Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by James Cantor (talk | contribs) at 14:50, 19 December 2014 (→Self-cite: No prob.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Sexology and sexuality Redirect‑class

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality Redirect This redirect does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Self-cite

In writing the mainpage stub, I used as one of the RS's a publication of my own. (I am a professional sex researcher.) Although this is permissible in WP:COI, I felt it appropriate to acknowledge here.— James Cantor (talk) 20:01, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

James Cantor, why did you create this topic as separate from the Frotteurism article? This topic should be covered at the Frotteurism article, per WP:Content fork. Toucherism is, for the most part, a WP:Neologism (also see neologism) that does not deserve its own Misplaced Pages article; that it does not deserve its own Misplaced Pages article is clearly seen by assessing the term on regular Google or on Google Books. It usually means the same thing as frotteurism, or is included as a subset of frotteurism; less commonly, it is distinguished from frotteurism. If you created this article simply to cover some non-paraphilia aspect, that does not change the fact that differences regarding the terms can be validly and sufficiently covered at the Frotteurism article. If you object to me merging this article there, I will query WP:Med about the matter. Flyer22 (talk) 00:23, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

And looking at your creation of the article, you clearly did not create it to cover some non-paraphilia aspect. Flyer22 (talk) 00:31, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm surprised you think it's an issue; these are two different paraphilias. Toucherism is grabbing/fondling (with hands), and frotteurism is pushing one's (erect) penis into someone. They are indeed related to each other, but I don't think they are (at least, I didn't mean them as) a content fork. Multiple RS's include one without the other: See this scholar google search. (No, I didn't mean them as paraphilic/nonparaphilic variants; both are paraphilias.) — James Cantor (talk) 02:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

James, look at the sources I pointed to for toucherism, which point to frotteurism; they do not strictly define frotteurism as "pushing one's (erect) penis into someone" or as very similar to that; this is also why the Frotteurism article is currently the way that it is. I'm surprised that you are distinguishing these terms in the way that you are. There is no need at all for a Toucherism article. Flyer22 (talk) 02:37, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I still must be misunderstanding you. The frotteurism article is entirely about rubbing (although it is true that many RS's are a bit bashful spelling out exactly what's doing the rubbing). Toucherism isn't about rubbing; it's grabbing/touching. Nonetheless, I can't say it's the biggest distinction in sexology, and I wouldn't be bent out of shape if Toucherism were redirected to Frotteurism. (Although Frotteurism would have to be re-worded to be a bit broader in its description.)— James Cantor (talk) 02:58, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

This is not a matter of the sources being bashful about how they define rubbing, or at least not solely a matter of that. Look at the sources for frotteurism on regular Google, on Google Books, and on Google Scholar; they do not strictly define frotteurism as "pushing one's (erect) penis into someone" or as "rubbing"; for example, this Adult Psychopathology and Diagnosis 2014 source from John Wiley & Sons, page 1008, and updated to reflect the DSM-5, states, "Frotteurism pertains to recurrent and intense sexual arousal from touching or rubbing against a nonconsenting person, over a period of at least 6 months." The Frotteurism article also currently shows that the DSM-IV-TR defined frotteurism the same way. So that article is not "entirely about rubbing"; the lead even states, "It may involve touching any part of the body, including the genital area." It stated that before my recent tweaks to that article. So I don't see that the Frotteurism article needs to be broadened to make clear that frotteurism is not solely about rubbing. But on that note, sources define rubbing differently. In common usage, the term rubbing obviously does not mean "rubbing against someone sexually"; the term rubbing usually means that the hands are involved. And this Sexual Deviance, Second Edition: Theory, Assessment, and Treatment 2012 source from Guilford Press, page 132, makes clear that toucherism is a manifestation of frotteurism, and that it may also be defined as "an erotic preference for touching a female stranger's crotch or breasts"; the source is also clear "that certain experts in the field distinguish frotteurism from toucherism" and that "the definitions of frotteurism in the DSM have raised more questions than answers and have done little to clarify vexing definitional problems in the clinical and scientific literature." Pages 132-138 of the source are clear that frotteurism may be defined differently by some sources and that diagnosing it has limitations because there is a lack of a standardized definition of it (see page 136). Again, all of this, including the toucherism angle, can and should be addressed in the Frotteurism article. Flyer22 (talk) 03:55, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

What change are you proposing, exactly?— James Cantor (talk) 05:53, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I thought I was clear on that. I'm proposing that the Toucherism article be merged into the Frotteurism article, and that the fact that some experts define the two terms differently, while others do not, be addressed there. As the 2012 Sexual Deviance, Second Edition: Theory, Assessment, and Treatment source shows, there is a lot of information about frotteurism that should be addressed in the Frotteurism article. Flyer22 (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

No resistance from me; go right ahead.— James Cantor (talk) 14:50, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

• Redirect-Class Sexology and sexuality pages
• NA-importance Sexology and sexuality pages
• WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles