Talk:Aesthetic Realism/Archive 5

message: Implementing the following suggestion by Willmcw, I revert the section on homosexuality--which is the "text argued over"--to "the version that we agreed upon prior to the page being unprotected":
::"I suggest we revert back to the version that we agreed upon prior to the page being unprotected. This continual arguing over the same text doens't move this article forward. -Willmcw 20:51, August 2, 2005 (UTC)" 
In fact Outerlimits has been posting, little by little, much that is untrue. Curiously only JT or I have challenged the unsupported assertions of this blatant advocate against Aesthetic Realism--and his imperviousness to facts. Now, another observer has noticed Outerlimits may be incorrect in something he writes. This new observer comments that there is evidence against what Outerlimits has presented (untruthfully) as a 1970s "media blitz" on the part of the Aesthetic Realism Foundation on the subject of homosexuality. So this person has been unjustly  poo-pooed on the Talk page. Meanwhile, he obviously has a point and cites a contemporary text as evidence (1977). 
Since this editing war is impeding the completion of a FAIR article, we should cool it down and call upon more objective individuals for help.
Meanwhile, nobody who initially put up the POV notice remains among the editors, so I think we can remove it. While the article is not entirely objective I think it's good enough, as long as the revert on homosexuality is retained, to be called pretty much NPOV.
I shall be emailing this Talk page post to administrators in Wikipedia to alert them to the unusual situation we are in the midst of. --Aperey 15:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That "suggestion" is about a month old. That boat sailed a long time ago, when you started playing with it. Much as you would like it, a version of the article that contrives to omit AR's central teaching on homosexuality, and that omits Eli Siegel's own summary of that teaching—that homosexuality is based in contempt for the world, which turns into contempt of women—is unacceptable. - Outerlimits 23:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Implementing revert suggested by Willmcw. Removing POV notice. 

message: Important in the history of art criticism in America is the founding of the Terrain Gallery and the subsequent use of the Siegel Theory of Opposites in diverse media including photography--which continues today. So I added a few references. --Aperey 16:47, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding a few more references re: the Siegel Theory of Opposites & Terrain Gallery 

message: APerey wrote:  "I have an idea that Mr. Blujay or someone else will want to delete this revision and perhaps will find a 'good' reason."
I won't remove it but it's silly to have it there, because it's obviously redundant. Any reader already PRESUPPOSES that AR supporters disagree that it's a cult.  DUH.
I knew that when I added a single, simple sentence, APerey would be right there to try to counter it.  He's got the majority of this huge, huge article, but I add one sentence and he's got to claim part of that, too.  Whatever.  You insist on stating the obvious, be my guest.
APerey, I also notice that you continue to ignore my debate invitation even though you said that I'm afraid to debate.  Which one of us is afraid again?  I'm ready for a live public debate when you are.  Bring it on. Michaelbluejay 17:27, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutering criticism 

message: I have added a few more authoritative references about Aesthetic Realism and photography. The Siegel Theory of Opposites first gained prominence in American photography in the 1960s. The editor of Infinity, Ralph Hattersley, wrote about it lovingly. The photographer and teacher Lou Bernstein (whose work appeared in The Family of Man) wrote brilliant columns based on it for Camera 35. The Konica Handbook by Nat Herz was based on Aesthetic Realism principles. And there were others with the intelligence to see the value of this approach to photography, the skill to use it to enhance their work, and the ethics to be happy that they did. 
You suggested, Willmcw, that a few sentences be added in the Philosophy section to represent, briefly, something that had been left out: the Aesthetic Realism understanding of social and economic injustice. I am working on them now. They should be posted very soon.--Aperey 22:40, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few additional references. 

message: I have removed these lines because they are ridiculously specific, and transparently geared to prejudice the reader toward seeing Aesthetic Realism as "one of those things" that claim too much and can't be serious. That, of course, is exactly what the people who wrote it intended. I say remove the junk, let the truth about Aesthetic Realism stand. I know some people are afraid of it and will start jeering immediately.
But think of this article as an ethical academy in 100 years will see it. Do we really want to be seen as falsifying, in public, a great philosophy?  
I cut the following:
::--including improved marriages, ending excessive drinking, better parenting, and resolving personal difficulties such as eating disorders and stuttering. In the 1970s and 1980s Aesthetic Realism was known for descriptions—written by men and women who studied it—of changing from homosexuality to heterosexuality. Some former students and others contend that the Aesthetic Realism Foundation is a cult. Other former students, current students, and scholars disagree. This is a lie, "as deep-dyed a falsehood as we have seen anywhere".--Aperey 21:39, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  An opening is general. These removed sentences are opportunistically specific. 

message: Editors must not engage in revert wars. In particular, there is a firm rule prohibiting reverting the same article more than three times in a 24-hour period. Editor TS has apparently violated that rule and I must ask that editor to voluntarily refrain from any further edits for a day, the usual response to a violation of the WP:3RR. Please discuss proposed changes here. If these reverts continue we will have to protect the page again. -Willmcw 00:07, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It is untrue that I have reverted the page more than 3 times today.  I reverted at 7:55 AM, 12 Noon and 4:03 PM. :) [--TS 19 September 2005]
*Original edit
* 22:33, September 14, 2005 65.140.180.28
*11:56, September 15, 2005 65.135.45.205
*15:50, September 15, 2005 70.111.213.157
* 20:11, September 15, 2005 65.144.243.139
*Those are four reverts. (if TS was registered then I wouldn't have to discuss this matter on this page.) -Willmcw 01:34, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverts

message: *Talk:Aesthetic Realism. Should the article be permitted to include historical information that current teachers of the philosophy seek to deemphasize? 03:43, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Philosophy]]

message: ===Aesthetic Realism and homosexuality===
Aesthetic Realism sees all situations, including homosexuality, as philosophic. "The large difference between Aesthetic Realism and other ways of seeing an individual," wrote Eli Siegel, "is that Aesthetic Realism makes the attitude of an individual to the whole world the most critical thing in his life" (Self and World, p. 1). As early as 1948, writer Sheldon Kranz stated that studying Aesthetic Realism changed his preference from homosexual to heterosexual by encouraging a more accurate way of seeing women, the world, and himself. In the 1950s and 60s other students also said their preference had changed. Four were interviewed on the David Susskind Show (1971) together with four members of the Gay Liberation Front and published their book, The H Persuasion, containing (1) the transcript of an earlier WNDT (Channel 13, New York City) Jonathan Black interview and (2) personal case history narratives written by each author to show the scientific basis of their change. 
Aesthetic Realism consultations began in 1971. At this time there were twelve teachers for women and men, three of whom—Consultation with Three—concerned themselves primarily with men who wished to change from homosexuality (see Timeline, 1971).
In 1978, advertisements saying "Yes, We Have Changed" were printed in four major newspapers, signed by 50 men and women who stated that they represented over 140.
The possibility of gay men and women wishing to become heterosexual--and successfully doing so--ran counter to the growing consensus that considered homosexuality neither pathological nor amenable to change. While agreeing that homosexuality was not pathological, a mounting number of men and women (1971-90) presented autobiographical studies with evidence that their own homosexuality had changed through the study of Aesthetic Realism. For men, this concept was the basis: (1)"All homosexuality arises from contempt of the world, not liking it suffiently. (2) This changes into contempt for women" (The H Persuasion, 1971). Men wrote that not liking the world sufficiently was countered by the study of how to see the world fairly. Still, there are others at the present time who contend that these individuals had not in fact changed.
Aesthetic Realism angered persons and engendered adverse publicity by espousing its viewpoint. Some religious institutions began to adapt it to back up religious doctrines. As a result, the Aesthetic Realism Foundation decided in 1990 to discontinue teaching the change from homosexuality.--Aperey 04:22, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  I suggest this shorter, more accurate, more neutral version. All the facts should be rechecked of course 

message: Aesthetic Realism sees all situations, including homosexuality, as philosophic. "The large difference between Aesthetic Realism and other ways of seeing an individual," wrote Eli Siegel, "is that Aesthetic Realism makes the attitude of an individual to the whole world the most critical thing in his life" (Self and World, p. 1). As early as 1948, writer Sheldon Kranz stated that studying Aesthetic Realism changed his preference from homosexual to heterosexual by encouraging a more accurate way of seeing women, the world, and himself. In the 1950s and 60s other students also said their preference had changed. Four were interviewed on the David Susskind Show (1971) together with four members of the Gay Liberation Front and published their book, The H Persuasion, containing (1) the transcript of an earlier WNDT (Channel 13, New York City) Jonathan Black interview and (2) personal case history narratives written by each author to show the scientific basis of their change. 
Aesthetic Realism consultations began in 1971. At this time there were twelve teachers for women and men, three of whom—Consultation with Three—concerned themselves primarily with men who wished to change from homosexuality (see Timeline, 1971).
In 1978, advertisements saying "Yes, We Have Changed" were printed in four major newspapers, signed by 50 men and women who stated that they represented over 140.
The possibility of gay men and women wishing to become heterosexual--and successfully doing so--ran counter to the growing consensus that considered homosexuality neither pathological nor amenable to change. While agreeing that homosexuality was not pathological, a mounting number of men and women (1971-90) presented autobiographical studies with evidence that their own homosexuality had changed through the study of Aesthetic Realism. For men, this concept was the basis: (1)"All homosexuality arises from contempt of the world, not liking it suffiently. (2) This changes into contempt for women" (The H Persuasion, 1971). Men wrote that not liking the world sufficiently was countered by the study of how to see the world fairly. Still, there are others at the present time who contend that these individuals had not in fact changed.
Aesthetic Realism angered persons and engendered adverse publicity by espousing its viewpoint. Some religious institutions began to adapt it to back up religious doctrines. As a result, the Aesthetic Realism Foundation decided in 1990 to discontinue teaching the change from homosexuality.--Aperey 04:22, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Aesthetic Realism and homosexuality