Talk:Comfort women

Template:Vital article This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 20 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jisuk1017 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Moriskume, Alexperez53.

"Japanese military sexual slavery"

For discussion about alternative article title "Japanese military sexual slavery" on this article, please see User talk:John B123#Special:diff/881758594. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 10:42, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

As this discussion may now involve other editors, it's probably more appropriate to have the discussion here rather than on my talk page. I have there copied the discussion over to this page. --John B123 (talk) 11:23, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

The NPOV is not political correctness. And please search in google about word "Japanese military sexual slavery". It is one of common name about "comfort women". Thanks. --Garam (talk) 18:28, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Agreed "Japanese military sexual slavery" is a common name for "comfort women", but common name is a different thing to which means, i.e definition, as used in the text. The cited works used this term in an attempt to distinguish between Volunteer Corps (Jeongsindae) and Comfort Women (wianbu). It did not give it as an overall meaning of "comfort women".

I have absolutely no objection to the phrase being used in the article, but not as what comes across as a definition in the lead section. --John B123 (talk) 18:44, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Please see WP:OTHERNAMES. And commonly the "Japanese military sexual slavery" means "comfort women" only, not "volunteer labour corps". Thanks. --Garam (talk) 10:05, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Comfort women are part of (and the victims of) Japanese military sexual slavery. They are not the entirety of it, it also includes the people who ran the brothels, the soldiers who used the women etc. The people who ran the brothels were part of Japanese military sexual slavery but that does not make them comfort women. As far as both factual accuracy and WP:OTHERNAMES are concerned, "Comfort women", which means "Japanese military sexual slavery" is incorrect. --John B123 (talk) 17:21, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Then, you means, is "Comfort women or Japanese military sexual slavery" okay? --Garam (talk) 15:55, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

I would prefer: "Comfort women (Japanese military sexual slavery) were women and girls forced into sexual slavery by the Imperial Japanese Army in occupied territories before and during World War II."

From a readabity point of view, that wording is redundant. Jusenkyoguide (talk) 23:02, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Per WP:AT, the article title indicates what the article is about and distinguishes it from other articles. What is this article about?

• A system of sexual slavery operated during WW-II by the Japanese military
• The term Comfort Women
• The practice of sexual slavery by Japan during WW-II
• The practice of wartime sexual violence by the Japanese military in WW-II
• Wianbu
• Jeongsindae (re that term, see [1], [2], etc.)
• Some or all of the above in some combination of subtopics

This is just a drive-by comment, but it seems to me that the article content is mainly about the first of these, with some of the other topics also covered to some extent. Perhaps a split is in order, with a short summary style overview article summarizing two or more detail articles separately covering individual subtopics more completely. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 13:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

• Glendale Comfort Woman Plaque.jpg (discussion)
• Palisades Park Comfort Women Plaque.jpg (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:51, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Southfield Comfort Woman Plaque.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:21, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2019

Please delete the sentence: Abe again expressed his most sincere apologies and remorse to all the women and acknowledged that they had undergone immeasurable and painful experiences and suffered incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women. (Found under "Apologies and Compensation")

The reason for this is that according to various news sources including the New York Times and such, Abe did not express his "most sincere apologies and remorse" and has always doubted whether "Japan's imperial military actually coerced Korean women into sexual slavery" numerous times. ("Critics, however, noted that before becoming prime minister for the second time in 2012, Mr. Abe publicly questioned whether Japan’s imperial military actually coerced Korean women into sexual slavery." Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/12/world/asia/japan-south-korea-comfort-women.html

Thank you. NK1711 (talk) 00:17, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done EvergreenFir (talk) 05:51, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

The source is listed already, it's from the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs press release on the occasion and is a direct quote from it. Jusenkyoguide (talk) 22:50, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Edit: Er, I see that EvergreenFir already got it. ^_^; Thanks! -JG

Semi-protected edit request on 08 November 2019

 Done Under Notable former comfort women Lee Yong-soo has her birth date listed as 1929 when it's actually 1928 can someone please change this ? Here are some sources. https://www.vday.org/node/1879.html sdh-fact.com/essay-article/270/. 103.4.30.171 (talk) 08:39, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 November 2019

Please consider edit this line "Stations were located in Japan, China, the Philippines, Indonesia, then Malaya, Thailand, Burma, New Guinea, Hong Kong, Macau, and French Indochina" and include Singapore as part of the article. The Japanese had also set up at least 4 comfort stations in Singapore as well during World War 2. Kim Bok-Dong, a victim who worked as a "comfort woman", mentioned that the Japanese tried to hide the existence of these comfort stations after the war in Singapore and made these "comfort woman" to become war nurses in a hospital.

Sources: https://mothership.sg/2017/07/comfort-women-were-housed-in-cairnhill-during-japanese-occupation/

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsT97ax_Xb0&t=625s Weiyelim (talk) 07:26, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 November 2019

Proposal: Replace "Comfort women were women and girls forced into being sex slaves by the Imperial Japanese Army" By "Comfort women were women and girls who worked in the military brothels for the Imperial Japanese Army, many of whom having been forced into being sex slaves"

Rationale: bring back a nuance removed without relevant justification in Comfort_women&oldid=426326787, to reflect the ongoing debate and complexity of the Comfort Stations; that it is not historically established that comfort women equates sex slaves, but rather include a wide and complex range of experiences.

Detailed rationale and source:

Sarah Soh, a Korean American scholar, deplores in her book "The Comfort Women: Sexual Violence and Postcolonial Memory in Korea and Japan" how equating comfort women’s experiences into a uniform sexual slavery narrative overlooks the complexity of an evolving empire-wide system incorporating “licensed prostitution and indentured sexual labor, wartime military rape and battlefield abduction into sexual slavery.”. This view is shared by many other historians, including Korean scholar Park Yu-ha.

There is no question that the Comfort system led to the sexual violation of tens of thousands of women. In spite of this, definitions such as the one provided in the first sentence of the article do not offer an accurate view of the complex comfort system, and rather further aggravates the misalignment between the academic understanding and the much needed public discourse.

Considering this, and according to wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, I think it would be appropriate to reformulate the first sentence in the way suggested above.

Doragoram (talk) 10:22, 6 November 2019 (UTC)Doragoram

References

I don't agree that the writings of Soh and Park support such a change. The "nuance" was a very minor experience: most of the comfort women were forced into sex. Certainly one can argue for a complexity at the individual level, but we should continue to show that the Japanese system was primarily a violation of human rights, primarily a system of sexual slavery. Binksternet (talk) 16:57, 14 November 2019 (UTC) Doragoram (talk) 18:08, 14 November 2019 (UTC)