Talk:Child prostitution

Child prostitution received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

I have done a substantial rewrite, using solid sources, incorporating appropriate text from original. The reasons for moving the article from 'child prostitute' to 'prostitution of children' are clear from the section on 'terminology'. I trust that this will be acceptable to others interested in the article. Alternatively, please express your views here so that we can debate. Zingi -- June 6, 2005

This is odd... Zingi had put {{date}} instead of a date stamp on the above comment, so it was always listing the current date... presumably an error. The comment was actually made June 6 2005.Herostratus 22:40, 27 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]
- Thanks for fixing it. Zingi 11:39, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand not calling the article "child prostitute," but why isn't it called "child prostitution"? Joey Q. McCartney 01:34, 4 March 2006 (UTC). Never mind, I see the reasons. Joey Q. McCartney 02:02, 4 March 2006 (UTC). But an improvement would be something like "Commercial sexual exploitation of children (prostitution)." Article looks good though. Joey Q. McCartney 02:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enjo kosai

Contrary to the rumors that many people believe, there is little to suggest that enjo kosai is anything other than a voluntary and conscious decision on the part of the prostitute herself--for this reason alone, it stands as rather unique within the topic. There are similarly rumors to the effect that yakuza abduct women and sell then into prostitution. Granyed that this has been fodder for countless Japanese melodramas, but again, no proof is on display at yer lokul myusee-uhm. ("at your local museum" for those who are new to the English language--see sarcasm) Sweetfreek 02:12, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Accepted. However, it may be viewed as the prostitution of such children by the 'users' or 'partners' of such children. The crux is that it is usually adults who create child prostitution through their demand for children as sexual objects, even if the children 'voluntarily' agree to that because of the financial benefit. Zingi 05:50, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hoooo boy! Alright, Zingi, I've encountered this one before. But before we go any farther, we(you and I) must establish between ourselves a clear and carefully defined definition of the word "child"... and this task I shall leave to you, because I'm a nice guy. Sweetfreek 02:27, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

'Child' is defined in international conventions (eg in the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention of the International Labour Organisation) as a person under 18 years of age. Zingi 11:39, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, in England, you can have sex on film when you're age 16. In Japan, the legal age varies, and until very recently was 12 in Tokyo. I don't know what it is now. IamthatIam 04:04, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The whole cause of child prostitution is the USA's (& UK's) wage system which IS slavery but no one thought so. Now we can see USA built everything wrong & was blinded by all the empty free land, which is why we thought building cars, roads, houses & small buildings for wages was right, but it was wrong. Now we can finally see that USA & all nations should have begun working part-time building only massive 100-story live/work/play Tower cities connected to maglev Trains to save lives, save the Earth, & eliminate all the work slavery. It would be easy if we just admit the wage is slavery, & employees are slaves, & corporations are slave plantations. And union strikes are slave rebellions. We can't end child sex trade/prostitution by making it illegal without giving all those children a guaranteed income (RFID) so that taking away their means of making money doesn't leave them to starve. Every person needs an RFID GI. Sundiiiaaa 18:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This shows child sex slavery in USA & should be added to the article: http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/ Sundiiiaaa 06:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

content needed

This topic desperately needs pictures

Definitely! How can we correctly understand the complex issues at hand without reference to pictures of an appropriate selection of scantily-clothed child whores? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.207.40.213 (talk) 22:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Intro and other improvements

I rewrote the intro somewhat to to provide a simple generic definition outside of national and international law. I also rewrote the section that talk about teen prostitutes being seen by some as a separate category. The section had a minor NPOV issue in that took the "Convention on the Rights of the Child" definition and implied it was the only acceptable definition. I did some rewording so as to state to be clear that it's the most common definition without stating that other definitions are wrong, from a general standpoint (i.e. outside the law). --Cab88 21:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3% of 106

" “La Strada-Ukraine” in 2001-2003, based on a sample of 106 women being 'trafficked' out of Ukraine found that 3% were under 18" - instead of saying 3%, wouldn't it be 3? - Richardcavell 09:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it was 3.18! simple mathematics my dear watson... aussietiger 14:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this pg needs to be reworked

this is confusing, and the subtitles follow in an odd order.. specific info is ify Chrrea 17:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bias

I added a note that this article doesn't seem to be presenting a neutral point of view. I just redid the section on Terminology, and hopefully removed the bias there. But it still exists in other parts of this article.

Wikipedia is intended to be an online encyclopedia that presents verifiable information in an impartial manner. Even if every contributor to an article holds the same point of view, that should not be clear to anyone who reads the article. The article itself should be neutral.

As written, this article implied that everyone who granted sexual favors for profit who was under the age of legal consent was being victimized by an adult who was profiting from their actions. That is not true. For example, school girls selling favors ranging from holding hands to sexual intercourse has been common in Japan, especially in large cities such as Tokyo, but pimping is relatively rare there. Someone may argue that they are still being victimized, but that is an opinion. Frankly, it is also an opinion that anyone who is working for someone else is being victimized. Even if everyone contributing to this article believes they are being victimized, the article itself should remain neutral

I invite others to examine the rest of the article and the section on Terminology, to help remove the bias. IamthatIam 04:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed bias tag, no sources provided from scholarly academics in fields of sociology or psychology to support this view. Addhoc 09:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Action to end exploitation

A link to this wikipedia article and an external link (which I reworded to hopefully make it NPOV) have been added. My question is, does this specifically fit this article? It looks like the group covers a lot of ground beyond the scope of this article. Opinions, please! Toyalla 18:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]