Talk:Sex tourism: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 16:32, 5 October 2019 editJohn B123 (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers194,138 edits Content moved to Talk:Sex tourism/Archive 1 ← Previous edit		Revision as of 16:35, 5 October 2019 edit undoJohn B123 (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers194,138 edits Content moved to Talk:Sex tourism/Archive 2 Next edit →
Line 20:		Line 20:
	\|align="left"\|2007:		\|align="left"\|2007:
	\|}<!-- Archive is using the "Permanent link archives method". -->		\|}<!-- Archive is using the "Permanent link archives method". -->

	== Female Sex Tourism Destinations ==
	] in the province of Pampanga, Philippines is famous for prostitution during the 80s and 90s mainly because of a foreign military base there. The contract of this military base didn't get an extension from the Philippine government (end of contract: 1992) and after the eruption of the ] in 1991, the base was evacuated and so as the prostitution industry was greatly affected.

	I am not sure if the article written here about Angeles as a "primary destination for female sex tourism still applies" for it happened more than 2 decades ago unless somebody could cite that. Angeles may not be the present primary destination right now, they may have transferred somewhere else. ] 05:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
	*AC has been re-discovered by German as well as American ex-military sex tourists. Sex tourism there is going strong...] 03:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


	The situation in Angeles is worse then ever, here are some links that will give you an update on the situation...
	http://qc.indymedia.org/news/2005/03/2736.php
	http://www.preda.org/archives/2004/r04062801.html
	http://www.preda.org/archives/hl/wvb.html

	even worse is that human rights workers in angeles are getting murdered by thse gangs.] 10:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

	susan, you need to state references when making outrageous claims like that. otherwise people will think you are spreading misinformation just like you did on the Angeles City page. ] 11:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

	Angeles may be a destination for male sex tourists but definitely not for females. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 11:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	== Don't! Buy! Thai! ==
	the following because it seems poorly sourced, outdated, in need of substantial re-writing, and contained broken wikilinks. Would fit better under ], but a short mention in ] would be okay.

	<blockquote>In the mid 1990's, a ] named "']'" was organized to publicize and discourage ] in ]. The premise was that participants would not buy anything made in Thailand until the Thai government and international agencies significantly reduced the use of children as prostitutes in Thailand, as well as the ready access that foreign tourists had to these vulnerable and often reluctant sex objects.

	<br><br>Travel bureaus and airlines have been organized to facilitate visits to the fleshpots of Thailand. For example, ] runs scheduled and charter flights between ] and other European cities and ]. One Lauda Air commercial shows a Western tourist talking on a cell phone: "...Got to go: The girls at the ] are waiting."
	Attorney/novelist ] has written at least one novel and a number of articles on the matter (http://www.vachss.com/).</blockquote>

	DBT ceased operations in 2000. The http://www.dbt.org/ domain has been acquired by another business. Other possibly helpful links:
	*http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/8931/b2.html
	*http://www.vachss.com/mission/dbt_update.html
	/ ] 14:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

	:You removed my one liner after this: "According to the Cambodia minister for Woman's Affairs, it is not tourists who are the prime culprits of pedophilia in her country, but the locals." but it would be nice to find a reference to support indicating that "non-tourist" child prostitution in general is relatively prevalent in these countries anyway as this sentence is a bit short which was why i added the thai love motel bit in the first place. Maybe I am lazy I should go google "child sex in asia" or something liek that and see what i can find to add just a little to this sentence... regards edgarde, ] 13:08, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

	::If you mean :
	::<blockquote>''For example, it is a popular local superstition in Thailand that an older man sleeping with a young woman will thereby renew his virility, if not his aging vigour, and one consequence is the drive-in ''love-motel'' where few questions are asked.''</blockquote>
	::I think the fact that it's a "local" superstition makes it irrelevant to the topic of Sex tourism (unless you consider it strong evidence that Thai Sex tourism does not involve child prostitution). Anyway, various beliefs about the ''health benefits'' of sex with young or virginal women exist in many cultures (too many to list here). Such a list might more relevant to the article ]. / ] 19:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

	::Sure. I am not disagreeing. Just would be nice to add to the short "one liner" before thats all i was trying to do... Regards. Actually I need hlep with reverts and POV bias in another article - this time I am on firm ground but there is wierd stuff going on over there... you can see my edits and my comments in the talkback also... you could help as a third opinion or arbiter thanks edgarde and I glad we are on good terms now... keep up the good work... Thanks. This is my fixed IP when I occassionally (and sometimes deliberately) forget to log in. :-) oops: its at ] in the infamous (apple) biased intro yet again... ] 14:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

	::I edited ] as: ] 14:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC) Mattjs.

	:::I think I am going to stop contributing to Misplaced Pages as it all gets to damn frustrating with even biased editors - you are an exception - and I dont know anyone higher up the chain to back me up when trying to point out editorial POVs. It is all quite a joke really: groups of POVed people get their way with articles and that can include the employees of large companies who through shear numbers can have their way set the own tone and agenda (along with the cronies) with articles on their own products. I strongly suspect that some large computer companies might be monitoring Misplaced Pages and doing this. Regards again and better you than me. ] 14:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

	::::If I keep seeing POV bias at ] its adios to Misplaced Pages! (After all i've got a "life"!) ] 14:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

	===Local superstitions encouraging child prostitution===
	I'm yanking this again because it's both off-topic and unsourced.
	<blockquote>Similar claims can be made for other destinations including in Asia where local superstitions may serve to encourage child sexual exploitation.</blockquote>
	The implications that
	*Asians are more likely to have sex with children
	*and when they do, it is not really pedophilia, but part of their culture
	... are really just noise in this article. If you can find a source for these this statement, add to a more appropriate article, perhaps something child prostitution related.

	I understand that some editors are really eager to share this information, but ] really isn't the place. / ] 15:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

	:No problem edgarde. That is a reasonable argument I guess. I wont submit any more experimental attempts at an acceptable edit here unless maybe I can one day finally find a decent source... (but dont hold your breath)... BTW: I finally got the iTunes problem fixed and on this (one) occassion (at least) my argument was on solid ground and so I won it through to a concensual completion with another excellent editor's help! Yipee! So I am not so down on Misplaced Pages now. Warmest Regards, ] 18:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

	::Good to hear the iTunes situation is worked out.
	::Experiments in good faith usually don't hurt, as long as one doesn't mind be "edited mercilessly" (as it says here somewhere). / ] 21:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

	:::I found a reference quite by accident during my (online) travels and I am sure others exist: Louise Brown, ''Sex Slaves: The Trafficking of Women in Asia'', Virago Press, 2001, {{ISBN\|1860499031}}. Indeed, quoting from the book's back cover:
	:::{{cquote\|The Asian sex trade is often assumed to cater predominantly to foreigners. ''Sex Slaves'' turns that belief on its head to show that while western sex tourists have played a vital part in the growth of the industry, the primary customers of Asia's indentured sex workers and of its child prostitutes are overwhelmingly Asian men."(+Ref here)}}
	{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment \| course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/Southern_Methodist_University/Gender,_Sex,_and_Sexuality_Global_Perspectives_(Spring_2019) \| assignments = ] \| reviewers = ] \| start_date = 2019-01-22 \| end_date = 2019-05-02 }}
	:::Some of the cultural issues I alluded to are examined and explained. SO: What should we now put back in: the quote? or?:
	:::<blockquote>"Arguments can be made that local cultural traditions in Asia (may) serve to encourage child sexual exploitation."(+Ref here)</blockquote>
	:::I prefer the back cover quote myself as it speaks for itself and rounds out the Burma one liner with respect to Asia otherwise I think we should in the alternative take out the Burma line entirely as irrelevant to the article. (Just to forewarn you) the alternative of not putting anything (of the suggestions here) into the article at all is an option with which I would be most unhappy edgarde.
	:::Leave a note on my talkback page and/or insert a similiar suitable edit of your own. Regards, ] 18:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

	::::Child sex by sex tourists raises the hackles of many drive-by editors for this article, but whatever you can add that's relevant to Sex tourism (i.e. why would someone travel to another country to do this), would be worth including. Give it a go.

	::::"Asian men" (from the quote) doesn't necessarily mean nationally native men. Japan (for example) is a major Sex tourism ''sending'' country, and word on the street is they like women very young. If the book you're looking at (and I can't see from here) says sex "tourism" (as opposed to ''trafficking'' or ''prostitution''), that's good to include.

	::::Sexual practices by locals are not by themselves relevant to Sex tourism; those should go in ], ], ], ] somewhere like that. Is there an article for "sex customs in Asia" or something?

	::::P.S. I'm okay with de-headlining the ] situation, but "Recent" shouldn't be in the title per ]. How about just ''Scandals'', or ''Arrests''?. You decide, I have to run. / ] 18:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

	::::P.P.S. Your happiness is your responsbility, not mine. Don't be laying guilt trips on me, man! <nowiki>;)</nowiki> / ] 19:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
	:::::OK I will fix that but then I would also like to take out the Cambodia (not Burma sorry) line if you don't want my suggestions in as by your own arguments above it too is not relevant to the article. Comments(/actions hehe)? Regards, ] 18:54, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

	::::::I think the Cambodian minister for Woman's Affairs, is replying to accusations that sex tourism is an industry so I think it's relevant. It ''is'' however awkward having it hanging there like that, without a preceding reference to the country. I could take or leave it. Is there an article like ]? / ] 19:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

	:::::::Hmmm. Lets just leave this for now while I/we think some about it... It is an enlightening bit of information that should go in Misplaced Pages somewhere I will check for Prositution in Cambodia, Child prostitution etc though unfortunately there is no Prostitution in Asia article that I am aware of. Hmmm... It is a doubly useful bit of information - by analogy i guess - in that it is suggestive of the locations for child sex tourists: i.e. those local or native cultures that historically (hence legally also) lack the same degree of prohibitions towards child sex and sexual exploitation in general and that is why i feel it is a tantalizing tidbit that is equally relevant here and fits appropriately as the final suggestive comment in the child sex tourism section of the article (thanks to the lead in by the Cambodia reference) but I have a feelign that you are always going to disagree but do note that my intention is not to provide excuses for child sex tourism but rather - and very relevantly i believe - elaborate upon the cutural context of the problem. By way of comparison the "Servaty" reference for example adds very little to the article and certainly nothing in terms of sociological research and understanding of the field unlike my sugeestion above... ] 23:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

	::::::::] certainly exists. Generally, if an article link isn't red, there's an article there.

	:::::::::It is just a list of links to other articles there... seee my comment following on a suitable place to put it. Regards, ] 23:39, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

	::::::::Minor concern: consider ]. I can't always guess the user behind the IP from context. / ] 23:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

	:::::::BTW: If after some time and reflection you still disagree with my argument above there is a "Causes and context" section in the ] artcle where it could go in (probably at the very bottom of the section as there is an uncited comment along the same lines at that point that actually needs a reference just like this one. ] 23:39, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

	==suggested new section on Article==
	Can i suggest a new section for the article, ==Welfare Agencies==
	The welafre agenceies at the frontline in dealing with the problems caused by sex tourism, and I thought iot might be a valuable addition to people doing research on sex tourism if we added a section on specific welfare agencies, both international and more area focused.
	What do people think, and are there any suggestions on this and how it should be constructed?] 15:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

	:What would be more useful would be documentation of what "the problems caused by sex tourism" actually are. We're a bit sketchy on that.
	:A couple welfare agencies spam all the sex industry related articles with links to their programs. It really doesn't tell the reader much about ''sex tourism'', and I really don't need more self-promoters to argue with. / ] 15:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

	::Also (and this is a minor thing), it helps to avoid terms like "at the frontline in dealing with the problems" which fall under ], saying these programs are ''great, Great, GREAT!!'' without actually giving the reader any information. Concise, informative writing should be the goal. / ] 16:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

	overall, i think this is a good article with very little outrageous accusations. i am slightly concerned about wikipedia's living persons policy being in violation by putting in the belgian journalist's name. perhaps i just dont understand the policy that well but it seems to me that this one instance of sex tourism is not very notable and singles out one person in particular. also, i made the second half of the big apple sex tour paragraph its own paragraph since it seemed to be changing subjects. ] 02:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

	==More Countries and Cities==
	i'll have to come back later with citations to add the following locations but i am surprised some of these are missing from the list. i am in angeles, where we have lots of sex tourists, and often hear people discussing the following locations:
	:China (including but not limited to hong kong). very popular destination for koreans, taiwanese and japanese.
	:Cambodia, particularly Phnom Penh
	:Philippines. only a very small percentage go to angeles. most tourists, including sex tourists, go to manila or cebu as there is direct flights.
	:Vietnam. ] 05:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
	] (]) 04:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
	Within the US, the map shows the entire country as having prostitution illegal. In Nevada, it is legall and regulated.

	==Intro==
	Heya all.

	I have sat with the intro for awhile and the last paragraph doesn't work for me:

	I am going to nix the "in order of increasing potential criminality)" it's an interesting idea but is it neccesary in the intro and I don't know... it just feels off to me for some reason; and and the lower age of consent. I'd like to see a source for that, saying "sex tourists go for countries with a lower aoc."

	I also nixxed the "where legal prohibitions are weak or unenforced." Again it is an unnecsarry point for the intro- and is it really the motive to travel? I'd argue that the motive, for child sex tourists, is access to sex with children, plain and simple.

	Attractions for sex tourists can include reduced costs for services in the destination country, and (in order of increasing potential criminality):

	* prostitution, either legal or subject to indifferent law enforcement,
	* lower age of consent, or legal indifference to this consideration,
	* access to child prostitution where legal prohibitions are weak or unenforced.

	At this point, I will confess a very strong bias I have.... intros should be as short and simple as possible and only cover major points which will be elaborated later in the article.] 17:33, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

	:Looks good. I was okay with the bullet list (and maybe I introduced it, can't remember), but the parenthetical never worked for me. It seemed like the tourist planned his or her activities by first choosing a desired level of criminality, and then choosing activities accordingly. / ] 17:53, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

	== Latvia ==
	Many in Latvia believes, that there is sex tourism (destination). There even exist anti sex tourism campaign. Here is site: Throught in Latvia there realy isn't sex tourism ] 19:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

	Nongovernmental organization «Re!Action» in collaboration with advertising agency «Alfa Centrs» has launched a social campaign «STOP sex-terrorism!», which challenges the opinion that Rīga is a place for cheap debauchery with easily available sex services not only in dedicated places but also from the local girls at nightclubs, bars and other venues.

	==edit war over scandals==
	there seems to be someone trying to insert an unsupported claim into scandals and it is getting deleted (as it should be). this made me look again that the scandal section and i dont really see what the Philippe Servaty scandal has to do with the definition of sex tourism given here. clearly this man was not engaging in sex with prostitutes. i think either the definition at the top of the page needs to be updated or the scandal section deleted as irrelevant. ] 03:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

	: Agreed - I've deleted it. Sex tourism is essentially travelling to patronise prostitutes overseas; cheating women in any country by falsely promising them marriage should not come under this heading. ] 09:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

	==Removal of "Depictions in fiction and popular culture"==
	I disagree with the last editor's removal of this section. There is a reason why many Misplaced Pages entries have such sections: the way a subject is treated in novels, films etc. can often offer us levels of insight into it that a documentary cannot. I would like to see this section restored, but rather than simply revert the change, I'd like to see what others think first. ] 04:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

	:Thanks for taking this to the Talk page. is the deletion in question. In addition to snipping the entire ''Depictions in fiction and popular culture'' section, I also removed an advertisement that has been appended to the ''Academic study'' section. (This article attracts spammers.)

	:This article has problems which I won't go into just now. I don't think an '']'' section benefits this article. The movies and TV shows listed were not informative or insightful on the subject, and whether the ''South Park'' "Super-Adventure Club" episode is notably even ''about'' "sex tourism" is hardly worth nitpicking over.

	:''In popular culture'' sections are often a problem because they tend to be trivia lists comprising every time some editor saw the subject in a movie, TV show or video game. In my opinion, a good IPC section makes a point.
	:*Here's a favorite example: .
	:*Here's a terrible example:

	:The list I deleted didn't demonstrate anything, and wasn't informative or useful. No one searches for this article so they can find a good cartoon or movie about "sex tourism". If the reader is serious, we have a couple documentaries listed, but if they're just looking for erotica or sexual humor or a story about hookers, whatever, there exist more likely paths to such information than this article about the exploitation of geoeconomic inequalities.

	:The most recent addition was ''The Boatman'' ({{imdb title\|0159248\|Bangkero, Ang}}), a "bomba" (as more or less high-class sexploitation movies with a moral messages are called in the Philippines). And no matter how great or realistic or insightful it may be, it's still the director's vision of a story that needs to recoup in the entertainment market. Fiction has no firm allegiance to reality — it's not a reliable source, so to speak.

	:Come to think of it, none of the items listed had ] describing these programs as being ''about'' sex tourism. Their inclusion here is ]; we'd have to take the contributing editor's word that they were relevant. If I wanted a wikilegal reason to gong that section, there would be a good one. However, I'm trying to give practical reasons.

	:There exists many a movie about prostitution and the sex industry. Maybe someone should make a ] on those. It's just not pertinent here. / ]<small> ] ]</small> 06:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

	:: You make some good points, though I would just like to say that I find the ''Ang Bangkero'' review on IMDB very misleading. The review seems to suggest that it is primarily a piece of titillatory erotica, whereas if you actually see them, both this film and the somewhat similar but gay-oriented ''Macho Dancer'', though they take the form of melodrama which is characteristic in Philippine cinema, are concerned to make serious points using sexual exploitation (including sex tourism) as a metaphor for the general exploitation and powerlessness of the poor under the then Marcos regime. Certainly neither presents sex tourism in an attractive light - the prostitutes are essentially depicted as victims of an unjust economic system. ] 09:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

	:::This issue comes up in a lot of articles. I'm not doing this simply to exclude ''Ang Bangkero''; if anything, it's quite an improvement over the ''South Park'' reference.
	:::Misplaced Pages has no article for this film that I'm aware of. Do you feel up to writing one? For starters, you'd need enough references (beyond IMDB and filmfest calendars) to establish notability — check ] so you'll know what to include to prevent a speed deletion. If this film is believed to have influenced Filipino politics or something, that would be quite notable, however even a few awards would probably be sufficient. A link in that article back to ] (provided the film is really pertinent to that subject) would link from this article via "]", which is entirely appropriate. / ]<small> ] ]</small> 22:33, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

	==Adding Sri Lanka to the list of western white female sex tourist destinations==
	It would appear Sri Lanka is missing on the list of major sex tourist destinations. There are multiple reliable sources that would indicate its the case, ,,. ] <small>—Preceding ] was added at 00:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	==Female sex tourism destinations - Spain==
	I've lived on the coast of southern Spain for 4 years and have seen no evidence of this tourism trade (although there is a thriving trade in prostitutes for men), so a reference would be essential to keep this in, I'd say. ] (]) 04:14, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

	==] page==
	Hi, How do I improve the page I created on sex-tourism in the Carribean; I need to make it verifiable. Do I simply do this by saying that a specific author says? Thanks <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 04:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	== Differences in locations between those visited by male and female sex tourists ==
	All of this information needs references to reliable sources, and any explanation of the differences would need to avoid original research, but I may as well ask people here what they think the reasons for these discrepancies are. I'm really interested.--''']''' <sup>'']''</sup> <sub>''']'''</sub> 10:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

	==An overview section==
	I had created an overview section, which I thought was well balanced, and which I thought would provide the start of a summary of the issues involved with sex tourism, such as that sex tourism exists because of laws and enforcement (or the lack thereof) by the destination country. I was taken by surprise when the whole effort was unceremoniously reverted. I feel this article needs more than a statement that some countries are favoured by sex tourists - unless the background and circumstances of why that is are considered. The article is much too limited in its scope. Before I waste more time, I would appreciate some feedback.] (]) 11:42, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

	:The ''Overview'' section introduced in , appears entirely ], and is ] except for one off-topic general item about ]. If ] can be found stating these things have a specific effect on ''sex tourism'', that might be worth including, but current news about the general economics of ] is beyond the scope of this article.

	:This statement:<blockquote>Some destination countries have become '''' dependent on the revenue which tourists bring into their countries ...</blockquote>might be of interest, but it is unsourced, and it is not made clear that this applies in particular to this article's topic. It is also possible that the rest of that section might have been getting at something that I couldn't extract from the vague and prolix writing style; if that was going somewhere, please let us know.

	:Can we agree at least that the changes introduced above to the definition of ''sex tourism'' just made it more vague? / ]<small> ] ]</small> 12:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

	::I'll think about the overview section more, when I have more time. As for the definition, I think the proposed definition is better because it must be restricted to those tourists who travel for the sole or predominant purpose of sexual activity. For example, a couple on a honeymoon obviously do not qualify, nor do people out for a good time and finish up having a sexual relationship, nor presumably would it cover two tourists have casual sexual relations, etc.] (]) 01:31, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

	:::The definition you left would include both of the situations (honeymoons, casual affairs) you wish to exclude. Sex tourism could be more specifically characterized as tourism for enjoying another country's ], but the definition you proposed removed all mention of that. / ]<small> ] ]</small> 12:30, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

	::Oh, a further comment - the reference to the sex tourists coming from wealthier countries is a bit redundant because most tourists in fact come from wealthier countries. So, what political point is being made?] (]) 01:34, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

	:::Tourist-receiving countries are characterized as "economically underdeveloped" later in the article, and economic imbalances are emphasized in the U.N. materials quoted in this article, though the article itself does not emphasize this at all. Since some countries mentioned in this article (Netherlands being an obvious outlier) don't fit the "underdeveloped" description, the lede characterizes the tourist-sending countries instead.

	:::This can probably be better handled, or simply omitted from the lede since the article does not cover economics in detail (other than describing it as entirely beneficial in the ''Adult sex tourism'' section). However, simply saying that wealthy countries send more tourism in general is ], since the effect of poor countries becoming sex tourism destinations is a major concern. / ]<small> ] ]</small> 12:18, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

	==Sexual orientation==
	There ought to be additional information about the sexual orientation of sex tourists. The reason for this is that there is a fairly widespread urban legend that sex tourists are disproportionately of a homosexual orientaton. ] (]) 02:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

	== BLP concerns ==
	I have uploaded an image. This image was taken with the express purpose of being added to this article, with the full permission of the two gentlemen involved. ] (]) 12:40, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
	:Besides the fact that there are three people in that article, I'm afraid that there are personality issues involved. I have removed this image pending consensus that it does not represent a BLP concern. I will be raising the matter at ] for further evaluation. Until consensus is reached, it must not be restored. --] <sup>]</sup> 12:53, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

	== Added photo ==
	I added a photo for the lede. I think photos add a great deal to an article. The photo I added is from the Misplaced Pages cmmons web site, anmd was taken by Kay Chernush for the U.S. State Department. It is described by the photographer as "Prostitutes talk to potential customers on the street in Pattaya, Thailand."

	The appearance of the photo suggests that the prostitutes are from Thailand, and the potential customers are foreigners.

	We do not know absolutely for certain that this is specifically "sex tourism". Like many other photos on Misplaced Pages, this photo represents the topic well. It is shows people who have gone to Thailand obviously for the purpose of finding a prostitute. This is imagery that serves the topic of the article very well, in my opinion. ] (]) 15:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

	: Regards, Atom. My only concern was that it implied that the guys were sex tourists, which we do not know, and probably were not. But I agree with you as to the importance of including photos, and see the link of the US State Department. Nothing personal--I respect your judgment and contribution. ] (]) 17:52, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

	::Further rounds of attempts to remove this photo. It's not clear what the objection is. It's certainly possible that the men aren't sex tourists or even that the women aren't prostitutes, despite the caption. The whole thing could have been a staged photo, maybe not even taken in Thailand at all! Obviously this sort of reasoning would lead to the removal of most pictures on Misplaced Pages if applied. It's a good picture, well sourced, and adds to the article. ] (]) 07:53, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

	:::Good picture? Well sourced? Adds to the article? This is an encyclopedia, not a supermarket tabloid. WP photos must illustrate the subject of the article. That photo did not. ] (]) 06:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

	:::: "Images must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly related to the article's topic. see ]. ] (]) 07:16, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

	:::::The issue is clearly expalined above. Just insisting "no" is not a valid argument, and in this case suggests a significant POV slant on your part. ] (]) 04:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

	::::::You need to read WP guidelines. Images MUST be relevant. This image is clearly NOT. ] (]) 16:36, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

	:::::::I'm well aware of WP guidelines. This image is directly relevant to the topic of the article. Continuing to push for it's removal will likely lead to administrative action. ] (]) 16:39, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

	::::::::Hi. I am also of the opinion that it is potentially libelous to depict people with an implicit assertion that they are sex tourists. Even if they have been approached by prostitutes, that does not make then sex tourists (I have been approached by prostitutes myself in Thailand, and have most certainly never been a sex tourist). ] (]) 06:37, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

	Again, there is no reason to doubt the veracity of this photo, and placing it on this page in no way violates any WP policy, any more than it would to say depicts a ]. The opinions expressed above are complete POV. ] (]) 06:38, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

	:This is really a classic example of #8 on ] of recurring issues in the editing of sex work-related articles. And while my attempts to engage in discussion over a long period of time were ignored, and a constructive edit is repeatedly reverted by a ], I'm the one being accused of edit warring and failure to assume good faith. If you're not willing to engage in a reasonable discussion and respect Misplaced Pages guidelines, especially ] than I may have to take other steps. I really don't want to do that, but the first step is for the other editors to start engaging in reasonable discussion. ] (]) 07:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
	::Is the objection primarily to the caption? We can fix that. ] (]) 07:44, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

	Unless we have it on good authority that these men are prostitute's clients, including a photo like that in this article is probably defamatory, whatever caption we give it. ] (]) 09:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
	:It's being used illegally as it isn't attributed to the photographer, see the website.It's also a BLP violation as we don't have the permission of the subjects pictured in the photo. See ] ] (]) 09:21, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
	::Please try to engage in discussion instead of just repeating the same claims. "Unless we have it on good authority that these men are prostitute's clients, including a photo like that in this article is probably defamatory"? No, absolutely not, unless we decide sex work is inherently shameful, in violation of ]. At any rate the faces are blurred and unrecognizable.
	::The photo is not the same as the one you linked to the discussion for. It is used with the photographer's permission and is attributed on the file page. Please take a look. Should the attribution be on the article page as well? I've never seen that on any photo on any article but if that's the correct format than please fix it.
	::There is no compelling reason to remove this photo. If you have one I'd be glad to hear it and have a reasonable discussion. So far none of the claims made have had any merit. If we are going to start removing photos based on the idea that we can't really know what's depicted, then we must ultimately remove nearly all photos. As in the baker example given above, we have no way of knowing that the man pictured is really a baker. He's just dressed like one, in a kitchen, engaged in activity that appears to be baking. For all we know, he might consider being called a baker defamatory. Should that picture then be removed? If we were to accept the argument given here, then yes. ] (]) 09:58, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
	:::The discussion I linked to is relevant to my point that we do not have permission of the subjects in the photo. As for attribution, you should have read the source website, but that could be fixed. What can't be fixed is the lack of permission from the subjects. ] (]) 10:21, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
	::::Do we have the permission of the man in the baker photo? ] (]) 10:25, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
	::::As for attribution, from the website: "The Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (G/TIP) assigned a U.S. photographer, Kay Chernush, to take these photos in India, Thailand, Italy, and Hong Kong in 2005. They are available for use with the credit: "Kay Chernush for the U.S. State Department." ] (]) 10:29, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
	:::::Clearly we can use our common sense to accept that it is a fair bit less controversial to be shown to the world as a baker than portrayed in a sex worker article. As the inclusion of this photo is already contentious and disputed, I also support keeping it out of the article. ] (]) 16:37, 17 July 2010 (UTC) ] (]) 16:37, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
	:::::I think we can accept that a photo of Seaman Mark Andaya on a US Department of Defense site is there with his knowledge and is not at all comparable to the photo in question. ] (]) 16:46, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

	I have to agree with those who are critical of inclusion of this photo. The sex workers in the photo are shown from behind and have a certain amount of anonymity, but the two would-be customers are clearly identifiable if they were to be recognized by someone in their social circle. The context of the article strongly implies they are "sex tourists". I don't think one needs to be anti-sex industry at all to see the fact that being either a sex worker or sex tourist is something that is socially stigmatized, and depending on their country of origin, might actually be illegal. Hence, splashing their faces all over the internet raises serious privacy issues. Clearly, the US State Dept doesn't feel any qualms about doing this, but we have our own editorial standards.

	If this is an image that has already been widely circulated, particularly in the press, then maybe, depending on how the men were already characterized in the press articles. However, barring that, I'm against using those images here, especially if its for no greater purpose than "the article should have an image". ] (]) 17:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

	I have had another look at the photo in question, the men's faces are NOT blurred, they are easily recognisable in a fairly high quality photo. ] (]) 18:36, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
	:You must be looking at a different photo, the men's faces are completely unrecognizable smudges at any level of zoom. A quick look will confirm that.
	:Since I'm trying not to reinforce the ] on wikipedia, and strongly support the policy on ], I can't agree with biased statements like "it is a fair bit less controversial to be shown to the world as a baker than portrayed in a sex worker article" or "we can accept that a photo of Seaman Mark Andaya on a US Department of Defense site is there with his knowledge and is not at all comparable to the photo in question". But at any rate the discussion on the photo itself is occurring ], making further discussion here moot. ] (]) 05:46, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

	== Many broken links ==
	The Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting—a major source for this article—has moved its website from pulitzercenter.typepad.com to pulitzercenter.org and also renamed many of its links. One or two I could do by hand but this is a little too much for me to fix. To get all(?) the current links, go to the Pulitzer Center website and search for "sexual exploitation", or click http://pulitzercenter.org/search/apachesolr_search/sexual%20exploitation directly. There are a couple of pages of results. Thanks. --] (]) 04:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

	: Done. ] 17:54, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

	== Shouldn't Nevada be marked as legal prostitution? Too specific to identify a state? ==
	a <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:12, 1 February 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	:In Nevada, a woman who attempts self-employment as an "independent escort" and accepts sex for money is still hunted as a criminal, same as the other 49 states. All that has been done is to exclude a number of specific houses of prostitution in rural counties (the list quite deliberately excludes Las Vegas) from what is otherwise a sweeping criminal prohibition. It's the sort of law only a mafioso could love, and then only if he owned one of the establishments licensed to keep operating while everything else is shut down... certainly no substitute for legalisation by a long shot. ] (]) 18:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

	== Catching and punishing innocent people ==
	'General "buyers" are prone to repeatedly engage in the “sex market” because they aren't being caught nor are they being punished.'
	And potato eaters are prone to repeatedly engage in the “potato market” because they aren't being caught nor are they being punished.
	Is there a reason they should get caught and/or punished? This whole article stinks like political bias. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:46, 23 November 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	==Proposed Changes==		==Proposed Changes==

Revision as of 16:35, 5 October 2019

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sex tourism article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3

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.

Travel and Tourism High‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Travel and TourismWikipedia:WikiProject Travel and TourismTemplate:WikiProject Travel and TourismTourism
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Sexology and sexuality: Sex work Mid‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Sex work task force (assessed as High-importance).

Template:WAP assignment

Notice: KyndFellow is banned from editing this article.

The user specified has been indefinitely banned by the Arbitration committee from editing this article. The user is also banned from discussing or proposing changes on this talk page.

_{Posted by Srikeit 17:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC) for the Arbitration committee. See Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism.}

Archives
2006: early \| Knodel1 \| Knodel2 \| Arbitration
2007:

Proposed Changes

Hello, I am a student at Rice University and am planning to update and expand this article as part of a class project. I think this article is highly relevant and needs significant updates and expansion. I would like to first expand the general information section to include a discussion of motivations for sex tourism, as Pasi Nurminen suggested in her comment, focusing on differing policies surrounding prostitution and social norms in sending and receiving countries. I would also include more information on how sex tourism operates, and the kind of revenue it generates in destination countries. I also plan to add a "cultural attitudes" section to discuss social stigmas surrounding sexuality and prostitution, and how this motivates or influences sex tourism. I plan to expand the "oppositions" section to include a more thorough discussion of this issue's connection to human rights and capabilities. Finally, I would like to add a section for "economic and policy implications," outlining the effects of sex tourism on national economies and the resulting influence on policies. This section will also include academic research about different possible approaches to the issue of sex tourism.

I am planning to delete the sections "prostitution laws across the globe," "documentaries," and "academic studies." I will incorporate relevant information from these sections into other areas of the article. I hope this will make this article more thorough, informative, and well-organized. Please comment with any recommendations or possible other changes you think I should make. I would appreciate feedback on how best to proceed with this article. Thank you! LHall19 (talk) 02:15, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

LHall19, I moved your section down, per Misplaced Pages:Talk page guidelines#Layout. Flyer22 (talk) 02:23, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

These additions contribute much to the overall article, particularly those on "Opposition to sex tourism" and "Cultural Attitudes" which provide various points of view and considerations from both sides of the debate. If more statistics or hard numbers could be provided in the "Economic and Policy Implications" section, this would make the studies cited, which offer theoretical support more tangible. Consider also adding subsections in "General" to break down the information and make it more readable. Great work!Katcai02 (talk) 00:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Problems with the maps

The map of North America indicates that prostitution is illegal in Iceland (red colour). The map of Europe indicates that sale of sexual services is legal, but the purchase is illegal, much like in Sweden or Norway (orange colour). Can someone verify which is accurate?

Also, Canada's legislation changed in 2014 and is now similar to that of Sweden, making the appropriate color orange. Could someone change this? -24.222.249.98 (talk) 13:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

What are the stated reasons for why people in developed countries should care about overseas sex tourism by their country's citizens?

I'm just curious, what are the reasons given by reliable sources for why people in developed countries should want to prosecute their country's citizens who engage in sex tourism overseas? What is the national interest in this? Has anyone ever written an article, or given a speech, explaining this?

For example, have developed countries signed on to international treaties against sex tourism because they need other countries' assistance in stopping sex tourism within their own borders? Thanks. Merdoza (talk) 21:06, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Extreme bias against child-adult sexual relations via use of weasel wording, derogatory language and American-only political viewpoints

Misplaced Pages's goal it create objective articles that are readable by individuals anywhere on Earth. Therefore, the view points listed in this article should reflect global views and not just western positions. Specifically, calling every adult-child sexual relation "child abuse" is to represent a view point that is controversial and non-standard in countries in south east asia, central america, Mexico and some countries in Africa. There is no point to editorialize and use heavily biased terms when we can describe this behavior in a politically neutral way. One example is saying "Brazil has the WORST child abuse rate" when we can say "Brazil has the highest rate of child prostitution". I understand adult-child relationships are a controversial subject and a very emotional one in many parts of the United States but this article must be kept politically neutral and reflect an objective world view. Boilingorangejuice (talk) 20:03, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Reverted, per what the literature states and per you adding unsourced material and going by your personal feelings on what is appropriate language for cases like this. And as for this, like I noted, "Sex with children is child abuse, depending on how 'child' is defined."

Pinging Herostratus and Legitimus for the opinions on this matter. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:20, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

And what a "coincidental" edit I just reverted at the Child abuse article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 09:40, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Can you please respond to my argument point for point instead of engaging in ad hominem attacks on me personally. Specifically defend your reversion of the subjective and emotional "Brazil is considered to have the worst child sex trafficking record, after Thailand" instead of the much more objective "Brazil is considered to have the highest rate child sex trafficking record, after Thailand". Reverting statements to less NPOV is in serious violation of WP policy. All my edits on this page were made to make this page more objective. By reverting my edits you have made this page more emotional and subjective.

Also looking for feedback from other editors on this issue of compromised objectivity for the sex tourism article.Boilingorangejuice (talk) 22:41, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Your comments, including your "22:41, 23 May 2016 (UTC)" comment, are not valid. That is my response. I already noted why I reverted you. And your understanding of the WP:NPOV policy is inaccurate. Being neutral on Misplaced Pages does not mean what being neutral means in common discourse. Just about all of your edits to any Misplaced Pages page concerning child sexual abuse are WP:Advocacy edits (we both know what type of advocacy), and you well know that I won't let them stand. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:11, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Sex tourism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:05, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Motivation section

I think it's lacking a very clear and obvious motivation. I can only speak for myself but I travelled to where prostitution was legal to have sex because I was a virgin and unable to get a girlfriend (I'm on autism spectrum). I would think failing at relationships would be a common motivation so I'm surprised to see this not mentioned. Xanikk999 (talk)

Why was the positive aspects section removed?

