Talk:Gay bathhouse/Archive 2

message: ' Gay bathhouses, also known as (gay) saunas or steam baths (and sometimes called, in gay slang in some regions, "baths" or "tubs"), are places where men can go to have sex with other men (note that not only men who identify as gay patronise gay bathhouses). '
:This introduces to topic of it being "a" place to have sex w men. It does not explain (nor does the article generally explain) why this would be done in this establishment, and why an extreme of promiscuity would be engaged in. It does not address the context (this sort of behaviour is either taboo, in opposition to cultural mores or outright illegal in 99+ of the earth). That is extremely POV. Sam [Spade] 03:49, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: First Sentence

message: *The article explains quite clearly the development, and the need for, gay bathhouses.  See the History section (which I won't C&P here).  
*Nowhere in the article does it claim that "an extreme of promiscuity" is engaged in in bathhouses.  
*Is public, anonymous and/or promiscuous sex taboo, in opposition to cultural mores or outright illegal in "99+ of the earth"? (do you mean in over 99% of countries?  This is a bit unclear).  At any rate, legal issues are discussed in the Legal Issues section.  
Since we're both here, can you give me a chance to respond before you can continue?  Also, are you planning to dispute every single sentence?  Because if you are this is going to take a very long time and we're going to have repeated edit conflicts.Exploding Boy 03:57, Jun 6, 2004 (UTC)
:I do not intend to engage in revert wars with you. If you refuse to allow others to improve "your" article, I will be the bigger man and walk away. For now we are discussing, which I am ok with so long as you minimize personal attacks and threats, and other abusive behaviours. Sam [Spade] 04:06, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I dislike the format for flowing conversation (as this seems to be), would you like to to go to IRC or some such? Sam [Spade] 04:23, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: First sentence -- response

message: '  Bathhouses for women are much more rare, though some men's bathhouses will occasionally have "lesbian" or "women-only" nights. '
:Why? Why don't women go there, and leave doors open, presenting one portion of their anatomy or another towards the air in prospect of random sexuality? Why don't straight people do this? Is it a normal thing to do, random sex with others? Why is this oddity not addressed? Sam [Spade] 03:54, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Second Sentence

message: *Gay press news story regarding Bathhouse scandal
*Promiscuity Facts
*Statistics suggesting Homosexuals are less promiscuous
*Long editorial on family values/promiscuity
*Statistical discussion "One out of two"
*Attitudes Toward The Media's Portrayals of Gays and Lesbians - Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, Volume 2, July 1, 1999
These links provide a range of information on the subject.  Sam [Spade] 04:41, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever. I agreed to the mediation process, which involves announcing ourselves on RFM and mutually selecting a mediator. That has yet to occur. As far as I'm concerned we've just been fooling about with "mediation" here rather than having a formal "mediation" and I am doubtful of the need for mediation (progress seems to be being made, and some minimums of civility are in effect). That said I will agree to whatever is necessary, and will be as compliant with policy as possible. I do not refuse mediation.  Sam [Spade] 04:56, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: OK, so formally request mediation. 
#I am here. 
#I am communicating. 
#I am providing specifics and evidence. 
#You are being rude and confrontational.
Sam [Spade] 05:05, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: You cannot formally request mediation until requests for comment are filed. If you do not have faith in the other's motives, I suggest you poll the community to see what they think of the article as it stands and/or sam's complaints. →Raul654 05:22, Jun 6, 2004 (UTC)
I don't particularly want to request mediation, but I will if this foolishness continues. Exploding Boy 05:25, Jun 6, 2004 (UTC)
I removed the "pro-gay" and "pro-family" as per complaint, but as you can see I strove to provide even displays of facts. I would like to see the personal nature of criticisms, hostility, and emotions in general here to decline or preferably to be removed entirely. For the record I do not assume bad motives on the part of EB, but rather criticise this particular article, and some of the response to my criticisms. Sam [Spade] 05:34, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: Just to clarify, if EB is asking that I step in for him as the person representing the view that the article is acceptable as it stands, I am willing to do so. However, in this case, I ask that he not address Sam's points directly on this talk page. One of my goals in agreeing to do this would be to minimize the tensions. (That is not to say he should bite his tongue - he's welcome to privately direct me towards things he'd like to see remarked upon. I'd just like it if he backed off and let things cool down, because I think that the high tensions currently being displayed are beneficial to nobody. Snowspinner 05:28, Jun 6, 2004 (UTC)
I've listed this article on both wikipedia: requests for comment and wikipedia: peer review (thought I doubt that will help).  Exploding Boy 05:34, Jun 6, 2004 (UTC)
----
I'm glad you removed the above inflammatory taglines, but still the very links you provide are non-neutral.  The first link basically supports the view that STDs can be transmitted and drugs used in bathhouses.  Both are mentioned in the article.  The second link is not even worth reading, cluttered as it is with outdated "references" (and in particular when looking at that site's main page).  The third link is a random collection of statistics, many of which are covered in the homosexuality article.  Once again, these links do NOTHING to add to this discussion.  I don't understand why you're posting them here.  They are simply obfuscating the real issue. Exploding Boy 05:42, Jun 6, 2004 (UTC)
----
Just a heads-up for those keeping a close eye on the article: I've added a few lines here and there, notably in the opening paragraph. If they're unclear or POV, let me know. -Sean Curtin 08:01, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of mediation