Talk:Nazism and homosexuality

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The title hides the meaning here. When you move to mainspace, I'd consider adding "Conspiracy theories" to the end of the title. ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 17:30, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Aside from Ernst Rohm, wasn`t most of the SA leadership homosexual? Deputy Edmund Heines was homosexual wasn`t he? Also Goring has not been proven to have been homosexual but did like to wear dresses didn`t he? Wasn`t he a transvestite? Lastly, Rudolf Hess even got the nickname fraulein didn`t he? (talk) 06:49, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
I’m pretty sure Betteridge's law of headlinesWikipedia apply here. Apart from the well-established facts about Röhm’s and Heines’ sexuality, do you have any sources underpinning your questions? ScepticWombat (talk) 05:40, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

False too[edit]

The nazis didn't care much about homosexuals. That's just the myth that they supposedly persecuted Christians or Atheists. They were honestly more tolerant than many who write the articles here. 2003:C3:371F:1300:D1DE:CA48:D35E:2767 (talk) 08:58, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Bullshit. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 13:13, 2 June 2020 (UTC)


the one for organisations includes only two, and one of which was shut down when the Nazis came to power. the list of gay Nazis includes only 3, and only one of which was gay.

so neither really a list if we remove the irrelevant from one, and the homophobic tropes from the other.

is this a work in process? its not great start if it is and shouldn't it still be in draft? if its the final cut, it shouldn't be. AMassiveGay (talk) 11:49, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

really, this is very poor[edit]

opening quote probably a bit too long and concerns myths and conspiracy theories around the Nazis and homosexuality, which would be fine if that's what the article addressed, but it doesn't. the opening paragraph is a mess of hyperlinks that don't lead anywhere useful or related to the subject, the pink triangle is hidden as a couple of references, while for some reason conservapedia gets a specific mention. the pink triangle warrants the mention, not conservapedia which needed be mentioned at all. neither are referred to again. I do not much care for the flippant tone more fitting for something on, gamergate say, than an aspect of the holocaust either.

the 2nd quote in the treatment of section is rather long considering what little information it provides, considering how brief the article is, and the section it appears, especially if we take out the lists, it should not be opening the article. that said, its only bit of the article that links it to real human beings.

the treatment section really is little more than a brief listing of some things banned and just stops before it gets going. there is brief mention of numbers killed, but not expanded on in any way. doesn't really get into the treatment of homosexuals. and the reference to himmlers rationale for oppression doesn't need a link to white extinction theory under a shit joke. fuck off with that.

see above for the two lists - not really lists even before removing the irrelevant and the homophobic tropes. really though, 'alleged'? really? how about not pushing the kind of bullshit that I would think this article would be debunking.

there is no examination of homosexuality during the Weimar republic, no real examination of it during the Nazi period, and no examination of the postwar period. no real examination of Nazi attitudes to homosexuality leading up to the night of the long knives. no examination of homosexuality's place in the holocaust. no examination of the myth and conspiracy theories that seemed to have been promised in the open quote and paragraph.

we can certainly do better than using a quote from metapedia.

whats this article for? whats its focus? its incomplete whatever it is, and where it is currently going it shouldn't. it should be started afresh. there isn't anything of the body worth keeping. some of the references maybe. but the ones that are to Wikipedia. AMassiveGay (talk) 13:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

this has been up since 2015[edit]

I feel a little better im not shitting on someones recent efforts and all, but fucking hell. 2015? jesus fuck AMassiveGay (talk) 13:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)