Talk:Heterosexual–homosexual continuum

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2019 and 1 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CMaskrey15, Jelam16.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Question: "Heterosexual-homosexual continuum"?
Unless I am missing it, neither of the references have this phrase in them. They merely state that "sexual orientation" exists along a "continuum", but never mention a hetero-homo continuum. If this term does not have enough Notability its own, maybe this should be merged into Sexual orientation. --User529 (talk) 11:20, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It is often reffered to as the "sexual continuum". Some references provide do not mention a name, just the actual concept, some references provided actually do refer to the name of the concept as well, so you will find some with the name and some just with just the concept of the term.  --Cooljuno411 (talk) 04:00, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep the article and read Klein. Surely, the world is not a simple place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.178.123 (talk) 17:02, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Final paragraph and quotation
The final paragraph read strangely. It contained a statement to the effect that "many" specialists see sexuality as more complex, etc., and then provided a quote that was unsourced. The paragraph included a citation to a Planned Parenthood website that doesn't appear to address this, and certainly doesn't contain the quote. B-Wuuu (talk) 21:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Feel free to rewrite. this stub was started a while ago as an outgrowth of a strange dispute on a different page, and it still has some rather torturous language in it because of that.  might even call for a rename or merge into a different article, because I'm not sure there's enough here for an article of its own (even in Kinsey and the few feminist and LGBT academics who discuss it, the issue is minor, so far as I can tell).  -- Ludwigs 2  21:35, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, it seems like this is just talking about the Kinsey scale.. maybe it should be merged into that article. B-Wuuu (talk) 21:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I've edited accordingly; let's see if this works better. B-Wuuu (talk) 22:03, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * looks good. I should ask your opinion on the article name, since you seem knowledgeable (myself, I only know of this material because I've read a lot of feminist literature).  is 'Heterosexual-homosexual continuum' standard language?  the people I've read really talk more about gender as a continuum or sexual orientation as a continuum - I'm not sure whether this terminology appears anywhere or whether it's a bit of OR on the part of the editor who started this page, or whether that's even important in this case.  do you have any insight into it?  -- Ludwigs 2  02:43, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not common, but it's a real term. Was used by McConaghy in the 80s in a famous study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior. It's also used by groups like NARTH who (controversially) claim that certain individuals have "unwanted" homosexual urges that can be "reversed." B-Wuuu (talk) 04:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page not moved: no concensus after 43 days. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:07, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Heterosexual–homosexual continuum → Sexual continuum — Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Seems to be the most common name for this idea. Fritz Klein's book uses "sexual orientation continuum" (several times) and "heterosexual/homosexual continuum." Kinsey uses "sexual continuum." A number of Google Scholar and Google Books matches for "sexual continuum," more than for either of Klein's terms. --Pnm (talk) 01:17, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose: The Term suggested, "Sexual continuum" is too general and not specific enough. For example, someone could use that term to discuss the range of activities that people within BDSM pursue.  Google Scholar does show sources where the term is used, but it is only in the hundreds.  "Sexual orientation continuum" is more specific, but has even less scholarly references.  It seems that many of the few scholarly references to "Sexual Continuum" use it as a biological term, such as http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1688582/ or http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1689320/, or http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2826.1996.04494.x/abstract  or the sexual needs of disabled people, such as "http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01991.x/abstract" or in discussing the commonality of intersex (using it in the context of gender).  Atom (talk) 01:40, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Only one of those http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1688582/ uses the exact phrase "sexual continuum" in the title/abstract. Do others use it in the body? (Any opposition to Sexual orientation continuum?) --Pnm (talk) 18:41, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes the term is used in the artcle, but in a different context than what this article entails. My preference is also for "Sexual orientation continuum", or leave it as it is.  Atom (talk) 21:56, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I would prefer sexual orientation continuum for clarity. Powers T 15:02, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I'm iffy on this. Atomaton said "sexual orientation continuum" has even less scholarly references. But, really, I'm not seeing the problem with this article being titled that or "Heterosexual–homosexual continuum." As these researchers simply used/use different wording for the same concept, it's not as though saying "heterosexual–homosexual continuum" is wrong. We can put the alternate names in the lead. Then again, there is WP:COMMONNAME. I would say we should go for a specific title. "Sexual continuum" is too broad, despite being the more common name. "Sexual orientation continuum" is more specific than "Sexual continuum," and if "Sexual orientation continuum" is more common than the current title, that might be the best choice here. Flyer22 (talk) 16:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Heterosexual–homosexual continuum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.uis.edu/studentaffairs/safezone/resources/documents/sexuality%20continuum.pdfhttp://www.uis.edu/studentaffairs/safezone/resources/documents/Sexuality%20Continuum.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:24, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose to merge Human sexuality spectrum into Heterosexual–homosexual continuum. The subjects of the two articles are, for all intents and purposes, identical, and there does not seem to be enough content in either one to warrant two separate articles. Human sexuality spectrum has several problems as an article, and Heterosexual–homosexual continuum seems to be a bit more thorough and is integrated into Categories of sexuality. 216.171.8.26 (talk) 08:30, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Merged with Sexual orientation
Merged with Sexual orientation. It was already proposed to merge this with another article which now is itself merged with sexual orientation. Per WP:MERGETEXT, content should be copied over if any good content exists. There is none. Exactly everything covered here is already covered better over there. Crossroads1 (talk) 19:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)