| Revision as of 17:29, 8 December 2014 editSlanWeinberg (talk | contribs)13 edits →Logic behind criteria for abuse← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:36, 8 December 2014 edit undoFlyer22 Frozen (talk | contribs)365,630 edits Tagged IP's comment as unsigned. I don't yet know who "SlanWeinberg" is, but I'd bet money that he's a returning Misplaced Pages editor.Next edit → | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
| ::Nevertheless, medical/moral/legal issues got lumped together in the article's very lead and they purport to add up miraculously...<small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:36, 24 November 2014 </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | ::Nevertheless, medical/moral/legal issues got lumped together in the article's very lead and they purport to add up miraculously...<small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:36, 24 November 2014 </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | ||
| :::That is ''one'' issue I pointed out with your question. I pointed out several issues. You seem to come to the article with either an poor understanding of the subject-matter and/or the English language, or an ''agenda''. So here's the deal: You want to have a conversation about specific changes to make to this article? If so, good; go click "Create Account" at the top of the page, make an account, and we'll discuss. I'm not interesting in talking to a random Polish IP address about a locked article, because it was locked for a very good reason. However, if you're intent to just ] about your views or disagreement about the general subject matter, which includes asking loaded questions, this is expressly prohibited under wikipedia's rules and there is nothing further to discuss and this thread will be deleted or archived.] (]) 14:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | :::That is ''one'' issue I pointed out with your question. I pointed out several issues. You seem to come to the article with either an poor understanding of the subject-matter and/or the English language, or an ''agenda''. So here's the deal: You want to have a conversation about specific changes to make to this article? If so, good; go click "Create Account" at the top of the page, make an account, and we'll discuss. I'm not interesting in talking to a random Polish IP address about a locked article, because it was locked for a very good reason. However, if you're intent to just ] about your views or disagreement about the general subject matter, which includes asking loaded questions, this is expressly prohibited under wikipedia's rules and there is nothing further to discuss and this thread will be deleted or archived.] (]) 14:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
| ::::Perhaps creating two articles on CSA-one dealing with medical concerns and the other with legal/moral ones-could help to prevent a paradox like the one I presented. | ::::Perhaps creating two articles on CSA-one dealing with medical concerns and the other with legal/moral ones-could help to prevent a paradox like the one I presented. {{Unsigned|89.71.153.13}} | ||
| :::::The paradox you presented is in no way brought up in this article, because the article only gives brief, passing mention of legal issues and no "criteria" based chronological age are used in the manner you described. Hence, your concern still makes no sense. Legal issues are already handled in ] and ].] (]) 17:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | :::::The paradox you presented is in no way brought up in this article, because the article only gives brief, passing mention of legal issues and no "criteria" based chronological age are used in the manner you described. Hence, your concern still makes no sense. Legal issues are already handled in ] and ].] (]) 17:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
| :::::::Anon, the opening should sum up the contents of the article, and the article as a whole certainly does not need to "add up". We are an encyclopedia, remember. ♫ ] ] ] 22:21, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | :::::::Anon, the opening should sum up the contents of the article, and the article as a whole certainly does not need to "add up". We are an encyclopedia, remember. ♫ ] ] ] 22:21, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 17:36, 8 December 2014
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Child sexual abuse article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 15 days  |
 | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
 | Pedophilia Article Watch (defunct) | |||
| ||||
 | This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Child sexual abuse article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 15 days |
 Archives | |||||||||
Index
|
|||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Logic behind criteria for abuse
Suppose that a 14-year-old American girl goes on vacation to Italy and willfully (and lawfully) sleeps with a 30-something Italian man. Do scholars/physicians/psychologists/courts etc. in the US consider her to be abused sexually? Will she need to go into therapy once back in the States just like her peers who had intercourse with an adult on American soil? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.71.153.13 (talk • contribs) 18:53, 24 November 2014
- Your question has no answer. It contains too many unjustified assumptions, oversimplifies an extremely complex issue, and confuses laws/morality and medical science.Legitimus (talk) 20:20, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- Nevertheless, medical/moral/legal issues got lumped together in the article's very lead and they purport to add up miraculously...— Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.71.153.13 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 24 November 2014
- That is one issue I pointed out with your question. I pointed out several issues. You seem to come to the article with either an poor understanding of the subject-matter and/or the English language, or an agenda. So here's the deal: You want to have a conversation about specific changes to make to this article? If so, good; go click "Create Account" at the top of the page, make an account, and we'll discuss. I'm not interesting in talking to a random Polish IP address about a locked article, because it was locked for a very good reason. However, if you're intent to just soap-box about your views or disagreement about the general subject matter, which includes asking loaded questions, this is expressly prohibited under wikipedia's rules and there is nothing further to discuss and this thread will be deleted or archived.Legitimus (talk) 14:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- Perhaps creating two articles on CSA-one dealing with medical concerns and the other with legal/moral ones-could help to prevent a paradox like the one I presented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.71.153.13 (talk • contribs)
- The paradox you presented is in no way brought up in this article, because the article only gives brief, passing mention of legal issues and no "criteria" based chronological age are used in the manner you described. Hence, your concern still makes no sense. Legal issues are already handled in Laws regarding child sexual abuse and Age of consent.Legitimus (talk) 17:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- Anon, the opening should sum up the contents of the article, and the article as a whole certainly does not need to "add up". We are an encyclopedia, remember. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 22:21, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- I agree with SqueakBox regarding the purpose of the opening. SlanWeinberg (talk) 17:29, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
- Anon, the opening should sum up the contents of the article, and the article as a whole certainly does not need to "add up". We are an encyclopedia, remember. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 22:21, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- The paradox you presented is in no way brought up in this article, because the article only gives brief, passing mention of legal issues and no "criteria" based chronological age are used in the manner you described. Hence, your concern still makes no sense. Legal issues are already handled in Laws regarding child sexual abuse and Age of consent.Legitimus (talk) 17:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- Perhaps creating two articles on CSA-one dealing with medical concerns and the other with legal/moral ones-could help to prevent a paradox like the one I presented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.71.153.13 (talk • contribs)
- That is one issue I pointed out with your question. I pointed out several issues. You seem to come to the article with either an poor understanding of the subject-matter and/or the English language, or an agenda. So here's the deal: You want to have a conversation about specific changes to make to this article? If so, good; go click "Create Account" at the top of the page, make an account, and we'll discuss. I'm not interesting in talking to a random Polish IP address about a locked article, because it was locked for a very good reason. However, if you're intent to just soap-box about your views or disagreement about the general subject matter, which includes asking loaded questions, this is expressly prohibited under wikipedia's rules and there is nothing further to discuss and this thread will be deleted or archived.Legitimus (talk) 14:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- Nevertheless, medical/moral/legal issues got lumped together in the article's very lead and they purport to add up miraculously...— Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.71.153.13 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 24 November 2014
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class law articles
- Mid-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles
- B-Class Crime-related articles
- Mid-importance Crime-related articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- B-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
- Mid-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
- WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
- B-Class psychology articles
- Mid-importance psychology articles
- WikiProject Psychology articles
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics