[WikiEN-l] Re: Pedophilia Article

[Denni]

Jimbo said

> I don't know if "single article" is the right solution, but there is
> no question that the way he advocates presenting the topic is very
> good NPOV writing.  The reader deserves to be informed that "some
> groups advocate..." because that's solid encyclopedic information.
> But the structure of articles must not give rise to a perception that
> we condone pedophilia.
>
> An additional subtle point that could be misconstrued is that we also
> must not _condemn_ pedophilia.  We are an encyclopedia, not a body of
> polemics.  We report, the reader decides.  We can (and must) report on
> the consensus of medical scientists, etc.  I trust that we can do this
> in a way that allows the reader to draw the right conclusion
> effortlessly.

I agree totally. There are many disagreeable and distasteful things which occupy space
in an encyclopedia. [[Murder]], [[suicide]], [[holocaust]], and [[rape]] are but a few
unsettling topics which have separate sub-articles. Because people may not agree with a
viewpoint or may find it uncomfortable to consider or discuss is not adequate reason to
limit discussion or analysis of it.

This topic is worthy of especial attention because it brings out the Spanish
Inquisition in all of us. Any topic which is so emotionally, socially, and politically
volatile deserves more than a vulgarity, a sour face, and a dismissal.

My only concern with Jimbo's comment is that he suggests there is a way to do this
which "allows the reader to draw the right conclusion efortlessly." What precisely =is=
the right conclusion, Jimbo, and if it is drawn effortlessly, is that a good thing?