Talk:Necrophilia

message: i dont know how to add tidily 
   (e) (i) commits or attempts to commit upon any dead human body any act of sexual penetration, regardless of the sex of the actor and of the dead human body
     (b) Abuse or desecration of a dead human body as described in Subsections (2)(b) through (e) is a third degree felony. 
here is citeation: http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_09_070400.htm
86.161.58.136 (talk) 23:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Utah state law 

message: I am not going to redirect Farewell intercourse here, but the topic needs to be covered somewhere. The planned Egyptian 'farewell intercourse law' has caused a moral panic in the Western media. See for example:
* 
-- Petri Krohn (talk) 19:40, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Al-Arabiya published a follow up story saying no such proposed law ever existed, and the christian science monitor published a story pretty thoroughly debunking the idea. The faux controversy may be appropriate to cover somewhere, but not in the legality section - since it isn't at all actually related to the legality of necrophilia - and I have the feeling it would be undue weight in this article to mention it at all Kevin Gorman (talk) 17:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Farewell intercourse 

message: The lead says 12%, but the "Research" section says 11%. I'm not sure which is correct, but they should be harmonized...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.78.155.105 (talk) 20:00, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistent numbers 

message: See also: In Tiny Amazon Frogs, Males Observed Extracting Oocytes from Females Killed in Mating Struggles Jidanni (talk) 20:05, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tiny Amazon Frogs 

message: It redirects here, so added it to the page. BP OMowe (talk) 18:41, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Davian behaviour 

message: Would sexual acts with a vampire or zombie classify as necrophilia? They were both corpses, if animate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.181.226.164 (talk) 08:53, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Vampire yes, zombie no. Friginator (talk) 07:47, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Necrophilia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090505021654/http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=hsc&group=07001-08000&file=7050.5-7055 to http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=hsc&group=07001-08000&file=7050.5-7055
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:38, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: I reverted the vandalism today, but it should be reverted further back; please fix. I am not able to watch this page due to being busy for a while. Please take care of this. CryMeAnOcean (talk) 21:29, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Er, no, it looks to me like you introduced vandalism with .  Care to explain what you were trying to do?  22:00, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

text: OK, I see what happened.  You reverted only one of the two edits made by the same IP immediately before your reversion.  Don't really understand why you couldn't have reverted the other yourself, but I have done so. General Ization Talk   22:04, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

text: Thanks for taking care of that. I wasn't sure how to do it. I thought if I revert again I will revert the vandalism I just rolled back. CryMeAnOcean (talk) 06:50, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Any information on what they consider to be acceptable state of decay??
Still  warm but dead bodies? Dead no more than X days? What is the worst condition of a corpse for them to indulge in the activity? Setenzatsu (talk) 11:56, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  State of decay 

message: Any confirmed grave raids to satisfy the need? Setenzatsu (talk) 12:00, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grave robbing 

message: Flyer 22 Rebird told me that Necromanticism is Necrophilia when I tried to add Necromantic as a Romantic Orientation here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romantic_orientation. Now Admin is always right, but I wished to add on this Talk page that I personally am a Necromantic, but NOT a Necrophiliac and NOT a Necromancer. Having a Romantic Orientation towards a dead being is not the same thing as having a sexual attraction to a dead body, nor the same as communicating with the dead for sorcery purposes. I hope people can understand why I would wish to note the difference. There is a Facebook group for people into “Necromanticism”, fyi. 🙏☮️ DErnestWachter (talk) 23:50, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It does not appear to be a widely recognized use of that word, so it doesn't belong on the list of romantic orientations. ... discospinster talk 15:35, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Necromanticism is NOT Necrophilia 

message: Reference 66, linked in the Case Studies section for Karen Greenlee, appears to be about mice, not anything to do with Greenlee or necrophilia. The link to the study referenced only provides an abstract, and on the off chance the actual article does reference her, I've not touched it. Based on the abstract linked, though, I can't imagine it does; it appears to be an ecological study on mice on Marion Island. JackMeraxes (talk) 03:35, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karen Greenlee Reference 

message: In the table in the United States subsection on Legality, it states the severity in Texas as a Class A misdemeanor and uses § 9.42.08 as a source. However, I think this is inaccurate. I will paste the legal text here for ease of discourse:
Sec. 42.08.  ABUSE OF CORPSE.  (a)  A person commits an offense if the person, without legal authority, knowingly:
(1)  disinters, disturbs, damages, dissects, in whole or in part, carries away, or treats in an offensive manner a human corpse;
(2)  conceals a human corpse knowing it to be illegally disinterred;
(3)  sells or buys a human corpse or in any way traffics in a human corpse;
(4)  transmits or conveys, or procures to be transmitted or conveyed, a human corpse to a place outside the state; or
(5)  vandalizes, damages, or treats in an offensive manner the space in which a human corpse has been interred or otherwise permanently laid to rest.
(b)  An offense under this section is a state jail felony, except that an offense under Subsection (a)(5) is a Class A misdemeanor.
In line (b) it states that any offense with the exception of (a)(5) is a felony, with only (a)(5) being a Class A misdemeanor. Furthermore, (a)(5) would not be considered necrophilia as described in the main article. (a)(1) would best fit the definition of necrophilia, and thus the severity of that offense, defined as a felony in (b), should be listed.
However, I do not have any background or experience in law so I would like to have a second opinion before making this edit.
BlueXeta (talk) 23:34, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Texas State Law Felony or Misdemeanor 

message: The cited source is an Indian tabloid which does not itself cite any sources besides unnamed members of "the deceased's family".
Other tabloids cite ZimEye as originator of the story. ZimEye has the name of the deceased and a quote from the woman, but no further documentation. This publication additionally ups the ante by also alleging that impregnation occurred as a result of the necrophilic act.
The paragraph should be removed, or at the very least presented as "reported" rather than "documented". 87.49.45.31 (talk) 18:54, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious source for "documented case" of someone have sex with a corpse motivated by the dead person's wishes.