This redirect is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all
LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the
project page or contribute to the
discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the
discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2020 and 10 December 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Princesslavabean.
FYI, I revised the History section of this page and deleted the "needs expansion" flag. Previously, the section was a bit disjointed and included a huge detailed subsection about Krafft-Ebing, which seemed out of place. It seems to me that any history that specifically relates to conversion therapy, rather than sexual orientation change efforts more broadly, belongs on the Conversion Therapy page (which has an extensive history section), not here. I've deleted subheadings in favor of a streamlined history section and added a new opening paragraph that covers pre-19th-century history related to this topic.
RadicalCopyeditor (
talk)
19:51, 26 February 2022 (UTC)reply
Reconciliation with Conversion Therapy
As noted above in the proposed merge section, it seems like it would be helpful to make sure that this article focuses on sexual orientation change efforts broadly, and that any information solely about conversion therapy should be housed in that article, rather than here. In that vein, I've reduced the Legal Status section of this article to a summary after integrating any unique and currently relevant info into the Legal Status section of the Conversion Therapy article. Everything in the section related solely to conversion therapy, was outdated, and duplicated the better-maintained section in the Conversion Therapy article.
RadicalCopyeditor (
talk)
01:57, 25 March 2022 (UTC)reply
As of early 2022, at least fourteen countries have instituted a nationwide ban (including Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Ecuador, Fiji, Germany, India, Malta, Nauru, New Zealand, Samoa, Taiwan, and Uruguay), and several more are actively considering legislation that would ban conversion therapy (including France, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom).
There seems to be a range of sources on the section for
Legal status of conversion therapy. I have not changed the sentence, as it seems as if the claim is justified. I'm just wondering if the Stonewall source can be used when they are actively campaigning for a ban on conversion therapy in the UK. I don't think that we would normally allow a Conservative Party source for the consequences of Brexit or a Green Party source for the impact of climate change, and these seem analogous cases to me. Perhaps each country should be justified separately with a bespoke source?
Epa101 (
talk)
20:31, 6 April 2022 (UTC)reply
"Conversion therapy, also known as sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE), is the scientifically discredited practice of trying to change someone’s sexual orientation or gender identity"[1]
"So-called 'conversion therapy' refers to any form of intervention, [...] that attempts to change an individual’s sexual orientation or sexual behaviors (sexual orientation change efforts [SOCE]) or an individual’s gender identity (gender identify change efforts [GICE])."[2]
"I should note from the outset that in the mental health literature these terms ["conversion therapy" and "reparative therapy"] are being replaced by the less familiar but more accurate acronym sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) because these methods do not constitute a legitimate, accepted form of therapy."[3]
Several past discussions on this talk page have recognized the duplication of scope and content.
RadicalCopyeditor has done some excellent work to improve it, but I still think there is not sufficient distinction to differentiate this as a separate topic from
conversion therapy. The chief argument against doing so has simply been the large amount of outstanding content here which would need to be incorporated. I, a
deletionist at heart, see the obvious solution... The only notable differences are this article's inclusion of techniques like castration, lobotomy, and corrective rape (which cannot be called therapy even in the loosest sense), and its exclusion of anti-trans gender identity/expression change efforts (whereas modern sources tend to bundle the three together). I think the more barbaric forms of SOCE/GICE could still fit snugly into the target article's History section.
The status quo is that this article is neglected in favor of its much more recognized and actively edited sibling, which currently 7x as many total edits. I personally only discovered it after considerable discussion at
Talk:Conversion therapy. I would also remark (though not as a proper rationale for merger) that it's accrued a mild stink of
WP:POVFORK and
WP:FALSEBALANCE, and gives too much weight and credence to the views of discredited cranks like
Richard A. Cohen and his organization,
Positive Alternatives to Homosexuality.
SUPPORT BUT, I actually think SOCE is probably the better article title. Obviously, not all SOCE are CT. If there's too much content to be covered in a single article, perhaps some of the 'Legal status of CT' stuff could be split off.
PepperBeast(talk)18:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge or subsume in new
parent article: Given bullet #3 which you added above, are you sure you want to merge SOCE ⟶ Conversion therapy? Ultimately, it seems, it likely will be the other way around. As mentioned at the
"not therapy" discussion, it's probably premature to use the SOCE name until it gains majority usage, however moving content from SOCE (you mentioned castration, etc.) into "<anything> therapy" just seems to be setting us up for undoing it all later. If that merely meant merging now to "Conversion therapy", and then renaming the article X years from now to "SOCE", I'd have no objection; that would be simple. However, the topics suggested by the two titles are not identical, and a future rename to SOCE won't work, because "Conversion therapy" is only a subset of it, and it will most likely have to be split off again, or at worst, live in its own, long, section at the combined article. As a compromise, I wouldn't object to a merge of the two articles to a new, third article with a different title. This proposed article would be a
parent article in
WP:Summary style, with "Conversion therapy" and "SOCE" as two
child articles (likely with others like GICE and SIT to follow) along with appropriate pruning at the two child articles to remove the current overlap. As for the title, probably it would have to be a
WP:NDESC that encompasses both/all subtopics, such as the ones mentioned at the
#Terminology paragraph at
Talk:Conversion therapy § Not "therapy".
Mathglot (
talk)
18:32, 28 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Mathglot I don't understand what makes your draft a separate article. The topic as defined is essentially identical to what RS define conversion therapy as, and thus the scope of the current conversion therapy article. Some of the text may be useful to insert/replace if the page is eventually moved to that title. (
t ·
c) buidhe02:20, 5 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Support merge common name standards seem to include SOCE under the generalized "conversion therapy" banner. I don't see much that suggests that they are simply closely related topics, but rather the same topic under two names. "Conversion therapy" carries certain connotations and such, but popular literature on the topic (across multiple opinions) almost always refer to the subject as under that name. ~
Pbritti (
talk)
18:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Support merge. I personally prefer the current title, as per reasoning given by
Pepperbeast (plus, calling this abusive practise "therapy" seems wrong), but I believe that academic consensus and popular usage is against me on this one. —
QueenofBithynia (
talk)
15:37, 5 July 2022 (UTC)reply
Reflist-talk
References
^"FIRST AMENDMENT — PROFESSIONAL SPEECH — ELEVENTH CIRCUIT INVALIDATES MINOR CONVERSION THERAPY BANS. — Otto v. City of Boca Raton, 981 F.3d 854 (11th Cir. 2020)". Harvard Law Review. 134 (8): 2863–2870. 2021 – via EBSCOhost.