331
edits
Talk:Brongersma: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
ce
(why I removed the speedy deletion tag. This page had been edited by others.) |
(ce) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The index page refers to Wikipedia for information about the subject of the wiki. It has this about Brongersma: He was primarily known as a defender of the rights of paedophiles and an advocate of more lax legislation on public morality. | The index page refers to Wikipedia for information about the subject of the wiki. It has this about Brongersma: "He was primarily known as a defender of the rights of paedophiles and an advocate of more lax legislation on public morality." | ||
The article is largely unsourced, and the statement "primarily known" is a judgment. It's a sign of editorial bias. To the person writing that lede, Brongersma was of interest, very likely, because of that, not because of his other accomplishments. However, was he a defender of "the rights of pedophiles | The article is largely unsourced, and the statement "primarily known" is a judgment, an opinion. It's a sign of editorial bias. To the person writing that lede, Brongersma was of interest, very likely, because of that idea, not because of his other accomplishments. However, was he a defender of "the rights of pedophiles"? Was he a pedophile? Not by the definition of pedophile. Brongersma was originally convicted of having homosexual relations with a 17-year-old "boy," at the time, in the Netherlands, the age of consent for homosexual relations was 21, higher than for heterosexual relations. The age of consent for both was lowered to 16 by subsequent legislation. Pedophilia generally means a sexual preference for prepubescent children. | ||
The word "pedophile" is inflammatory, conjuring up images of a sexual predator, and young children. It's a complex issue, and difficult to address. | The word "pedophile" is inflammatory, conjuring up images of a sexual predator, and young children. It's a complex issue, and difficult to address. | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
There is another issue that requires general consensus: should wikis that are not generally open for editing be listed by WikiIndex? If an individual uses wiki software, does this make the web site a "wiki"? I see no registration link for Brongersma. All edits that I saw, in a quick review, were by "Admin." However, any web site on the related topics is likely to be under heavy attack. We saw that WikiIndex was under attack because of Leucosticte's participation here, and the attack on this page was almost certainly due to the tracking of Leucosticte, seen on RationalWiki, by some, and in some other places, as an advocate for "raping kids." See [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Brongersma&diff=175700&oldid=175588]. | There is another issue that requires general consensus: should wikis that are not generally open for editing be listed by WikiIndex? If an individual uses wiki software, does this make the web site a "wiki"? I see no registration link for Brongersma. All edits that I saw, in a quick review, were by "Admin." However, any web site on the related topics is likely to be under heavy attack. We saw that WikiIndex was under attack because of Leucosticte's participation here, and the attack on this page was almost certainly due to the tracking of Leucosticte, seen on RationalWiki, by some, and in some other places, as an advocate for "raping kids." See [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Brongersma&diff=175700&oldid=175588]. | ||
On the one hand, Leucosticte has been trolling for this response. On the other, WikiIndex has a mission. I suggest we follow the mission. I linked to the Wikipedia article because it is | On the one hand, Leucosticte has been trolling for this response. On the other, WikiIndex has a mission. I suggest we follow the mission. I linked to the Wikipedia article because it is ''relatively neutral.'' I avoided adding clarification because I do not want to create a debate here over the definition of pedophilia. RationalWiki was nearly torn apart by that debate, stimulated by Leucosticte, between many who wanted to stand for free speech, and others who could not tolerate the presence of a "child rapist," even though Leucosticte has never been charged with any child-sexual offense, is clearly not a pedophile (from extensive writing about his own sexuality), but described fantasies, fantasies that, from objective research in the field, are not uncommon. (Which does not establish norms. It might be common to fantasize murdering your boss, it would not make it right!) --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 16:18, 7 January 2015 (UTC) | ||