h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.h2g2.com/A476903 Wrong statements about sex

Have some more?

http://www.h2g2.com/Writing-Guidelines
2. Be Original

We have an entries on sex... The browser category is at http://www.h2g2.com/C499. What to do about them is in the guidelines.

{Blunt? Who's Blunt?}

Hi Lucinda, I'm sorry but I don't understand what you're saying. My entry contains things which are not yet covered by other entries. Of course there is a category where my entry could fit in. Should I state where to put it in?

I'm not sure what you mean by Blunt, I never mentioned this word. I even don't know it.

Please help me.

I was saying that I was blunt - as in being over-direct...

This is in fact covered in the relevant section of the http://www.h2g2.com/writing-guidelines, should you actually bother to look at them, but you have basically three options:

1) post your thoughts to associated forums for existing entries.
2) create an entry on a new topic where there is clearly no overlap.
3) combine your entry with an existing entry, and post the combined entry for Peer Review.

I did read the guidelines.

I have read all entries about sex and did not find a single one with wrong statements about sex. So, where's the problem?

And, there are many entries on sex, each one focusing on one aspect of this topic, it is not a single one with everything thrown in. Why should I be the first to merge my thoughts?

By the way, the entry on sex: http://www.h2g2.com/A5176 in the guide is in some funny way saying about almost nothing about the topic. In does in no way conform to the guidelines, especially: 5. Don't Try too Hard to be Funny, as it consists of jokes only.

My entries deal with my experiences in real life and provide some very useful information about the topic.

Sex is a very personal thing. We don't do mass surveys like Masters & Johnson. And personal views shouldn't be mixed with other's views, as the message could get lost.

I did two unique entries, I invite you to read them again and find out as others did, and I'd suggest you bother with stating your criticism more precisely.

Thanks for explaining the word "blunt" to me: let's be friends and talk about it like friends, ok? These are my first entries, after all. And quite personal ones.

I'm so much better at being blunt, though. I did at one point think about writing more, (heck, at one point I wrote more, then deleted it) but I thought I'd give you a chance to recognise where the problem was yourself. Besides, from my own experience blunt criticism is rather more useful. Plus, anything else I wrote just ended up being more blunt. Oh well - this post will be a write-only post.

Perhaps I could give an example or five:

> "Masturbation is not good"
This is something that already is in the entry on both male and female masturbation.

> "Sex and friendship do not fit"
This is something that could be the basis of an entire entry on 'mixing sex and friendship' - how to do it - what the risks are, what the rewards are. It is also something which is already discussed in a conversation off the sex entry.

> "Women have more fantasies whereas men are more hmm, dull."
Same as above for an entry on sexual fantasies, differences between genders.

> "Women need a foreplay."
New entry on foreplay, existing entry on sex.

> "Men can have good sex without emotions."
Entry on Love, Entry on Emotions, differences between genders, etc.

--
People have made wrong statements about just about every aspect of sex there is, so an entry entitled "wrong statements about sex", if it is to be in any remote way complete, is going to have to cover material over the whole of the subject of sex - that's going to end up in severe overlap, as is already the case with the statement on masturbation, and will increasingly happen as more entries are added to the guide.

Personal views *should* be mixed in with other views. That's why many entries have multiple researcher credits after them. If the guide is in any way meant to be an authoritative guide, then it can't be full of "a perspective on XXX" entries. You wouldn't be the first to merge your thoughts, and you won't be the last.

My suggestion would be to write entries, based on your own personal perspective, on a particular specific topic within the vast amount that is "wrong statements". For example, you might write an entry on "Can you have sex and friendship", or "one night stands", or "foreplay" or "sexual fantasies" or whatever. This would allow you to go into vastly more detail, which would be good.

You are welcome to disagree, and it is entirely your entry. If you wish to keep it covering it's current subject matter that is up to you. This is just my opinion - that as it stands it won't make it into the guide. If you think it can do so, just say, and I'll move on and criticise and suggest based on other criteria.

Thanks for not deleting! Thank you for giving me the chance to recognise it for myself. (Just deleted something very blunt)

You are right in saying that there will be some kind of overlap. But it is neccessary to put all wrong things in one entry! The other entries basicly approach the topic by saying: this way is ok, and maybe that other too. Which is good, because it's your personal view and choise what to do and like. My other entry is a good example.

This entry is different: the aim is to fight against the misleading nformation we thought we had about this topic. The aim is to give people a chance to break out of their normal, manipulated habits. To make new experiences on their own. And to not do what society and church want them to do.

I would be glad if someone reacted like this: hey, I always took that for granted, now this bloke writes it is not, I wonder whether he is right? Maybe I should try it.

And that's also the reason for me not to discuss the statements any further, that's left to the entries of the topics themselfes.

I invited others to contribute to that entry, it should contain all wrong statements.

The following only applies to my other topic, which is quite personal.

I think that personal views should *not* be mixed. That's why they are personal. One person. Not many, each with a different point of view, which ends in saying everything is good and do as you like. One view with one basic philosophy which, if you like to stick to it, may do good to you.

Just compare it to an entry of cake. There could be one entry describing cake in general. And many entries, each describing one recipe. You wouldn't want to mix all recipes into one topic. You could append them one after another, but what would be the use of that? Linked pages with own discussion forums are much better. After all, it's the web.

Personal views are not in any way authoritative, and can never be! If you mix them, you get mixed personal views, nothing more. The entries are far from being scientific or complete, most of them are not even schoolbook level (e.g see the edited entry for boolean algebra: DeMorgan's law isn't even mentioned).

The guided cannot be scientific, it derives it's power from being personal and it should never claim to be authoritative.

And that is how The Guide is described in the books, and why it made it such an success!

No reply?

I am waiting for someone else to comment so that we may have the benefit of their wisdom... I think I've said everything I wanted to say at the moment...

I'd just like to point out that I agree with Lucinda. Entirely. On this, and the other, related entry, by the same author, which Lucinda also made similar comments regarding.

As a general rule, entries that are solely one person's opinions about a topic for which there are (by definition) a multitude of opinions, are probably not going to be a good fit for the edited guide. You could try expanding your current entry by collaborating with someone(s). You could try narrowing down the topic and including objective information as well as subjective.

Mikey

I'd agree with both Mikey and Lucinda

Everybody is welcome to collaborate!

The one-liner format of this entry works well. It might work even better if there were some matching pairs in there. Lets face it - most generalisations are more or less inaccurate. However it is worth pointing out that myths are myths. I like it, but am too tired just now to try to add to it.

agcB