Talk:Coulrophobia/Archive 1

N/A
Thanks for creating a seperate article, The clown article has been in need of a good sorting for a long while.

--Soggy biscuits 20:43, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I feel the image used in this article is deceptive. The issue here is with coulrophobia, which is based primarily around a fear of clowns of the normal variety, not the aggrandizement of intentionally frightening clown images. This image shoudl be replaced with a suitable average clown photo, preferably one that isn't copyrighted. --Soggy biscuits 09:00, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Please allow me to disagree, scary clowns is the depiction of courlophobia. And among the "normal variety" of clown are often pretty scary. Besides, what is "normal"? All clowns are unique. Mukadderat 23:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Alternate Spellings?
I seem to remember there being mention of two popular alternate spellings, though I can only remember one of them completely: "caulrophobia." I know this is shaky ground since the original spelling isn't even that widely known, but I've seen a few people employ that spelling rather than the one in this article (one of these people is probably an English major). Why was it removed? Ours18 04:27, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

chucky from rugrats is coulrophobic
isn't he? (for coulrophobia in popular culture) 82.13.83.244 23:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Children
Should discuss greater prevalance of condition in very young children. --Daniel C. Boyer 14:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
I've tagged this with NPOV. I'm not sure how to fix it, but it does currently convey an unencyclopedic, opinionated, unsupported with references, stance on the reality of this "disorder". While I think it's probably spot-on, and I agree with the opinions presented, it's not encyclopedic. Gigs 16:20, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

This article is virulently pro-clown. Coulrophobia is real and not uncommon, many children fear Santa and clowns. The media portrayals should be limited to the pop culture section.Ghosts&amp;empties 20:16, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge from Can't sleep, clown will eat me
Can't sleep, clown will eat me is too small, so I suggest a merge. The article will continue to remain is at is if nothing is done about it. What do you think?  K ilo-Lima|(talk) 20:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Nah, let it stay as Simpsons trivia. Oppose. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 21:40, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yup let it stay, it's more useful that way. bbx 22:58, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * if you are going to merge it, merge it with the neologisms of the simpsons list... - Adolphus79 11:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Image traumatic to coulrophobes?
I find it kind of ironic that a page that deals with the fear of clowns has pictures of clowns on it. Just because if someone were researching their own coulrophobia, they'd be afraid of the page. Or something. --AndrewNeo 05:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

AGREED! I am coulrophobic and cannot view this page because of the clown images. PLEASE REMOVE IMMEDIATELY. I beg you. It is INSENSITIVE to have these images on this article. --TechnoGypsy


 * &lt;Sigh!&gt; You could have done it yourself, but I have done it for you. --Dennette 01:23, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Not a serious reason to vandalize the page. Images restored. Mukadderat 22:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't consider myself coulrophobic, but these photos give me cause to be very afraid. To contradict those who would deny coulrophobia, these images speak volumes.

I agree. Would you put a picture of wide opn spaces on a page on arogaphoia? Or bring a drink to an AA meeting. This is not only wrong, it is cruel.


 * The page at Arachnophobia has no images of spiders. Further, the links at the bottom include the warning: 'Insecta Inspecta Arachnophobia (Warning! If you have Arachnophobia, this page contains some graphic material that might disturb you, proceed with caution!)'. Please do not assume there's a dearth of spider images in Wiki images. Tha arachnophobia page demonstates some sensitivity. I am removing the image again, and will refer to the objections to to the image on this page. An image of a clown is not needed to illustrate the fear of clowns any more than an image of a spider is needed to illustate fear of spiders. Currently, all other arguments aside, as the image conveys NO additional information to the article, it should be left off until someone can justify *why* the article needs an image of a clown. If someone doesn't, in fact, know what a clown is, they can follow the link. 69.181.120.218 04:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

(BTW Please note I left the pennywise image as it is relevant to the text it is next to as an illustration, doesn't include an insulting and POV caption, and is further down the page making it not visible until scrolling)

This is not AA meeting. This is encyclopedia. Censorship not allowed for whatever reasons. Argument "if someone doesn't know what a clown is" is irrelevant: we are not repeating the description of clowns. Image of "normal" clown is good for comparison with the scary clown. Mukadderat 17:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

My ealier unsigned comment (...this photo gives me cause to be very afraid. To contradict those who would deny coulrophobia, this image speaks volumes) has been misconstrued. This page definitely needs a picture of a scary clown. A coulrophobe is likely to find a picture of a clown to be far less traumatic than the real thing. The photo serves to remind former child coulrophobes that their fears were grounded in reality. Only a clown apologist or a truly evil clown would supress the power of a picture. Ghosts&amp;empties 22:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not a coulrophobe and as far as I know I don't have any phobias. But from my perspective, having an image of a clown here is not particularly 'encyclopedic', and seems to me to be just mean spirited. There is an article here on Wikipedia about clowns where there are several images available. I've noticed that a few of the other phobia articles have similarly displayed images of the fear in question, but they are in the minority. -- Johorne 14:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Coulrophobia not in any dictionary
"Coulrophobia" is not in any dictionary that I could find, not even the OED. How do we know this is a legitimate word and not a neologism that would run afoul of Avoid neologisms? Are there any reliable sources we can cite for this word? TacoDeposit 16:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * A search of Google just returned 55,400 page hits ... and I'm pretty sure that you will find it in the big, multi-volume edition of the OED that's only found in public libraries. A lot of obscure words, like Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis (74,700 hits on Google) and Floccinaucinihilipilification (80,300 hits), are omitted from the "home" edition, although you might find "Arachibutyrophobia" (25,300 hits). Many smaller dictionaries do not include FUBAR or SNAFU, either. --Dennette 09:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I am talking about the full edition, not the "home" edition. It's not in there. I am aware there are plenty of Google hits, but are there any reliable sources of this word's legitimacy? TacoDeposit 14:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I have searched Google Scholar and (the beginning of the list at) Google books without finding any source that verifies that this word was ever used by any psychologist or similar to describe a condition. As I see it, the word is a neologism.Sjö (talk) 19:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Answer this, or pull it.
What additional, useful, and relevant information does the photo of a clown add to this article? 69.181.120.218 06:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I dunno but it sure is scary! 66.160.120.185 20:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Inclusion of the clown picture
I came here because of a Mediation Cabal case being filed concerning this article - I wanted to hopefully start a discussion about the inclusion of clowns in this article. The fair use image was rightfully removed as there are indeed free image alternatives, but free image or not this is an interesting bit of discussion. While Wikipedia is not censored, a key point is determining whether the image has a purpose in this article. So, could people please discuss here whether they think pictures of clowns should be included or not? Thanks. Cowman109 Talk 23:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, as a pre-discussion compromise, how would you feel if the current image of the clown is at least made smaller as simple courtesy to readers?  Cowman109 Talk 23:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think making it smaller would help. It may not be intended to be a scary clown per se, but it is indeed a scary clown, and including any image of the object of a phobia in an article about the phobia seems cruel. A link to the clown article is sufficient. I don't think this is censoring or over reacting. Over reacting would be replacing the word clown with cl---.Lkinkade 00:01, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

