Difference between revisions of "Directory:The Wikipedia Point of View/The Encyclopedia of Homosexuality"
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
[http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/index.php?title=EOH:WHYOutOfPrint According to Dynes], Garland 'caved in to a pressure group of leftist and feminist activists who viewed the Encyclopedia as lacking in political correctness'. | [http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/index.php?title=EOH:WHYOutOfPrint According to Dynes], Garland 'caved in to a pressure group of leftist and feminist activists who viewed the Encyclopedia as lacking in political correctness'. | ||
| − | The reason given by the publisher was that a number of articles in the Encyclopedia were signed with the name of Evelyn Gettone. Gettone was one of a number of pseudonyms employed in the work. In fact, of the original four editors, two names were pseudonymous-Warren Johansson and Stephen Donaldson | + | The reason given by the publisher was that a number of articles in the Encyclopedia were signed with the name of Evelyn Gettone. Gettone was one of a number of pseudonyms employed in the work. In fact, of the original four editors, two names were pseudonymous-Warren Johansson and Stephen Donaldson. <ref>test</ref> |
Dynes claimed that 'In the entire fracas no one ever discovered serious errors in the Encyclopedia of Homosexuality. The attacks were a pretext for suppression of views regarded as politically undesirable. As such they were a shameful effort to impose censorship'. | Dynes claimed that 'In the entire fracas no one ever discovered serious errors in the Encyclopedia of Homosexuality. The attacks were a pretext for suppression of views regarded as politically undesirable. As such they were a shameful effort to impose censorship'. | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
and points out that "Pedophile organizations have linked their arguments to support of the rights of children". | and points out that "Pedophile organizations have linked their arguments to support of the rights of children". | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Notes == | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{Reflist}} | ||
Revision as of 10:22, 14 September 2008
There is no entry in Wikipedia for The Encyclopedia of Homosexuality, which is remarkable given that so much of material in Wikipedia is actually sourced from it.
In May of 1995 Garland Publishing, Inc. abruptly withdrew the Encyclopedia of Homosexuality from sale. Uniformly well reviewed, the set had garnered a number of prestigious awards. Since the 1990 publication, sales had been steady. Today objective observers acknowledge that the Encyclopedia of Homosexuality has not been surpassed in its field.
According to Dynes, Garland 'caved in to a pressure group of leftist and feminist activists who viewed the Encyclopedia as lacking in political correctness'.
The reason given by the publisher was that a number of articles in the Encyclopedia were signed with the name of Evelyn Gettone. Gettone was one of a number of pseudonyms employed in the work. In fact, of the original four editors, two names were pseudonymous-Warren Johansson and Stephen Donaldson. [1]
Dynes claimed that 'In the entire fracas no one ever discovered serious errors in the Encyclopedia of Homosexuality. The attacks were a pretext for suppression of views regarded as politically undesirable. As such they were a shameful effort to impose censorship'.
Dynes does not say why it was thought the work was 'politically incorrect', nor what exactly was being censored.
There are some leading themes or theories that run throughout this massive work, one of which is to blame Christianity for all of the problems encountered by modern homosexuals. This puts this work in opposition to John Boswell's theory that the Catholic church was slow to adopt a hostile attitude. Homosexuality is taken as a given, and all hostile theories are refuted.
http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/index.php?title=Portal:EOH
- Pederasty (Warren Johansson)
- Philosophy (William Percy)
- Christianity (Vern L. Bullough)
- Peter Damian (William Percy)
Pedophilia
The article on Pedophilia was written by Joseph Geraci and Donald H. Mader. They define pedophilia as "mutually consensual affective relationships between adults, on the one hand, and pre-pubertal children, those undergoing puberty, and adolescents, on the other, occurring outside the family, and which include a sexual component" (p. 964).
It contains the startling assertion that child pornography does not involve the abuse of children.
- Child pornography" is the sharpest point of attack on pedophilia and pedophiles. Included in this attack are the imputation that children are always abused in the production of such images, and the fear that such images will stimulate the abuse of children. It has been shown that this issue has been exploited for political purposes, and the statistics on the amount of such material exaggerated beyond proportion." (p 968).
and points out that "Pedophile organizations have linked their arguments to support of the rights of children".
Notes
- ^ test
