Talk:LGBT grooming conspiracy theory

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-03
— Assignment last updated by Momlife5 (talk) 15:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

"LGBTP" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LGBTP&redirect=no LGBTP] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. lizthegrey (talk) 22:50, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Just going to leave this here.
https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/homosexuals-more-likely-to-molest-kids-study-reports/ JustAPoliticsNerd (talk) 05:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Ah yes, the famously reliable baptist press and Judith Reisman. Zenomonoz (talk) 05:55, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think we can do anything with this... Neither the Baptist Press or RSVP America which published the underlying report are reliable sources in that context. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 06:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * My point is not that I agree with the Southern Baptists, and I don't, really - my point is that this is not a settled topic, the essence of this article is heavily politically biased, and it should be either deleted or merged into a larger article about LGBT. JustAPoliticsNerd (talk) 06:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * That's not how this works. The Wikipedia article is about LGBT allegedly grooming people into becoming LGBT. Which there is no persuasive evidence for. That Baptist Press article is just a misinterpretation of male-male molestations (many of which are carried out by males who do not have attractions to males nor children). Zenomonoz (talk) 06:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * So your defence is is asserting that males sexually assaulting males are not necessarily. . . attracted to males. Do you see how ridiculous this is?  Do you see the mental gymnastics you are making to defend such a worldview as unbiased? JustAPoliticsNerd (talk) 06:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Pedophile ≠ anything else. False equivalency much?  -  Sumanuil  .  (talk to me) 07:17, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Or perhaps I happen to be quite familiar with the scientific literature. A large fraction of people who molest children do not have any attraction to children, or arousal patterns for children (this can be tested in a lab with penile plethysmography). Some men molest children because they have issues with psychopathology, drug use, alcoholism, lack of access to an adult partner etc. Molestation of boys is more common in cultures where males are segregated away from females, for example. And anyway, homosexual pedophiles show strong arousal to prepubescent boys not adult men, while homosexual teleiophiles show arousal to adult men and not prepubescent boys. Nobody calls a heterosexual pedophile a 'straight man', it's also illogical to do the same for homosexual peodphiles and gay men. Zenomonoz (talk) 07:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * My point exactly. Men molesting boys doesn't make this conspiracy theory true.  -  Sumanuil  .  (talk to me) 07:29, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm just going to leave this here.
 * Cheers. DN (talk) 07:50, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If thats your point then you need to bring reliable sources to the table. See WP:NPOV "All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 06:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If thats your point then you need to bring reliable sources to the table. See WP:NPOV "All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 06:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC)