| Revision as of 20:50, 2 June 2020 editJohn B123 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers194,206 edits →RfC about mentioning child prostitution based around caste: Reply← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 13:20, 20 September 2024 edit undoRJJ4y7 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users734 edits →an open source educational resource: new sectionTag: New topic |
| (84 intermediate revisions by 45 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Vital article|topic=Society|level=5|class=B |
|
| ⚫ |
}} |
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Safety resources}} |
|
|
{{Template:Distressing article}} |
|
{{calm}} |
|
{{calm}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|1= |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|1= |
|
{{WikiProject Law|class=B|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Law|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Crime|class=B|importance=mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Sexuality|class=B|importance=mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Sexology and sexuality|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Psychology|class=B|importance=mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Psychology|importance=Mid}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Human rights |importance=Low}} |
|
⚫ |
}} |
|
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Pedophilia Article Watch/WikiProjectNotice}} |
|
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Pedophilia Article Watch/WikiProjectNotice}} |
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Human Rights}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Child sexual abuse/Archive index|mask=Talk:Child sexual abuse/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes}} |
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Child sexual abuse/Archive index|mask=Talk:Child sexual abuse/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
| Line 22: |
Line 22: |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Controversial-issues}} |
|
{{Controversial-issues}} |
|
{{Auto archiving notice|small=yes|age=15|index=./Archive index|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}} |
|
|
{{archives|index=./Archive index}} |
|
{{archives|index=./Archive index}} |
|
{{Child protection}} |
|
{{Child protection}} |
|
{{findsourcesnotice|""|child (molestation OR "sexual abuse" OR rape)}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Link number 195 no longer works. == |
|
|
|
|
|
Title. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> |
|
|
|
|
|
== More rounded view of Rind Controversy == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello, I recently studied the Rind controversy in a course about science and culture. When I reviewed the summary here, I felt it omitted important some published/peer-reviewed responses to the article. As such, I attempted to write a concise but rounded overview of the debate that occurred after the article's publication. I hope it was a productive edit.] (]) 15:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:The prior version was a bit too brief, I will grant, but these edits I feel start to tip a little too far the other way. It's a touchy subject because the study was and still is used by egosyntonic pedophiles to justify their actions, whether that was the study author's intent or not. Did you read the main article on the ]? It's very comprehensive.] (]) 01:28, 28 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:. Also, the Fixer1234b account is very likely a sock. ] (]) 02:01, 28 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==WP:SYNTH== |
|
|
|
|
|
I am not getting where did {{U|John B123}} found any connection of and with the "Child prostitution" or "Child sexual abuse"? Source does not even support the content. The source is nowhere being specific about the victims being children, then why you see the requirement to misrepresent ? The source has been badly misrepresented. |
|
|
|
|
|
You agree that my removal was correct but you are trying to find a way to get through the content anyhow. This is not allowed per ]. The information has to be about "child prostitution" or "child sexual abuse" or else it is just POV pushing and original research. The source mainly talks about a village where girls work as prostitute as they outnumber boys. |
|
|
|
|
|
Given the discussion on your talk page , you are only ] at this stage. ] (]) 12:45, 2 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{u|NavjotSR}}, ] is not being violated here. I've now read the source. It states, {{tq|When they are deemed old enough, perhaps at the age of 11, most are expected to start doing sex work....She remembers what the adults in her village told her when she was 15, and her family was having money problems....That was when she started....Girls in Sagar Gram, which lies next to a highway, are groomed for this life virtually from birth. Parents decide which of their daughters will fetch the best price. Older girls teach them how to attract customers from passing trucks and cars. The younger ones sometimes stow under beds, observing the others at work....The legal age of consent in India is 18. Madhya Pradesh, the state in which Sagar Gram is situated, recently passed the death penalty for anyone who rapes a child under 12, also increasing jail terms for adults who have sex with someone under 18. Police say seven people were arrested for child sexual exploitation offences in Sagar Gram in the past year, five of them women who sold their underage daughters.}} The only way this could be synth would be if this was not child sexual abuse. Why are you claiming it is synth? <span style="font-family:Palatino">]</span> <sup>]</sup> 13:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:: Firstly, {{gn|You agree that my removal was correct but you are trying to find a way to get through the content anyhow}} is a complete fabrication. As I have previously told you, I do not agree your removal of the content was correct. |
|
|
:: Your edits have been reverted by myself and other users. Despite {{u|Crossroads}}'s warning about removing the same content on ], you continue to ] over this content. Please comply with ]. --] (]) 13:54, 2 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:::{{ping|Crossroads}} Your text says "'''perhaps''' at the age of 11, most are '''expected''' to start doing sex work", is not same as saying "they start doing sex work at 11". Are we going to write that "''Perhaps most girls in Sagar Gram village are expected to engage in sex work by the age of 11''"? ]. None of the words from the source support what you have been restoring; "In India, in what is termed 'caste slavery', an estimated 100,000 lower-caste women and girls are groomed into prostitution as a family trade." Especially when "women and girls" can be of any age and not just children, that is how the source is being misrepresented badly. ]. Now since the whole story from The Guardian is itself about only a single village where prostitution is taking place, why we are even adding it when the broader details about the entire country already exists on both articles? This is a clear breach of ]. ] (]) 16:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I've had a look at the and I'd like to point out that it discusses one village, Sagar Gram, as well as one caste, the Baccharas. As of now, the article makes it appear that the behaviour described in the paragraph is occurring on a national basis, rather than among the Bacchara caste of Sagar Gram. Additionally, if you all decide to retain the information, the 100,000 estimate should be ] to Ashif Shaikh of Jan Sahas, rather than using Misplaced Pages's voice; I should note that he seems unsure of the figure, however. I hope this helps. With regards, ]<sup>]</sup> 00:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*I agree with the above that the content is UNDUE and OR and it must go given the speculations and dubious relevance. ] (]) 15:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== an open source educational resource == |
|
::It is frustrating when editors meticulously address questions brought up only for it to not be looked at anyway. Makes it hard to have good faith and think every time an issue on India comes up, users get embarrassed or offended. @NavjotSR, you first brought up that "The source is nowhere being specific about the victims being children" and then ] quoted the source that literally talks about children and that counts for nothing to you. The issue is brought up that this is not representative nationally, but that it has to exist everywhere in the nation was never a criteria. ] (]) 17:54, 19 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Then you must avoid misrepresenting sources in first place. The information in question is backed with words like "expected", "perhaps", and is ultimately about "women and girls". You need a lot better argument than selective ] and violate ]. ] (]) 02:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
::::My comment concerned the paragraph as it was written extrapolating the tragedies occurring in one caste of one village to the entire country. I do not have a problem with mentioning the information, if that is the consensus between the lot of you; however, claims should be properly attributed and the village should be specified, rather than making this seem to be a country-wide activity. I hope this helps. With regards, ]<sup>]</sup> 02:10, 20 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i reacently found a website (started by a social worker academic) which is a database of freely available, open source social work textbooks on every course a social worker would need to take from entry all the way to an advnced practice degree. will be useful for building Misplaced Pages articles. also please spread the word if any social workers you know would benefit. URL: https://opensocialwork.org/textbooks/ ] (]) 13:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
== RfC about mentioning child prostitution based around caste == |
|
|
{{rfc|pol|soc|rfcid=976428B}} |
|
|
Should the "Asia" section contain information about caste based prostitution involving children in India? ] (]) 21:30, 25 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Yes''' per my comments above. It is discussed in good sources like ''The Guardian'' and Al-Jazeera (see ]). It meets ] and appears to be ]. This RfC is about material, by the way. <span style="font-family:Palatino">]</span> <sup>]</sup> 05:45, 26 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Yes''' per ] since it is backed by reliable sources. ] (]) 22:12, 26 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''No'''. It is not exactly backed by the reliable source. The text says "'''perhaps''' at the age of 11, most are '''expected''' to start doing sex work", is not same as saying "they start doing sex work at 11". Are we going to write that "''Perhaps most girls in Sagar Gram village are expected to engage in sex work by the age of 11''"? ]. None of the words from the source support what you have been restoring; "In India, in what is termed 'caste slavery', an estimated 100,000 lower-caste women and girls are groomed into prostitution as a family trade." Especially when "women and girls" can be of any age and not just children, that is how the source is being misrepresented badly. ]. Now since the whole story from The Guardian is itself about only a single village where prostitution is taking place, why we are even adding it when the broader details about the entire country already exists? This is a clear breach of ]. ] (]) 04:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''No''' per above and ]. ] (]) 11:43, 1 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''No''' as per above 2 reasons. I however believe that the religion based prostitution involving children in Pakistan can be added. There are enough reliable sources online supporting that non-Muslims are victimized - please see ] article.-] (]) 20:12, 2 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
* '''Yes''' Whilst the Guardian focuses on one village, the source estimates 100,000 women and children are in this situation, so the village is being used as an example, rather than saying it only happens in that village. The 100,000 includes women and children, but we don't know the proportion of juveniles. Whatever the proportion, some lower-caste children are being prostituted; to exclude the information over semantics is at best burying your head in the sand over this abuse. --] (]) 20:50, 2 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
i reacently found a website (started by a social worker academic) which is a database of freely available, open source social work textbooks on every course a social worker would need to take from entry all the way to an advnced practice degree. will be useful for building Misplaced Pages articles. also please spread the word if any social workers you know would benefit. URL: https://opensocialwork.org/textbooks/ RJJ4y7 (talk) 13:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
.svg){kind=icon}
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
