2281:
2278:
2274:
2272:
2271:William James
2268:
2263:
2262:
2258:
2254:
2250:
2247:
2246:antisexualism
2242:
2241:
2240:
2234:
2232:
2225:
2222:
2219:
2216:
2213:
2210:
2209:
2208:
2202:
2198:
2197:
2196:
2190:
2185:
2183:
2182:
2178:
2174:
2171:Any books? --
2170:
2165:
2157:
2155:
2150:
2146:
2142:
2137:
2136:
2133:
2132:
2128:
2124:
2118:
2116:
2112:
2108:
2100:
2099:
2093:
2092:
2091:
2088:
2083:
2082:
2081:
2078:
2077:
2073:
2072:
2066:
2065:
2064:
2061:
2055:
2054:
2053:
2050:
2045:
2044:
2043:
2040:
2035:
2034:
2033:
2030:
2025:
2024:
2023:
2020:
2015:
2014:
2013:
2011:
2006:
2001:
2000:
1999:
1996:
1991:
1990:
1989:
1986:
1985:
1981:
1980:
1974:
1973:
1972:
1969:
1963:
1962:
1961:
1958:
1953:
1952:
1951:
1948:
1943:
1942:
1941:
1938:
1932:
1931:
1930:
1927:
1922:
1921:
1920:
1917:
1911:
1910:
1909:
1906:
1905:
1901:
1900:
1894:
1893:
1892:
1889:
1884:
1883:
1882:
1879:
1874:
1872:
1871:romantic love
1867:
1866:
1865:
1862:
1861:
1857:
1856:
1850:
1849:
1848:
1845:
1844:
1840:
1839:
1831:
1830:
1826:
1822:
1818:
1810:
1806:
1802:
1798:
1793:
1792:
1787:
1786:
1781:
1777:
1774:
1773:
1771:
1767:
1764:
1763:
1761:
1757:
1753:
1749:
1745:
1741:
1738:
1737:
1733:
1729:
1725:
1718:
1714:
1713:
1712:
1711:
1707:
1703:
1693:
1692:
1691:
1690:
1686:
1685:
1679:
1678:
1677:
1676:
1672:
1671:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1662:
1658:
1653:
1652:
1646:
1645:
1644:
1643:
1639:
1635:
1631:
1630:
1624:
1623:
1622:
1621:
1617:
1616:Malthusianism
1613:
1609:
1605:
1604:
1598:
1597:
1596:
1595:
1591:
1590:
1584:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1577:
1573:
1572:
1566:
1565:
1564:
1563:
1558:
1557:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1544:
1543:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1530:
1529:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1520:
1516:
1512:
1511:
1505:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1498:
1493:
1492:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1479:
1478:
1472:
1471:
1470:
1469:
1465:
1464:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1452:
1450:
1445:
1444:
1438:
1437:
1436:
1435:
1432:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1423:
1416:
1412:
1408:
1404:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1392:
1388:
1382:
1380:
1375:
1371:
1364:
1360:
1359:
1358:
1352:
1350:
1349:
1345:
1341:
1332:
1329:
1328:Mickey Mantle
1325:
1324:Justin Bieber
1321:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1308:
1302:
1298:
1294:
1289:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1283:
1279:
1275:
1270:
1269:
1264:
1260:
1256:
1255:
1251:
1250:
1249:
1248:
1244:
1240:
1231:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1215:
1214:
1210:
1206:
1205:24.189.87.160
1196:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1184:
1178:
1170:
1167:
1163:
1159:
1158:
1157:
1154:
1150:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1144:
1131:
1128:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1105:
1100:
1099:WP:notability
1096:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1090:
1087:
1083:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1072:
1063:
1059:
1056:
1052:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1043:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1026:
1023:
1019:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1009:
1007:
1003:
996:
993:
988:
986:
983:
979:
978:
977:
974:
970:
966:
962:
958:
948:
944:
940:
936:
931:
930:
929:
927:
923:
919:
915:
905:
901:
898:
894:
890:
889:
888:
886:
878:
876:
871:
868:
863:
862:
859:
856:
851:
850:
849:
848:
845:
841:
833:
829:
826:
822:
817:
813:
810:
805:
804:
803:
802:
799:
796:
792:
788:
783:
782:
781:
778:
775:
773:
769:
764:
762:
756:
752:
748:
746:
742:
736:
731:
728:
723:
719:
714:
713:
712:
709:
707:
703:
699:
695:
688:
685:
681:
677:
673:
672:
671:
668:
666:
662:
655:
652:
648:
647:
646:
643:
641:
634:
631:
627:
626:
625:
623:
619:
615:
611:
607:
603:
598:
596:
592:
588:
584:
583:breastfeeding
580:
576:
575:contraception
572:
568:
563:
561:
557:
553:
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
530:
526:
522:
519:
515:
511:
507:
503:
499:
496:
488:
485:
480:
479:
478:
477:
474:
466:
460:
457:
452:
451:
450:
449:
446:
443:
438:
437:
436:
435:
432:
426:
423:
421:
417:
413:
409:
403:
399:
395:
391:
385:
382:
379:
377:
373:
369:
368:antiandrogens
364:
361:
359:
355:
354:antiandrogens
348:
345:
341:
337:
336:
335:
332:
330:
325:
324:
317:
314:
310:
309:
308:
305:
298:
283:
279:
273:
270:
269:
266:
249:
245:
244:
239:
236:
232:
231:
227:
221:
218:
215:
211:
198:
194:
188:
185:
184:
181:
164:
160:
156:
155:
147:
141:
136:
134:
131:
127:
126:
122:
116:
113:
110:
106:
101:
97:
91:
83:
79:
74:
73:
65:
61:
57:
53:
50:
46:
45:
37:
33:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
2905:— Preceding
2902:
2894:
2882:Girth Summit
2878:Hydrotherapy
2859:
2837:
2834:
2809:source check
2788:
2782:
2769:
2765:
2761:
2759:
2722:
2719:
2697:
2681:
2677:this section
2674:
2434:
2429:
2427:
2423:
2414:
2411:
2405:
2400:
2395:
2386:
2383:
2380:
2373:
2367:
2361:
2357:
2355:
2337:
2331:
2326:
2311:
2305:
2303:
2285:
2283:
2276:
2266:
2264:
2256:
2245:
2243:
2238:
2229:
2206:
2200:
2194:
2168:
2163:
2161:
2153:
2119:
2104:
2089:
2079:
2062:
2051:
2041:
2031:
2021:
2009:
2007:
1997:
1987:
1970:
1959:
1949:
1939:
1928:
1918:
1907:
1890:
1880:
1868:
1863:
1858:The material
1846:
1814:
1775:
1765:
1759:
1755:
1751:
1747:
1720:(in Russian)
1699:
1612:antinatalism
1608:deep ecology
1560:constructed.
1446:
1430:
1424:
1420:
1383:
1378:
1373:
1369:
1367:
1361:
1356:
1337:
1312:
1309:re lovecraft
1262:
1258:
1235:
1202:
1179:
1175:
1162:Inclusionism
1153:91.148.159.4
1140:
1127:91.148.159.4
1104:91.148.159.4
1071:91.148.159.4
1067:
1050:
1044:
1029:
1010:
999:
952:
918:68.42.17.202
909:
882:
874:
837:
821:Slrubenstein
791:Slrubenstein
779:
776:
765:
757:
753:
749:
741:evolutionary
737:
734:
721:
710:
691:
669:
658:
644:
637:
599:
595:evolutionary
564:
552:masturbation
514:sexual drive
492:
473:66.24.236.62
470:
428:
424:
387:
383:
380:
365:
362:
351:
340:Antiandrogen
333:
326:
322:
320:
306:
302:
277:
241:
192:
152:
96:WikiProjects
63:
35:
2776:Sourcecheck
2497:Herostratus
2438:Herostratus
2389:Erotophobia
2224:Erotophobia
2158:Please note
2123:Herostratus
2121:to use it.
1988:What is it?
1821:Herostratus
1797:Herostratus
1702:Herostratus
1387:Herostratus
1340:Herostratus
1293:Herostratus
1274:Herostratus
1239:Herostratus
1186:92.2.127.76
912:—Preceding
565:“Women get
540:rationalise
406:—Preceding
344:Gameslinder
313:Gameslinder
86:Start-class
2928:Categories
2846:Report bug
2675:I removed
2456:article).
2376:John Money
2348:1890159018
2319:0252068130
2306:antisexual
2244:A wave of
2218:Asexualism
1908:Who is he?
1902:The writer
1885:Yes, both.
1789:copyright.
1752:mechanical
1740:WP:COPYVIO
1320:Bill James
1084:etc. etc.
1055:AlexJohnc3
1022:AlexJohnc3
992:AlexJohnc3
844:mikkanarxi
727:AlexJohnc3
651:AlexJohnc3
640:scientific
622:biological
542:their own
525:hereditary
518:consensual
484:AlexJohnc3
394:Doctor Who
376:transwomen
358:castration
248:discussion
2829:this tool
2822:this tool
1724:Copyright
1353:re Orwell
949:Polygamy?
702:Communism
567:ovulation
548:sacrifice
536:monastery
529:Christian
510:ovulation
502:sexuality
372:androgens
2907:unsigned
2835:Cheers.—
2703:AnonMoos
2615:AnonMoos
2553:AnonMoos
2458:AnonMoos
2212:Celibacy
2164:expanded
2141:AnonMoos
1841:The goal
1758:but not
1403:AnonMoos
1143:AnonMoos
1086:AnonMoos
1036:polygyny
1032:polygamy
1018:polygyny
1002:polygamy
982:AnonMoos
969:contribs
961:DJ Craig
957:unsigned
935:AnonMoos
914:unsigned
897:AnonMoos
867:AnonMoos
855:AnonMoos
809:AnonMoos
676:celibacy
665:celibacy
630:AnonMoos
579:pregnant
544:celibacy
506:humanity
442:AnonMoos
408:unsigned
299:Old talk
56:deletion
28:deletion
2762:checked
2729:my edit
2694:Tolstoy
2580:WP:FLAT
2454:asexual
2416:guess.
2107:WP:ELNO
2101:Summary
1783:issue.)
1748:machine
1634:lesbian
1449:asexual
1374:obvious
706:Fascism
618:species
610:evolved
591:concept
585:. (In
556:asexual
280:on the
195:on the
2770:failed
2683:Erpert
2647:Lexein
2584:Lexein
2528:Lexein
2173:Lexein
2115:WP:SPS
2010:anyone
1934:think.
1381:true.
1334:quote.
1166:Alexc3
1117:Alexc3
787:WP:NOR
698:Sweden
614:racist
532:clergy
498:nature
456:Mathmo
431:Mathmo
396:. The
92:scale.
2862:Daask
2524:WP:RS
2169:that.
2111:WP:RS
2074:Other
1291:yet.
1034:with
745:drugs
606:brain
571:scent
495:human
398:Irony
390:Dalek
2915:talk
2886:talk
2866:talk
2766:true
2707:talk
2651:talk
2619:talk
2588:talk
2582:. --
2557:talk
2532:talk
2526:. --
2522:and
2520:WP:V
2501:talk
2462:talk
2442:talk
2387:The
2345:ISBN
2316:ISBN
2177:talk
2145:talk
2127:talk
1825:talk
1817:here
1801:talk
1756:much
1726:and
1717:here
1706:talk
1614:and
1497:STDs
1407:talk
1391:talk
1370:1984
1344:talk
1297:talk
1278:talk
1243:talk
1223:talk
1209:talk
1190:talk
1160:See
1115:. --
1064:Tags
1020:. --
965:talk
939:talk
922:talk
825:Talk
795:Talk
761:rape
718:NPOV
694:Nazi
602:drug
534:and
416:talk
64:keep
62:was
36:keep
34:was
2803:RfC
2780:).
2768:or
2753:to
2743:to
2701:--
2430:you
2294:by
2094:No.
2016:No.
1975:No.
1760:all
1259:bad
1051:has
895:--
823:|
793:|
722:you
678:or
538:to
392:on
342:?
272:Low
187:Low
2930::
2917:)
2888:)
2868:)
2816:.
2811:}}
2807:{{
2778:}}
2774:{{
2709:)
2653:)
2645:--
2590:)
2559:)
2534:)
2503:)
2464:)
2444:)
2343:.
2273:,
2179:)
2162:I
2147:)
2129:)
2117:.
1827:)
1803:)
1708:)
1610:,
1409:)
1393:)
1379:is
1346:)
1299:)
1280:)
1263:no
1245:)
1225:)
1211:)
1192:)
1069:--
990:--
971:)
967:•
941:)
924:)
789:.
704:,
667:.
482:--
418:)
2913:(
2884:(
2864:(
2848:)
2844:(
2831:.
2824:.
2705:(
2649:(
2621:)
2617:(
2586:(
2555:(
2530:(
2499:(
2460:(
2440:(
2366:(
2364:"
2350:.
2321:.
2199:"
2175:(
2143:(
2125:(
1823:(
1799:(
1734:.
1704:(
1618:.
1405:(
1389:(
1342:(
1295:(
1276:(
1241:(
1221:(
1207:(
1188:(
975:.
963:(
937:(
920:(
414:(
284:.
250:.
199:.
98::
66:.
38:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