As mean as it might seem, I think an image of a scary clown would probably be more appropriate. (Ideally, the Pennywise image would have been perfect, but it's not free.) This is an article about the fear of clowns; I think a clown whose appearance is traumatic is topical, whereas a mundane clown isn't. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:05, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * To someone suffering from this disorder, any image of a clown is "scary", not just Pennywise ... they have been known to injure themselves and others (I have the scars to prove it!) in their attempt to flee from an unexpected image of a clown. I think that the image should be removed from this page, but I already deleted it once, only to have it restored because of "No Censorship".  --Dennette 05:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * It seems like a drastic proposal, but another possibility would be using a tag like the one to the right. Cowman109 Talk 05:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

"Popularity in the media"
The following section was removed, because it remnainted unreferenced. If someone can provide quotations, please do so. Mukadderat 23:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Of late, the preponderance of coulrophobia as a convenient punch line in mainstream media has led to an "outbreak" of epidemic proportions of this condition. It provides a convenient and humorous ailment for those looking to garner attention and at the same time not appear weakened by their condition. Coulrophobia also legitimizes scapegoating a group, people who dress up as clowns, who some dislike for their style of entertainment and acting personality.

While it is impossible to prove that every individual who claims to have coulrophobia is doing so to placate their need for attention and recognition, it is a fairly simple task to separate the malingerers from the truly phobic. Those who suffer from chronic phobias tend to seek to alleviate themselves of their ailment, as it is crippling, whereas "Faux Phobics" revel in their dysfunction.

As a corollary, there has been a dramatic rise in coulrophillia in the last decade, leading to large communities of clown fanciers around the world.

Coulrophobia in popular culture
The helpfulness of this section has clearly been questioned - it does appear to simply be a reiterating of some items in evil clown and doesn't necessarily add much to this article. This should be an informative article explaining coulrophobia (of which, I should mention, I cannot find any verifiable sources concerning). I think that the details there don't serve much of a purpose in this article, as this article is not about evil clowns, it is simply the fear of clowns in general. Cowman109 Talk 00:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I have removed references to evil clowns that don't seem to concern, but the mention of notable popular culture characters suffering from coulrophobia does seem to have more to do with the article. Cowman109 Talk 00:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Can we stick to characters strongly associated with coulrophobia, instead of listing every single character who has ever been scared of a clown in one episode of a long-running series? This has attracted a ton of nonsense of the form "Character foo was scared of clowns in episode X of series bar." - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, a good idea. Mukadderat 19:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * If we're listing fictional characters with established coulrophobia, shouldn't we have some mention of real-life celebrities who have it as well? Johnny Depp, Daniel Radcliffe and Sean Combs are all admitted coulrophobes. Sylocat 15:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Should not the horror film "The Thing" be mentioned? My cousin developed Coulrophobia from early childhood to early teenhood from that movie.

People in Character suits
It seems to me that fear of people in character suits (Mickey Mouse, Kool-Aid Man, Easter Bunny) would stem from the same reason people clinically fear clowns. Would this be grouped under the same term or would this be a phobia on it's own? --Infosocialist 12:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Linkimage
Template:Linkimage has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 23:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Female clowns not scary
I'm not a coulrophobe per say, but male clowns tend to creep me out, whereas female clowns have no affect on me at all. What is it that makes male clowns seem so menacing? --Candy-Panda 06:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It could be that you had a bad experience (that you haven't yet remembered) with a male clown, a large clown, a man, or a large person, and that translates into your male-specific coulrophobia. Good luck figuring it out!    — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 22:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Male clowns tend to be more grotesque, don't they? Female clowns are generally made to look cute and not all that weird. And exaggeratedly scary clowns are generally male. Plus, you see more male clowns, which may factor into it somewhere... just my wild hypothesizing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.134.240.33 (talk) 23:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I do feel that too. I think that's because in generic teratomorphic disfigurments for entertaining reasons it is a trend that the teratomorphic traits are intentionally less exaggerated in females, partially that's because of the social value of feminine atractiveness (female uglyness is some kind of social taboo) while feminine traits are retained in the disguise (sex transition disguises are also a taboo especially in asociation with children's entertaiment). Keep in mind that human femininess is a uniquely human trait, so retaining them in the disguise is adding to the anthropomorphic traits. The second reason applies if you are an adult or teen human male. Since feminine traits are universally attractive to our knee-jerk reproduction instincts they keep us distracted from the teratomorphic traits ("stop staring at my boobs and look me in the creepy painted eyes!")--Draco ignoramus sophomoricus (talk) 00:09, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

STUDY
Has anyone actually seen the study cited indirectly about kids and clowns? Aside from being totally misstated in Nursing Standard, and subsequently being misreported in the news, the study in Sheffield found nothing resembling the results that NS and the various "news" sources reported. Unfortunately, they did not publish the full study but results are here: http://www.cscy.group.shef.ac.uk/research/spacetocare.htm  Before I start correcting the issue, I thought I'd see if there was any other information available.

Peter Camper (talk) 11:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Bozophobia
A popular English language term that describes fear of clowns is the word "Bozophobia" (which obviously has an etymological origin in the famous clown character Bozo the Clown). The term "Bozophobia" has 1,810 Google web search hits (as of 03MAR2008).

The article should be editted to reflect that the word "Bozophobia" is also used in the English language to describe fear of clowns.

72.82.198.10 (talk) 19:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Then again, doesn't "Bozo" have more than one meaning in current parlance? Not just a clown in the circus sense but a jerk in the business or worldly sense?  I'm not opposed to adding it but maybe you should be sure it's apples:apples.  Do all your Googleicious hits refer to circus clowns?  Peter Camper (talk) 03:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Now you have your Bozo. He's featured in DOTT from LucasArts. He's an inflatable clown-puppet with a Lachsack and scares the hell out of Bernhard. -- KTHXBYE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.63.27.189 (talk) 12:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Picture
The picture has a rather ominous looking clown whereas coulrophobia is the fear of regular clowns, perhaps this picture should be altered or removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Feyre (talk • contribs) 14:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks goes to whomever put that picture up. I REALLY appreciate it. I say it should be removed. -IXTJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by IXTJ (talk • contribs) 02:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I personally believe having a picture of that in this article is a bit off. As someone with coulrophobia, I was trying to read statistics (which begs to question why I even came to wikipedia) and suddenly... BAM! That picture. 76.89.24.7 (talk) 03:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, it looks insistent that a clown picture of some sort be here. Might I suggest a comic that depicts coulrophobia? I don't know if they're useable, but of the many classic comics that can be found in newspapers, I'm sure there is one depicting someone afraid of a clown. A picture of such a scenario I think would contribute more than what is already a scary clown picture. A comic-depiction may also be more easily handled by coulrophobiacs (especially if black and white). In trying to find an example this image at DeviantArt was the best I could find that wasn't genuinely scary (just that top-right frame alone would work). --76.25.69.227 (talk) 08:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Illustrating articles is good. This image depicts something that affect someone with this phobia. I think it's a great depiction of it. I added the image back as I see there is no good reasoning why it was removed. Feel free to replace it with a better [freely licensed]] photo that depicts someone experiencing the phobia. Wikipedia is not censored, so I don't see any reason to censor this article because there are a small number of people with this fear. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. -- Dan Leveille TALK 07:33, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Evil clown + Coulrophobia
It seems the article share a common section called: "...in popular culture". I suggest a merge. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:15, 29 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Some seem to feel that fear of ordinary normal clowns is different from aversion to intentionally evil clowns... AnonMoos (talk) 16:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I totally support a merge. Neither article is huge, and it wouldn't be a big deal to combine them. As I see it, there is absolutely no need for two articles. Whether or not people fear normal clowns or intentionally scary clowns, it all comes down to basically the same thing, a fear of clowns, and it is likely that the idea of creating an intentionally scary clown comes from the phobia anyway. Sky83 (talk) 17:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose. The "evil clown" trope does not require the subject be a coulrophobe. We shouldn't merge these any more than we should merge the pages on snakes with fear of snakes, or spiders with fear of spiders. --GRuban (talk) 20:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm in complete support as well. The "evil clown" page does not belong on Wikipedia, it belongs on TV Tropes, where it, in fact, already exists. --thither (talk) 00:01, 4 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Support - evil clown is such a small article, when you take out the excessive list of pop-culture references. -- Dan Leveille TALK 07:39, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I understand the feeling that "Evil Clown" doesn't warrant its own article. However, if it is to be merged, it should be merged into "Clown" - the main article on clowns, not with "Coulrophobia". Point out that, in addition to their real-life appearances in circuses and rodeos, clowns often appear in fiction as villains, and give some discussion and examples. It would also be suitable to mention that the "evil clown" motif draws upon coulrophobia. But making "evil clown" a section of the coulrophobia article would be wrong, IMO. 216.136.86.11 (talk) 18:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose. "Evil clowns" are a contemporary archetype in popular fiction and don't belong in an article on the psychology of coulrophobia, which is the irrational fear of non-evil clowns.  I don't think the motif necessarily derives from or relies on coulrophobia either, it's simply the inversion of a familiar image that's supposed to be harmless and entertaining for children. I agree that if it's to be merged with anything, it should be merged with the main clown article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.232.27 (talk) 03:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose merge with Evil Clown, but Support merging Evil Clown with Clown. 'Nuff said. ☻☻☻Sithman  VIII !!☻☻☻ 15:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Etymology
I can't find a stem "koulr(o)-" in either my modern Greek or ancient Greek dictionary. See also: -- AnonMoos (talk) 16:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Coulrophobia in fiction
This entire section should be removed. It's not relevant to coulrophobia. It doesn't inform the reader about the subject. No one who comes here wondering about clown-fear is going to care what the Animaniacs or Seinfield has to say about the subject. Also, it's unsourced. Jomasecu talk contribs 23:24, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. I was expecting to see something about Bart Simpson and Kramer being scared of clowns on this page. I'm sure a little digging could find the relevant episodes. 01:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockingbeat (talk • contribs)

In popular culture section
I thought the Kramer edit was fine. Also, Bart's fear could go there. And, pushing it a bit too far would be the famous Jack Handy "I've always had a fear of clowns. Maybe it's because of that time we went to the circus, and that clown killed my dad." Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I also suggest moving "It can also be the effect of seeing a sinister portrayal of one in the media,[citation needed] such as the monster that took on the disguise of a clown in Stephen King's novel and film It." from the lead to the aforementioned section. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:34, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Regarding the recent deletion of the whole section: I'm not big on trivia or pop culture sections, but I lean toward inclusionism. I think once an article fills out then it is fine to remove less important content. From a visitor's point of view, it is a section they can read or skip. Section titles are big and bold, and nobody is going to accidentally get half way through the section and want that thirty seconds of their life back. Its presence does more good than harm. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:01, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It's a WP:TRIVIA section and at this time unsourced. It has already been deleted several times, and it was only readded today. I think the onus is on the editors that want to put it in the article to argue for why a trivia section should be added to the article.Sjö (talk) 16:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't quite understand the objection. Take away the pop culture section and it's basically a stub. There's very little article to "ruin" as far as I see. I agree with Anna; fill it out a bit and we can be more selectiveMarkeilz (talk) 17:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Pruning the Popular culture section
Maybe it's time to gently trim back some of the unsourced and more trivial ones. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:01, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. The article seems to getting of the track. Examples on popular culture are to help the reader in understanding the phobia and shouldn't be exhaustive. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:22, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keeping it to about half its current size seems right. Do you think that's okay? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Absolutely.Sjö (talk) 05:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If there should be a Popular culture section (which I think we shouldn't), at least there should only be examples of some notability. If coulrophobia is a significant plot device, such as in the Bart Simpson or Zombieland references, it belongs in the article. If someone mentions in passing that they are afraid of clowns, it doesn't.Sjö (talk) 17:37, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. But, how do we know if we didn't watch it? If you know, please, let's clean house, even if it means removing all but a handful. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:49, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I removed some based on the text in this article or in a linked article. It might take some searching, but often there's a description of the plot somewhere. Any ideas on where we should draw the line for notability?Sjö (talk) 20:17, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * How about we just zap the majority, leaving what we guess to be the most notable, or those with good references. It's not really our job to go fact-checking other editors' content. We can add a nowiki notice in the section asking editors to only add notables. Then, we can vet new additions to the section. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

How about this:

< ! - - Please, only add referenced, notable examples here, where coulrophobia is a significant plot device. Thank you. - - >

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Good! I added the text and pruned anything that wasn't referenced, except the Simpson example because Bart's words has become something of an Internet meme. I thought about keeping Stephen Kings It, but I think It's more of an evil clown than an example of coulrophobia. I've read the novel and seen the film a long time ago but I don't remember any mention of coulrophobia. If I'm wrong, It's obviously notable.Sjö (talk) 05:47, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Good trimming. The "It" entry might be worth keeping because it is about invoking coulrophobia in the reader, and it is very famous. Either way is fine. I see you figured out that I added the spaces for the nowiki example (< ! - -  - - >) so that it would not render here on the talk page. Thanks and happy editing. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:00, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * We could add some text in the section like "Fair of clowns can be found in many works of art, like films, books, video games, etc. Here are some notable examples". This will make clear that the list is not exhaustive. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:40, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

In popular culture section
I have restored the Popular culture section. I think its removal should have been discussed first. This is the closest thing to a guideline I could find. I still think the section should exist, but be kept small and well referenced. I tagged the entries needing citations. I will dig some up if I can. We can zap those that remain unsourced. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:49, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The current section is most of the article. That is absurd.  I think the guideline applicable is Common Sense.
 * That section is worthless, adds no encyclopedic value to the article and degrades the article. Toddst1 (talk) 15:19, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I removed the section, even I would like to have 1 or 2 examples in brief. We should rewrite in a way to summarise the appearance of the coulrophobia in popular culture. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:14, 23 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I rewrote the section to keep it from being an indiscriminate collection of unsourced trivia, and I organized the examples according to how coulrophobia is used. This may be bordering on original research but it's a vast improvement over the list format. Feel free to revert if you like, or add other examples of how coulrophobia is used. I considered writing about how it can be used to indicate a change in a persons state of mind (like when Seely Booth loses his coulrophobia) but as I don't have a good reference I didn't. Sjö (talk) 08:56, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Image Discussions again
I am not coulrophobic, although suffer from severe arachnophobia, so have a lot of sympathy for them.

As it has already been said, having the image could cause distressing and upsetting to claudrophobes.

I will remove it until its existence can be justified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quindie (talk • contribs)


 * You'll find that difficult to do, as it's already been moved to the clown article. There's a discussion at the bottom of this page. Malleus Fatuorum 00:00, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Move
this article should be moved to fear of clowns. It's absurd that the article is at current title but consist largely of explanation of why coulrophobia doesn't exist, even in the dictionary. 169.231.63.77 (talk) 11:01, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe that would be better title, since it appears that it isn't a recognized phobia at all.Sjö (talk) 11:26, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Support per Sjö and the wise IP. Also, as Wikipedia is used as a source, it could end up becoming the recognized term. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:41, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It is already a recognized term in published sources. See a search for the term at Google Books. Further, a phobia is an irrational fear of clowns...not just a regular fear. Not seeing it in a dictionary or in DSM-IV-TR is misleading. DSM-IV-TR can not enumerate all phobias...they are as numerous as they are irrational. There are three broad categories for phobias; this one falls under specific phobias (as opposed to agoraphobia or social phobias). Specific phobias are always valid. And as for the dictionary, they just haven't caught up with the times. New words are created and become valid all the time. The earliest published source that I have seen when searching Google books is this in 1990...which is citing an earlier publishing.  ⋙–Berean–Hunter—►  ((⊕)) 15:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I was sure I'd google-book-searched this ages ago and came up with nothing. I am very surprised. It appears to be not only a recognized phobia, but a recognized term. Thank you Berean Hunter. Next time I will not trust my memory, but instead will practice due diligence. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:56, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's not true to say that the word "colrouphobia" doesn't appear in any dictionaries; for instance, it appears in the Oxford Dictionary of English (and many others), which dates its origin to the 1980s. The Internet as we know it today wasn't generally available until the 1990s, so the "internet meme" argument is hardly credible. Malleus Fatuorum 14:26, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Additional comment Here is a list of college texts and professional publications
 * The first 3 of these are college text books mentioning coulrophobia:


 * Psychology 02/03. Karen G. Duffy, McGraw-Hill/Dushkin, 2002 ISBN 0072506342, 9780072506341


 * Understanding Abnormal Behavior By David Sue, Derald Wing Sue, Stanley Sue


 * Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and Behavior by Dennis Coon, John O. Mitterer


 * The encyclopedia of phobias, fears, and anxieties By Doctor Ronald Manual, Ada P. Kahn, Christine A. Adamec.


 * Campbell's psychiatric dictionary By Robert Jean Campbell.


 * Also the Austrailian Oxford Dictionary and the Pocket Dictionary list coulrophobia.


 * This is a cursory look... ⋙–Berean–Hunter—►  (<b style="color:#00C">(⊕)</b>) 14:38, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose It's recognized as a phobia. --Tepigisthe498th (talk to me!) 23:41, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose Any diagnostician will identify this disorder in one of two ways: DSM-IV Code 300.29 Specific phobia, or as coulrophobia. Attention Deficit Disorder didn't exist as a term until fairly recently either, but it is no less valid a diagnosis just because the psychology community only recently recognized it, nor should the recent etymology of the term invalidate it; would you suggest creating a "people who are easily distracted and bored" page and moving Attention Deficit Disorder there? No, coulrophobia is an accepted phrase pertaining explicitly to a fear of clowns and as such, preference must be given for proper brevity and specificity in taxonomy. Besieged (talk) 20:50, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Removal of File:Scary clown.jpg
The image File:Scary clown.jpg is offensive and causes anxiety to suffers of coulrophobia, and as such, should be removed from the article discussing the said phobia, as I myself am I sufferer of coulrophobia, I had to cover the image with my hand to read the article, so I would like for this offensive image to be removed from the article, thank you. Greg The Webmaster (talk) 13:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The image is by no stretch of the imagination offensive, and so I have restored it. Malleus Fatuorum 15:57, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * It may not be offensive to you, but what about to the suffers of this phobia? You have to think about the feelings of the coulrophobes viewing this article, such as myself, who have to cover the image with their hand just to read the article, so I will remove this image again. Greg The Webmaster (talk) 21:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * ... and I've put it back again. That you may find it offensive is immaterial. Malleus Fatuorum 21:12, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Do you suffer from coulrophobia? Well if you do, then you would understand, but apparently you don't, it is mean spirited to have a scary clown image in an article discussing about coulrophobia, and this has been discussed before in here, but their arguments have been ignored, you don't see an actual image of a real spider in the article Arachnophobia do you? Greg The Webmaster (talk) 21:18, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * There's a cartoon spider in that article, but I think the situations are rather different. It may not be at all obvious to many people that clowns could in any way be scary, so this is an example. Malleus Fatuorum 21:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTCENSORED, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, etc. No edit-warring please. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:29, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with Malleus that the image should stay. Greg, if you have coulrophobia then you know yourself that the phobia is irrational, yes? The fact that you can't stand the photo confirms that you have this phobia (many phobias are determined by photo tests). You should never accommodate the phobia. You need to overcome it. That's part of treatment.
 * Wikipedia is not censored. <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  (<b style="color:#00C">(⊕)</b>) 22:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that doesn't help that much. There are two major psychiatric approaches to phobias: "graded desensitisation", in which the patient is gradually exposed to increasingly provocative threats in the expectation that the lesser will eventually overcome the greater. The other is "flooding", in which the patient is exposed to the full threat of the phobia, in that hope that it will be a traumatic enough experience to displace it. My experience of both is that the latter is likely to do more harm than good, since it's about as effective clinically as telling a depressive to "pull yourself together"; it just doesn't work, and inspires resentment against the clinician, to less than any intended effect. Graded Desensitisation, on the other hand, is a form of behavioural therapy which tends to have much more success since it is non-threatening, and that is seen as important and helpful by patients. There are other therapies, such as cognitive therapy, but their efficacy remains moot. Rodhull  andemu  00:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Instead of deleting the image, I propose the addition of this template to the article, it would make the article friendly to coulrophobes. Greg The Webmaster (talk) 13:52, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not censored in addion we do not put content warnings in aricles --Guerillero &#124; My Talk   16:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

What about giving users the option of hiding the image? Like this:

<div class="infobox NavFrame" style="width: 305px; border-spacing: 2px; text-align: left; font-size: 95%; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-left: 1em; border-top-style: solid;"> <div style="line-height: 1.6em; font-weight: bold;background: #C0C090; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; position: relative; height: auto;">Image: Scary clown.jpg Coulrophobia is an abnormal, exaggerated, or irrational fear of clowns. The term is of recent use but is not commonly used in psychology, and according to one analyst, "has been coined more on the Internet than in printed form because it does not appear in any previously published, psychiatric, unabridged, or abridged dictionary". In particular, the term is not recognised as a specific disorder by the American Psychiatric Association in its latest categorisation of disorders, nor is it recognised by the World Health Organisation as a valid disorder. The term has also not yet been accepted by authoritative sources such as the Oxford English Dictionary as having any validity as a usable term in the English language. Greg The Webmaster (talk) 16:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, we do not censor content. Also the DSM-IV reconsies specific phobias. This term falls under the wider banner. --Guerillero &#124; My Talk   16:59, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * You're not making much sense. This is what you wrote right at the start of this topic: "I myself am I sufferer of coulrophobia". Are you now arguing that you suffer from a phobia that you do not believe to exist? Malleus Fatuorum 17:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * We need to remember that DSM-IV was published in 1994, a long time ago now, and the term coulrophobia has only been in circulation since the 1990s. It's also misleading to imply that psyschiatrists do not use the term; |here's one example from the Jung Journal: Culture & Psyche (2010). "With their masked faces, strange clothing, and unpredictable behavior, clowns have instilled fear in many [my emphasis]. In fact, the term coulrophobia is defined as a persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of clowns." Perhaps the sources that you've consulted ought to be updated Greg. Malleus Fatuorum 18:08, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Here's another example for you, from the March 2009 issue of Pediatric Anesthesia: "During enrollment [into the study], the potential clown involvement was explained to parents; of course, if the parents were concerned about potential fear of clowns (coulrophobia), the parents were free to decline participation." Malleus Fatuorum 18:14, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually all I did was copy and paste the beginning of this article as an example to demonstrate the hide-ability of the image. Greg The Webmaster (talk) 21:27, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * If you're going to quote, then why not make it obvious that you're quoting (and perhaps why), by enclosing in quotation marks? That's what they're for after all. And in reply to your question "no offense, do you read the article you are editing?" the answer is yes, but unlike certain others I do so with an open mind. You might have noticed that the lead has changed somewhat from what you quoted anyway. Malleus Fatuorum 22:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * @User:Malleus Fatuorum, sorry, I assumed that since you were an editor in this article, you would recognize that it came from the beginning of the article, but in the future, I will quote quotations, thank you for the notice. Is there no way to incorporate my idea of using Template:HiddenImage to make the image hide-able to coulrophobes? Try thinking yourself in the shoes of a coulrophobe, you view this article, and this scary image of a clown appears, how would you feel? @User:Berean_Hunter, I understand what you are saying, fearing clowns is irrational, but some coulrophobes can't help but be scared, and not all coulrophobes are ready to overcome and face their fears, and subjecting coulrophobes to this scary image is not going to help them. Greg The Webmaster (talk) 06:18, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Presumably it's not this particular image that you're objecting to, it's any image of clowns? But actually I've got no objection to putting the image in a hideable box as in the example above, so long as the default is that it's displayed. Malleus Fatuorum 14:24, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * To a coulrophobe, any image of a clown put in this article would be traumatic and uncomfortable, which is why coulrophobes would never visit the clown article, due to the images, and this is why I strongly believe that images of clowns should be removed from this article, or at least put in a hideable box, and yes, in the template, the image is displayed by default. Greg The Webmaster (talk) 21:58, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Very well...although I'd suggest changing the title to something other than the raw image file name. Some of the other phobia articles have pics and some do not. It may be a good idea to run this past WT:PSYCH to see if they have any interesting input. This could set a precedent.


 * Say, that phobia doesn't extend to smiley faces and the like does it?  <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  (<b style="color:#00C">(⊕)</b>) 22:41, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, I'm still listening. Would it address your concerns Greg if the image was hidden by default? Actually, the more I think about it the more I'm coming around to Greg's point of view. This image might be better used in a coulrophobia overview in the clown article than here. Malleus Fatuorum 22:56, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm only here part-time at present but this does not seem to be going anywhere. There's no requirement to have an image in any article, particularly those that are provocative to some readers; however, we seem to manage this quite successfully in Depictions of Muhammad and Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy in that those who do not want to view such images may opt not to do so. Of course, there are always fanatics who insist that, despite the teachings of their own scriptures, such images are sacrilegious and there is not much we can do about that. However, in this case, I believe that the image is pointless. Any phobia, by definition, is predicated upon its irrationality, yet the image we have is of an evil clown, which might not meet that test in that fear of evilness isn't that irrational, and thus perhaps a better image here might be of a "non-evil clown", although again, I don't see why we might need to have such an image. Similar discussions have occurred in the article cunt, suggesting that an image might be added; but that article isn't about the "thing", it's about the "word", and there are much more appropriate articles in which such a depiction might be appropriate. Same here. Thanks for reading, but I'm now quite exhausted, and will try to leave it up to common-sense: do we need an image here at all? I do not think so, for that is purely decorative and does not expand a reader's understanding of the topic. Malleus, for once please take my comments seriously even if you can't do that for myself personally. Rodhull  andemu
 * Everyone should expect that a page that discuss clowns, will include images of clowns. I see no reason to hide the image. arachnophobia has a spider for example and triskaidekaphobia has 13. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:03, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The last arguments of Rodhullandemu are stronger. We should discuss on them. I tend to agree that the image adds nothing to the article. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm going to be bold and remove the image because I'm no longer convinced that it adds anything to the article. As I already said above I think that it would sit easier in the clown article than here. The makeup, attitude, and lighting are clearly contrived to present a particular and non-typical image of a clown. Malleus Fatuorum 23:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with the removal but also posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology before I knew that it was removed. Greg has a point which may extend beyond this particular article into other phobias and psychological articles. <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  (<b style="color:#00C">(⊕)</b>) 23:30, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * By all means let's have that wider discussion. Malleus Fatuorum 23:33, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for understanding my POV on this issue, articles about phobias shouldn't have images of the fear itself, because people suffering from the phobia would be driven away from the article due to the image, and if that person wants to overcome and face that fear, like I myself will someday do, then that person would just visit the article about the fear, once again, thank you for understanding. Greg The Webmaster (talk) 13:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I saw this being discussed elsewhere and it drew my attention as a coulrophobic. In case this is brought up again at some later point, I'd like to add my name to those who are opposed to an image being included in this article. Coulrophobia, for me, is more specific. I'm not much affected by images, but for many, it's a source of great anxiety. It isn't necessary to include an image for readers to understand what the phobia is about. It's a fear of clowns. Pretty straight-forward. If they don't know what a clown is (lucky them), they can click on the clown link. The arguments about CENSOR and such don't logically apply here. It's not about censoring. It's about the images not being necessary, and thus there should be some consideration for how it may affect those who suffer from coulrophobia and have a desire to read&mdash;or possibly even work on&mdash;the article. That said, the hostile reaction given by some of those here in response to Greg's completely reasonable request are shameful. Lara  20:00, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The context needs to be borne in mind; Greg presented his position made during a period in which at least one other editor was rubbishing the article as essentially describing an internet meme rather than a valid phobia, we'd already had the "some" vs. "many" wars, and Greg began by claiming that the image was offensive. Which it is not by any stretch of the imagination. Greg subsequently argued for his position and persuaded at least two other editors who had initially supported the image's inclusion that it ought to be removed, which is has been. Problem solved, surely. The only shameful thing I can see here is the effort to deny that coulrophobia actually exists. Malleus Fatuorum 20:54, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You edit warred and argued harshly against someone with a valid concern because (it appears) you didn't like his terminology. He stated from the start that he's coulrophobic, yet you have decided to take a hardline position on the word "offensive". By definition, to be offensive is to be unpleasing; to be insulting. Personally, for my particular flavor of coulrophobia, I didn't actually find the image to be unpleasing in the same sense as Greg did, in that it produced anxiety in him. I found it offensive more in the insulting sense. Insulting that someone would be so inconsiderate (read: trollish) to include a "scary clown" image in the clown phobia article. And further offensive that a long-term editor would so aggressively defend such an (obviously inappropriate) addition. Now, maybe it's only so obvious to me because I understand the phobia having dealt with it for quite some years now. Regardless, I don't expect you to feel shame for how you responded to him. I don't expect you to acknowledge that you misunderstood his above post in which he copied the lead of the article as a means of presenting an alternative, thinking instead he was claiming the phobia doesn't exist. Especially considering you seem to still think that's what he did, even after it was clearly explained that he wasn't making such a claim. Or, perhaps I'm misunderstanding, and you're talking about the earlier edits to change the article into a meme article, in which case, that's irrelevant to this discussion. Either way, I know you quite well, Mal. And you know me quite well too. As well as two WP editors who have never met can expect to, at least. I doubt either of us will back down from our positions on this, but I hope you better understand my position now. Lara  21:21, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You're quite right, I very much doubt that either of us will be changing our minds on this. BTW, it wasn't Greg who claimed that the phobia doesn't exist, it was Rodhullandemu. Malleus Fatuorum 21:38, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, well my apologies for that misunderstanding then. I missed that as I skipped over everything he said. Lara  21:42, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I saw this posted at Jimbo's page. I vehemently oppose article censorship - but that said, this clown image isn't really relevant unless there's some source that says this image triggers the condition.  I have absolutely no idea for example whether a picture of a happy clown would be as objectionable to phobics, so including it might obscure more than illumine.  (Even if I believe your reaction, it would be original research, and to be rudely honest, I can't get over my gut feeling that this is some imaginary disease made up by some shrinks clowning around...)  For example,  cited in the article shows a combination of "happy" and "scary" clowns, saying that any distorted image was potentially disturbing, and it wasn't clowns in particular, while saying that scary clowns were important in popular culture.  I think that an image should be added if (1) it is specifically cited (e.g. used in a study) or (2) if a source defines the type of clown images that are involved clearly enough that you can say that an existing Commons stock photo is definitely covered in the category. Wnt (talk) 03:52, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * My first reaction on hearing of this on Jimbo's talk was that we should include the image, but I find the arguments in this thread fairly convincing: this article isn't about clowns, so it's not really useful to include an image of a clown. It's just decoration. And since it's specifically harmful, I don't think we should have a clown image in the article. A better image might be of a person in the throes of an attack of the syndrome, for instance (I'm not sure how you would depict that in an image and I'm not saying that would be a good image either, but it would be more on-topic.) Herostratus (talk) 05:23, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * FWIW Images has some thoughts on the matter, but could be read either way. Images says images should be "significantly and directly related to the article's topic". That's arguable here. "Images should look like what they are meant to illustrate", but the image isn't a picture of coulrophobia (which as an abstract entity you obviously you can't have a picture of). On the other hand, if a reader is thinking "Well, what is this clown entity that the article speaks of?" then it would be useful. But the article Clown is just a click away, and if you really don't know what a clown is you should probably go to that article. Images didn't change my mind, I still think it'd be better not to include the image. Herostratus (talk) 05:33, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree this picture should not be in the article. It appear to be included mostly for shock value. Look at Arachnophobia, which has a cartoon rather than a picture of a huge spider at the top. It seems common sense not to include a picture of what causes the phobia in an article about the phobia itself. This is not about censorship, but rather about good taste. Yoenit (talk) 08:23, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed, the image makes little sense and is somewhat disconnected from the article topic. There is no source provided explaining that this is an example of a particularly scary clown, for example, that has significant effect on a Coulrophobe. I agree with the above that an image more relevant to the article prose would be appropriate. --Errant (chat!) 10:48, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * For the record, coulrophobia isn't a fear of scary clowns. It's a fear of clowns, so a happy clown would serve as a potential trigger as well. Lara  12:19, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Though I'm sure even happy clowns are sufficient triggers, an evil-scary-clown is even worse. If that's true (and it may not be) then this image is particularly cruel.  It is also somewhat inaccurate, since it portrays a clown in such away that even non-coulrophobes might find it disturbing (just cause it's creepy and dark looking).  Much more honest representations would be of a normal clown not a "terrifying clown" which is for these purposes redundant, excessive, and possibly misleading. (also flew in from Jimbo's page) Ocaasi (talk) 14:18, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't even put the template on the page because on some slow computers, while it's loading, templates like that are open.--Tepigisthe498th (talk to me!) 23:43, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Just adding this in, but I never found the image a problem. I have some wicked arachnophobia, and I wouldn't really care if the article for that phobia in general was riddled with pictures of big-ass spiders. I may get an itchy sensation by seeing these creatures on television or get paranoid by anything that resembles a spider by the next few moments even if what I just saw wasn't a real spider in front of me, but it's not like I'll really get disturbed or care if the thing is not actually in front of me. So with that said I thought that was the same way with all phobias. GunMetal Angel  23:21, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Merge discussion
Some of the folks commenting at Articles for deletion/Evil clown (2nd nomination) are wanting to merge that article with this one. Editors input there is welcome. <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b> 16:06, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I am not an editor, but as a sufferer of this specific phobia, I'm going to give my input on this issue, coulrophobia is not a fear of evil clowns, it is a fear of clowns in general, to merge this article with Evil clown would give readers the impression that coulrophobia is a fear of evil clowns, which clearly coulrophobia is not, coulrophobia is not a fear of evil clowns, it is a fear of clowns in general.Greg The Webmaster (talk) 14:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You should make your comments at the link above...if you want them considered, that is. Cheers, <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  15:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks :-) Greg The Webmaster (talk) 16:19, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Popular Culture
another popular culture case not mentioned is One Tree Hill character Hayley James Scott I am sure you could find a reference to it at the very least she dislikes clowns — Preceding unsigned comment added by QueenAlexandria (talk • contribs) 18:18, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

How about 'IT' by Stephen King - clown which turns into killer spider thing - again its about someone over coming their fear. DJ Smiley (talk) 12:22, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Metamfiezomaiophobia?
Is anyone adding this? And what of harlequins? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.147.236.195 (talk) 19:23, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Harlequins are not clowns, they are much closer to Jesters, and in fact are a mostly archaic and obsolete persona/profession that survives mainly in literature/media but have little to no representation outside it (excepting costume parties, conventions, and the like, where they're still an oddity). Besieged (talk) 03:04, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

This is a phobia of pantomimes and mimes. It can be very dangerous and anyone suffering from this such avoid theatres in the UK around christmas time as an attack could be deadly.

Evil Clown
I really don't see how this is relevant, especially as regards an irrational fear of all clowns, and this addition seems little different than the whole argument about the "Scary Clown" photograph. A reference to clowns in general, which article itself may then refer to both coulrophobia and "Evil Clown" utter sensibly; an irrational fear of all clowns would naturally include "evil clowns", making this superfluous inclusion superfluous at best. I feel it should be removed. Besieged (talk) 03:35, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

You got to be kidding me
guys you really need to check your resources "κωλοβαθριστής" comes from κώλος(ass), βάθρο (throne, big chair, chair as in chairman,and toilet in slang) -ιστης (it makes it a male noun) exp. ποδόσφαιρο (soccer) ποδοσφαιριστής (soccer player) so yeah "κωλοβαθριστής" it's a heavy vulgar "funny" word for someone that sits on the toilet or he is "thank-god-he-is-at-least-a-potty-trained-hillbilly" or toilets are too good for him ,so what I am trying to say is that the fact you put this word anywhere in this document about clowns or coulrophobia means you have been pranked so,yeah, you might want to take that part out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.131.104.122 (talk) 22:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, right. Those who actually know what they're talking about say that the word κωλόβαθρον comes from κῶλον meaning "stilt"and βαίνω meaning "I go". But of course you know better. Malleus Fatuorum 23:16, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Famous cases
Johnny Depp and Puff Daddy both have a fear of clowns. Does this belong in the article perhaps? It's easily citable, but not sure if it's all that relevent.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 12:51, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd say no; that's pure trivia. (There's already too much trivia in this article that should be removed.)    Joel Why? (talk) 12:57, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

University of Sheffield clown study
Is there any primary citation?

Every report on the study is secondary and is anecdotal rather than discussing the actual findings of the study. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curtgunz (talk • contribs) 03:09, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Research section
There's currently a discussion about the Research section at WT:MED (permalink). 109.146.70.40 (talk) 12:45, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Klóounophobia
Possibly deserving a mention, the online etymology dictionary quote "looks suspiciously like the sort of thing idle pseudo-intellectuals invent on the Internet and which every smarty-pants takes up thereafter" is read by Stephen Fry in Series L Episode 3 (Literature) of the quiz show, QI. He goes on to say, "The Greek for clown is klóoun, which comes from English; so, if anything, it should just be klóounophobia."


 * Interesting, but I don't think this meets the criteria for inclusion on the main page. The word "coulrophobia" has been in common usage since the 1980's, long enough to be included in several dictionaries and marked as rare, not as slang. The origin of coulrophobia apparently has to do with stilts, not painted faces. A vote in the American Heritage Dictionary would be authoritative, but Stephen Fry is not a linguistics expert. Drbits (talk) 22:31, 23 February 2016 (UTC)