I noticed it was removed a few months ago without any discussion taking place. Only the criticism section remains. Per WP:BOLD policy if nobody objects I will add it back in a few days. Xanikk999 (talk)

It's probably worth pinging @Barefoothannah: who added the section and @Roxy the dog: who deleted it. - Polly Tunnel (talk) 16:56, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

or, you could take a look yourself, and perhaps decide for yourself. I don't actually remember doing this, but it fixed the broken formatting and removed a significant chunk of OR. I'd probably do the same again. Hannah is unlikely to appear BTW. -Roxy the dog. bark 17:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

I re-added the parts that were sourced from the postive aspects section. I don't see any OR but there was one section that had no citations so I left it out. Xanikk999 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:50, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

There were still issues. I'll take a closer look at this at a later date. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:00, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

More removed here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:24, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sex tourism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:29, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Overview material

TantraYum, regarding this and this, whether it's used as the lead paragraph or not, it belongs in the Overview section...since the Overview section is meant to summarize aspects of the article that are to come. So it is completely unnecessary to have a "Legal issues" section there. MOS:Paragraph states that subheadings are usually not needed for a little bit of material. Plus, other aspects of the article deal with legal issues. But I'm not going to strongly oppose the new section. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:51, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for reaching out.

Not sure how to proceed..... the whole article, other then the intro feels pretty messy and disorganized... and has bigger issues then where to put this one sentence.... this is just my attempt at a broad re-organization of the article.

As it was (and is now) the overview doesn't feel like an overview. It lists destinations and then this one sentence about legality. I think the first sentence in the demographics section would fit better in the overview and move the more detailed info in overview down to demographics. What do you think?TantraYum (talk) 22:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

It is a paragraph rather than a sentence. But, yeah, the article needs work. It is sometimes worked on by WP:Student editors, which can cause problems. As for the Overview section, I'm not fond of overview sections since the lead should be the overview. If any material is better relocated to another section, we can do that and get rid of the Overview section. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:56, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

That was my thought exactly- yes lets get rid of overview. TantraYum (talk) 01:27, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Almost 1/3 of this article is not about sex tourism

As I look over this article, a solid chunk of it is about prostitution and child sex tourism. I propose moving the material about prostitution to the prostitution article and moving the information about chlld sex tourism to the child sex tourism article or the child sex tourism portion of this article. Thoughts? TantraYum (talk)` —Preceding undated comment added 22:50, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Can we talk about that map of the USA?

The North America map has a grey area representing the State of Nevada, where prostitution laws vary by country. That being said, the grey shape on the red US outline looks nothing like Nevada. Can someone correct that please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.203.188 (talk) 18:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Contributing

Hi! I would like to contribute information to this page. --Lifeisgood20 (talk) 19:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Gay Sex Tourism

Hi, I think this page is missing a section on gay sex tourism so I am currently working on it. Lifeisgood20 (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Expanding on Opposition

Hi, I feel the Opposition section could use some expansion. I added violence as a factor for sex workers as well as HIV statistics amongst sex workers. Lifeisgood20 (talk) 06:34, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

@Lifeisgood20: Hi, I didn't see any statistics about HIV, just an out of date assertions that " risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases is high among persons who exchange sex for money or non-monetary items". This was true 20 or 30 years ago in many third world countries, but thanks to education, condom campaigns, access to healthcare etc, UNAIDS figures suggest HIV prevalence amongst sex workers is no longer significantly higher than the general population in most countries.

Whilst there is violence against sex workers, I haven't seen any evidence that sex tourism increases this. Figures for the US, which is generally not a destination for sex tourism, are irrelevant here. --John B123 (talk) 17:15, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

@John B123: Hi, thank you for your feedback. I am curious, if my expansion on HIV was better supported with more up to date material, would you find that its place in opposition of sex tourism, should revert? As far as violence amongst sex workers, I find that its prevalence should remain in this catagory because, even though sex tourism isn't a "legal" market in the US as it may be in other countries, there is still a large underground sex tourism market, which should not go ignored. Therefore we also shouldn't ignore the violence that these sex workers (legal or not) endure. What are your thoughts? Lifeisgood20 (talk) 02:40, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

@Lifeisgood20: Hi, objections such as health risks, violence, stigmatism etc are more general objections against prostitution rather than specifically objections to sex tourism so would be more appropriately addressed in the prostitution article, unless of course there is evidence that sex tourists behave more violently or take more health risks.

There is also the problem of over-generalisation. Iceland, surprisingly, has become a sex tourism destination for men from Northern Europe in recent years. Both HIV and violence against women are extremely low in the country. Compare that with Bahrain, a middle east destination for sex tourism, where generally women are second class citizens and prostitution carries harsh sentences, violence is likely to be high because there is little risk of the victim reporting it. In sub-Saharan Africa, HIV prevalence rates are high amongst the general population, so compared to Iceland sex tourism to say Kenya carries higher risks.

Additionally, grouping sex workers together can also be misleading. Using your figures for the US, the murder rate quoted will be far less for legal sex workers in Nevada, but far higher for street workers in inner cities who prostitute themselves to feed their drug habits.

I do think there should be included in the article, although not as opposition as it is historical, the spread of HIV in the 1980s and 1990s through sex tourism. Prior to understanding HIV, it's causes, prevention and care, particularly by the general public, sex tourism did play a part in the spread of HIV. Sex tourism to sub-Saharan Africa, especially Kenya, and gay sex tourism to Haiti are the usually quoted examples. --John B123 (talk) 17:02, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Categories: