Talk:Irving Bieber

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 September 2018 and 21 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Chammo02.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Nonsense
The article reads 'It has also been suggested that the study was informed by stereotypes promulgated by the media,[2]. For example, in 1964 Life Magazine[3] featured a coverage on homosexuals directly inspired by this study, with regards to smothering mothers[4].' Since the Bieber study was published before 1964, isn't it a bit ridiculous to cite that Life Magazine article to support the claim that it was influenced by media stereotypes? This is perhaps evidence that media stereotypes were influenced by the study, but not the other way around. Skoojal (talk) 07:25, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It makes sense. Anyway that is a referenced assertion from a critic.Zigzig20s (talk) 14:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * There is nothing obviously sensible about citing a magazine article written after a study was published to show that it was influenced by media stereotypes. Skoojal (talk) 20:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I fixed it. The rationale was broken.Zigzig20s (talk) 21:25, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Sentence that needs to be re-worded
The sentence is this, 'Homosexuality: A Psychoanalytic Study of Male Homosexuals has been disavowed by some for defining homosexuality as an illness[2], and for examining homosexuals already in analytic treatment as opposed to regular heterosexuals.' The last half of that sentence, everything after the comma, is problematic. It's just not clear from that part of the sentence what the problem with the study was held to be, or what exactly was wrong with what it did. Skoojal (talk) 09:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * He compared homosexuals in treatment for mental disorders with mentally sane heterosexuals. It should be one way or another for both. I suggest you read the critic who pointed it out, though.Zigzig20s (talk) 11:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying that this part is not accurate. I am saying that it may not be clear to the reader, and that it needs to be explained better. Skoojal (talk) 23:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Missing Information: The "Motherfucker" Episode
This article does not include a noteworthy piece of information: the fact that, during the APA's debate over whether homosexuality should be labelled a mental illness, Irving Bieber was personally insulted by gay activists and referred to as a "motherfucker." I think this fact should be added to the article - not because I want to add inflammatory stuff for the sake of it, but because it is easier to grasp how passionate that debate was if this is mentioned. Skoojal (talk) 01:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I can't remember if it was Bieber exactly, off the top of my head I'd say it was Edmund Bergler, but I could be wrong. The episode is broached in Kenneth Lewes's book I think? The activist is mentioned by name and I remember they have a page on Wikipedia. If you could quote the page number that'd be good. I thought I would've taken it down but I can't find it in my notes now.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure it was Bieber, not Bergler. Homosexuality and American Psychiatry is the likely source for this. Skoojal (talk) 22:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've checked Bayer's book, and yes, it was definitely Bieber who was called a motherfucker, not Bergler. Bayer refers to Gary Alinder's essay Gay Liberation Meets the Shrinks, in Out of the Closets: Voices of Gay Liberation. Skoojal (talk) 23:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * , page 103.Zigzig20s (talk) 07:32, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Quite. So, do you agree that this should be added? Skoojal (talk) 10:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It sounds somewhat trivial, don't you think?Zigzig20s (talk) 11:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I don't think it's trivial at all. I wouldn't even have mentioned it if I thought that. It's an important fact that should be added, although I will have to consider how best to do that. There has to be proper context, so that adding this doesn't look like adding a rude remark for the sake of it. Skoojal (talk) 09:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Mentioned Motherfucker Incident
I have added a mention of the motherfucker incident to the article. The only source for this so far is Charles Socarides's book Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far, but I will add several others, including Ronald Bayer's book. Skoojal (talk) 22:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

What Year Was He Born?
The first paragraph indicates he was born in 1909. A later paragraph says he was born in 1930 in New York City. I searched online and found a source that says he was born in 1908. I think the death year is correct, but can somebody confirm when he was born? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jebix (talk • contribs) 15:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Using Reference 2 from the article (New York Times), I corrected that he was not born in 1930, but graduated from New York University Medical College in 1930 instead. I still am not sure what year he was born. Even the New York Times article hints at another possible birth year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jebix (talk • contribs) 15:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Book
I haven't read the book, so I can't add the information necessary. But I noticed that this paragraph contains nothing about the book's content or theses, only the critics' point of view. If those who wrote this article might add the information, it would give the article a less biased feeling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.231.200.236 (talk) 14:29, 23 February 2013 (UTC)