Talk:Sigmund Freud's views on homosexuality

New article

I see ADM has started this article as a spin-off from conversion therapy. There's certainly a lot of content here that overlaps with the conversion therapy article, but I don't think that this article should necessarily be merged back to conversion therapy, since much of what Freud wrote about homosexuality would not be relevant to conversion therapy and may deserve a separate discussion. Born Gay (talk) 23:00, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

References

References make no sense. To what works are they referring to? --Accursius (talk) 17:50, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Five years later, and this is still an issue. Anyone care to help? --Tkbrett (talk) 01:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

12 years later, this is still an issue. BerlinEagle (talk) 01:43, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Rick Santorum

My edit deleting a reference to Rick Santorum's views on homosexuality was reversed. I don't see how Rick Santorum's views are relevant to an entry on Freud's views. Rick Santorum's views on homosexuality belong in the entry on Rick Santorum. But they are not relevant to Freud's views. Perhaps some other editors could comment.Iss246 (talk) 02:32, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia has two articles dealing with individuals' views of homosexuality. One is this article, Sigmund Freud's views on homosexuality. The other is Rick Santorum's views on homosexuality. Since they are similar articles, it makes perfect sense to provide links from one article to the other. It's reasonable to assume that people interested in one might be interested in the other, and so find the links useful. It's completely irrelevant that one doesn't need to understand Santorum's views in order to understand Freud's views - that misunderstands the purpose of see also links. (Incidentally, while the link to the article on Santorum's views has been removed from this article, no one has ventured to remove the link to this article from the article on Santorum's views). FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:43, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Citing Freud

Why does so little of this article actually cite Freud. It seems to rely on secondary sources, which are far from satisfactory and authoritative. Claims are made regarding Freud's alleged views but Freud himself is not cited regarding this.

Has the article been modified for modern political purposes? LeapUK (talk) 21:05, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

There are numerous good secondary sources that discuss Freud's views on homosexuality. Kenneth Lewes's The Psychoanalytic Theory of Male Homosexuality is one classic source. With that and other sources, there's relatively little need to cite Freud himself, though that can always be done if there's some special reason why it's necessary. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 21:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

I must stress that the secondary source that you presented does not suffice. In this poorly referenced article, there is no sourcing of the material that suffices. There is no full author to back up the claims made. JLanex (talk) 15:59, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

It's a well-known, highly regarded book, and it definitely counts as a reliable source, per WP:RS. Saying "I must stress" does not make your comment any more accurate. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 21:43, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree with FreeKnowledgeCreator. JLanex, your implication that the article should rely a lot on primary sources and your claim that secondary sources "are far from satisfactory and authoritative" go against Wikipedia's sourcing standards; WP:Primary sources/WP:Secondary sources are clear about that. Flyer22 (talk) 01:05, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Freud wrote notably little on the subject of homosexuality, perhaps for the reason of his well-known mid-19th C puritanism - who knows? I don't think it's unreasonable to rely on secondary material when the primary material is so scarce, especially where an issue as theoretically important as this one is concerned. Because the subject is so inexplicably and unnecessarily politicised, I'm always wary of political motives where sexuality-related articles are concerned, but this article seems comparatively well-balanced to me. Daedalus 96 (talk) 21:13, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Request for Semi-Protected Status

After reading some articles concerning homosexuality, I must stress that this article is of utmost importance considering the amount of research Freud has done on the subject. This topic is often censored by many, particularly by the "liberals" or the left, from the United States. Freud is a European social scientist. I put warning labels on the article to attract contributors to help make this article stand out with verifiable sources. Currently, it has no such thing and I question how this article is even still up without adequate sources for so long. I am not a expert in psychology. This is a controversial subject and politically heated subject. I believe Freud's research and his view is important to know considering there are very few, today, that actually have studied it extensively as him. Lots of people, including gays, tend to research Freud to some capacity for knowledge that is all too rare today. JLanex (talk) 16:15, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Not done: requests for increases to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 16:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Opening sentence

The opening sentence doesn't make a lot of sense to me ... it seems like the words "whereas" and "ascribe" are being used incorrectly. Could someone with better knowledge of the subject try and make it more clear? Ivar the Boneful (talk) 03:36, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Fixed. Thank you for the heads up. :0) Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 15:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC)