This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Child sex tourism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Pedophilia Article Watch ( defunct) | ||||
|
It is requested that a global map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2021 and 9 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jimenabisso2.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 17:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Who exactly are considered children, atleast when it comes to cst, people 0-18 or people 0-12 or somewhere within -( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 16:39, 27 December 2008 (UTC))
I think globally, children are defined as pre-pubescent aka lacking developed gender specific sex organs. So I would say ages 1-11 would be children. Almost all sex work that happens in Thai land is above this age so I think the article needs to be renamed to pubescent sex work and make another article for pre-pubescent sex work. Right now the article just smears all pubescent sex work while hinting at pre-pubescent. - 24.239.124.140 ( talk) 22:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Just in reading the first paragraph of this article I see that the WP:NPOV is not being observed here. Case and point: CST is a shameful assault on the dignity of children and a form of violent child abuse and violence. Language such as that has no place on Wikipedia. Again in the Global Response section: Many governments have taken commendable steps to combat child sex tourism. Fairness of tone is fundamental in any encyclopedia. Tennekis (rant) 21:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
-this article has quite a bit of POV, mainly it in calling this child abuse, the idea that having sex with children(the article doesnt specify what age children are, 0-13 or 0-18 so for now i saw 0-18) is abuse is an opinion and POV, i say the first paragraph should be changed to: Child sex tourism (CST), unrelated to Adult sex tourism (AST) is travel to engage in commercial sexual acts with minors. In an effort to counteract CST, many governments have enacted laws to allow prosecution of its citizens, for sexual acts with minors in a foreign country that may not be illegal in that country, which are illegal in theirs . It is a multi-billion-dollar industry believed to involve as many as 2 million minors.[1] I know my re-write is a bit rough around the edges so im not gonna add it yet, please someone comment on what you think. ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 13:54, 12 December 2008 (UTC))
-if i don't get a response in 2-3 days im changing it, i like to reach consensus but it seems no one visits this page. ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 07:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC))
-then we can just get a new source that doesn't contain bias. ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 05:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC))
-anyway the source does state "Child sex tourism (CST) involves people who travel from their own countries to another and engage in commercial sex acts with children." now we could state that some countries including the US consider cst to be child abuse. ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 05:19, 19 December 2008 (UTC))
-how about this - Child sex tourism (CST), unrelated to Adult sex tourism (AST) is travel to engage in commercial sexual acts with minors. Many countries consider CST to be child abuse and have enacted laws to prosecute their citizens for having commercial sex with minors in foreign countries. CST is a multi-billion-dollar industry believed to involve as many as 2 million minors. - that there would abide by the source ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 05:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC))
- well i can see a edit war a stirring, so to prevent that first i would like to ask why this idea for the first line is not better than the current "Child sex tourism (CST), unrelated to Adult sex tourism (AST) is travel to engage in commercial sex acts with minors." which is a rewrite of what the source says "Child sex tourism (CST) involves people who travel from their own countries to another and engage in commercial sex acts with children." thankyou ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 03:49, 22 December 2008 (UTC))
I agree that there are serious issues with POV in this article. Calling the pubescent sex worker business "Child sex abuse" is slander. Weasel words like "exploited children" and "victimizes" litter this article. Almost all of the 13,14,15, 16 year olds that engage in sex work do so in a consensual manner for extra money. This article screams America-witch hunt. Even the DSM5 differentiates between pre-pubescent sex and post-pubescent sex.
This article needs serious POV clean up and is an embarrassment to wikipedia. Right now it reads like a page out of the Bible. - 24.239.124.140 ( talk) 22:38, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
This is the edit in question. On most other articles, this would be accepted as a rational part of the POV check. I looked through it and could not find any edits that were objectionable from the WP:NPOV standpont. Indeed, one was a minor edit. And no article dealing with a type of activity so diverse in age, culture, history and specific activity should attribute victimhood unquestionably to all individuals who fall under its gaze. This is one of the main reasons why CS Tourism and a host of similar articles seriously fail NPOV as weasel-worded proponents of a rather dogmatic "pro child" psychiatric/healthcare POV. forestPIG (grunt) 14:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Just saw the external links, and the whole host of them link to advocacy pages and campaigns. This is an article about an issue not a campaign. Wikipedia says "Wikipedia's purpose is not to include a comprehensive list of external links related to each topic." With this in mind "affiliated agencies" are out-of-scope.
'The Code' is also a subjective opinion and an institution sanction (ie- the un, or whom ever polices this sort of thing)
Finally, 'Virtual Worlds' is a charity working for safety. They either ought to have their own wikipage or do their own marketing/recruiting elsewhere. The guidelines also say "Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links, or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links." Lihaas ( talk) 18:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
There ought to be additional information about the sexual orientation of child sex tourists. The reason for this is that there is a fairly widespread urban legend that child sex tourists are disproportionately of a homosexual orientaton. [1] ADM ( talk) 02:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
The 02:55, 2 April 2010 SmackBot version of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia.-- Wing ( talk) 14:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Last sentence, "The Protect Act shifted the burden, making predators liable for the act itself" is contradictory. In legal terms if the burden shifted then the presumption is of the intent to travel abroad for sexual predation on children. Burden shifting does not create liability, but instead changes the presumption of some fact (presumed true versus presumed untrue), but allowing evidence to the opposite. Either the Protect Act shifted the burden, or it was the organic act that initially created liability, it cannot do both.
Nowhere in the act does it say "burden" "shift" "persuasion". Of the 12 times the act mentions "evidence" the one time it deals with child sex tourism it states "it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant reasonably believed that the person with whom the defendant engaged in the commercial sex act had attained the age of 18 years." It doesn't seem that the act shifted the burden of proof for the element of travel with intent. 05:30, 24 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DespicableJay ( talk • contribs)
Can i put some links to Youtube videos which i think are interesting for this issue? Peter Moulton ( talk) 21:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
I didn't know countries can set laws that apply in areas not under their jurisdiction, why wouldn't it fall under Cambodian law instead? And are there any other laws besides this that can apply abroad? The snare ( talk) 14:19, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, I wonder also if the people from the piratebay came to the US, they would be liable for what they have done. They are not US citizens though The snare ( talk) 02:32, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
This article states/defines the illegal fact as "commercial sex act as any sex act, on account of which anything of value is given to or received by a person under the age of 18..."
Does that mean that a sex act involving a minor in which the payment is made to the pimp, NOT to the child, is legal?? ( Dumarest ( talk) 01:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC))
Our article claims that "the majority of the exploited children are under 12 years old." To support this, we cite an opinion piece from ABC that says:
The article's claim only pertains to pedophiles. Pedophilia is, by definition, a sexual preference for prepubescent children, i.e., mainly those under 12. As our own article states, most child sex tourists are not pedophiles.
Next we claim that child sex tourism "victimizes approximately 2 million children around the world", citing a series of non-academic sources which provide no explanation for this obviously wrong estimate. Only one cites its own source: the UNICEF fact sheet, which actually puts the figure at "as many as 1.2 million children" (again with no empirical basis). A statistic that serious should have a stronger source than tabloids and charity 'fact' sheets. KateTheSpy ( talk) 12:17, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Lies, Damn Lies and Thai Statistics. I am extremely sceptical about the figure of 40% of Thai prostitutes are children (under 18). Not so long ago, one NGO came up with a figure of 2,800,000 Thai women were involved in prostitution. This represents about 1 in 12 of all Thai females. Other figures have been mentioned, but the general consensus is that the real figure is in the region of 200,000. My scepticism arises from the question, that if you do not know how many prostitutes there are, how can you tell what percentage are children. Pattays has a reputed 50,000 prostitutes, yet the local newspapers typically only report a handful of cases of child sex tourists arrests monthly. The economics are such, that in order to sustain 20,000 child prostitutes, there needs to be in the region of 6000+ Child Sex Tourists at any given time. If that were the case, you would expect many more arrests. My suspicion is that the true figure is probably nearer 5%, the majority of whom are working in Thai brothels servicing Thai men and have little or no contact with Sex Tourists. 86.44.145.223 ( talk) 13:30, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm concerned with the information in the section concerning regional government actions. A lot of the information given concerns governments that have taken no action. All Caribbean countries mentioned, for example, were described as having taken no action or minimal action. Information in this section also indicates areas within certain countries where CST is especially problematic (i.e., available).
I'm in favor of the free flow of information, but at least for the sake of editorial consistency, I think the section discussing government actions should only refer to governments which have, in fact, taken action. Mentioning a nation such as Trinidad and Tobago, only to say that "there were no reports nor prosecutions on child sex tourism," implies there was a reason to list that nation other than to describe its government's actions concerning CST. I'm sorry, but this section reads like a guide on which countries to visit for CST without getting hassled by the local government.
For this reason, I think it's important to remove all listings in this section that indicate only a lack of governmental action. If it's important to include this information, then it should be included in a separate section with a title indicating the inaction (or inadequate action) of the governments listed, and there should be a consensus here giving a good reason for having such a section. Dcs002 ( talk) 04:57, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
In the section "International law enforcement activities" the letters RTP are used in the phrase:
In both cases, local ICE agents work with their RTP counterparts to monitor the suspects’ movements while in Thailand
Yet there is no explanation as to the meaning of this acronym.
Aethalides ( talk) 06:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
This part seems ambiguous:
Under the PROTECT Act of April 2003, it is a federal crime, prosecutable in the United States, for a U.S. citizen or permanent resident alien, to engage in illicit sexual conduct in a foreign country with a person under the age of 18, whether or not the U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident alien intended to engage in such illicit sexual conduct prior to going abroad. For purposes of the PROTECT Act, illicit sexual conduct includes any commercial sex act in a foreign country with a person under the age of 18.
If any sex act is unlawful, then it should just say "any sex act".
If it is ONLY a "commercial" sex act that is unlawful, then "includes" should be removed and replaced with "is" - 75.71.20.179 ( talk) 04:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Flyer22 keeps reverting this to make a statement that suggests child pornography possession is illegal in Argentina. I have many sources for this. I used one from the United States Government https://www.dol.gov/ilab/reports/child-labor/findings/2012TDA/argentina.pdf
"The Penal Code criminalizes facilitating, promoting, or benefitting economically from child prostitution.(36, 37) The Penal Code also prohibits the use of children in pornographic shows and in the production, publication, and distribution of child pornography. However, it does not criminalize the possession of child pornography for personal use." Boilingorangejuice ( talk) 22:18, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Child 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:49, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Child 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Child 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:39, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Child 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:08, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Child 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:37, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
The format of the paragraphs in this chapter is not coherent and consistent. For some reason only in SK paragraph it is talking about the policing in extrajudicial regions, not the tourists WITHIN the country. If that is the case, there should be paragraphs for the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, and France too, as the majority of child sex tourists are coming form those countries.
If people wanna understands more about which countries sends the most child sex tourists and extrajudicial policing of each countries, there should be independent sections. - strawburry17c ( talk) Edited at 6:29 PM, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
First of all, the source is not directly linked to the reports so i think it's better to change it to this.
https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/142982.pdf
It says, "According to the The Trafficking in Persons Report of 2010 reports that the sale of virgin girls continues to be a serious problem in Cambodia, and that a significant number of Asian and other foreign men, primarily South Korean, travel to Cambodia to engage in child sex tourism."
However, if you look at the original quote, it says like this. "The sale of virgin girls continues to be a serious problem in Cambodia, with foreign (mostly Asian) and Cambodian men paying up to $4,000 to have sex with virgins. A significant number of Asian and other foreign men travel to Cambodia to engage in child sex tourism."
There isn't any information or indication in the report that South Korean is the major child sex traveler.
According to Protection Project (2007), United States citizens appear to be frequent perpetrators of child sex tourism in Cambodia, constituting nearly 27 percent of offenders arrested in this country for child sex tourism offenses, as based on available data. - strawburry17c ( talk) 20:14, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200510/kt2005103118273511990.htm the original source stopdemand.org was entirely dependent on while making its page doesn't even exist, which significantly reducing the credibility of the entire sources.
There are more reliable explanation based on vastly more credible sources (i.e, Trafficking in Persons report 2019) available so i think it's enough. - strawburry17c ( talk) 16:40, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Child sex tourism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Pedophilia Article Watch ( defunct) | ||||
|
It is requested that a global map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2021 and 9 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jimenabisso2.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 17:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Who exactly are considered children, atleast when it comes to cst, people 0-18 or people 0-12 or somewhere within -( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 16:39, 27 December 2008 (UTC))
I think globally, children are defined as pre-pubescent aka lacking developed gender specific sex organs. So I would say ages 1-11 would be children. Almost all sex work that happens in Thai land is above this age so I think the article needs to be renamed to pubescent sex work and make another article for pre-pubescent sex work. Right now the article just smears all pubescent sex work while hinting at pre-pubescent. - 24.239.124.140 ( talk) 22:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Just in reading the first paragraph of this article I see that the WP:NPOV is not being observed here. Case and point: CST is a shameful assault on the dignity of children and a form of violent child abuse and violence. Language such as that has no place on Wikipedia. Again in the Global Response section: Many governments have taken commendable steps to combat child sex tourism. Fairness of tone is fundamental in any encyclopedia. Tennekis (rant) 21:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
-this article has quite a bit of POV, mainly it in calling this child abuse, the idea that having sex with children(the article doesnt specify what age children are, 0-13 or 0-18 so for now i saw 0-18) is abuse is an opinion and POV, i say the first paragraph should be changed to: Child sex tourism (CST), unrelated to Adult sex tourism (AST) is travel to engage in commercial sexual acts with minors. In an effort to counteract CST, many governments have enacted laws to allow prosecution of its citizens, for sexual acts with minors in a foreign country that may not be illegal in that country, which are illegal in theirs . It is a multi-billion-dollar industry believed to involve as many as 2 million minors.[1] I know my re-write is a bit rough around the edges so im not gonna add it yet, please someone comment on what you think. ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 13:54, 12 December 2008 (UTC))
-if i don't get a response in 2-3 days im changing it, i like to reach consensus but it seems no one visits this page. ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 07:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC))
-then we can just get a new source that doesn't contain bias. ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 05:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC))
-anyway the source does state "Child sex tourism (CST) involves people who travel from their own countries to another and engage in commercial sex acts with children." now we could state that some countries including the US consider cst to be child abuse. ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 05:19, 19 December 2008 (UTC))
-how about this - Child sex tourism (CST), unrelated to Adult sex tourism (AST) is travel to engage in commercial sexual acts with minors. Many countries consider CST to be child abuse and have enacted laws to prosecute their citizens for having commercial sex with minors in foreign countries. CST is a multi-billion-dollar industry believed to involve as many as 2 million minors. - that there would abide by the source ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 05:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC))
- well i can see a edit war a stirring, so to prevent that first i would like to ask why this idea for the first line is not better than the current "Child sex tourism (CST), unrelated to Adult sex tourism (AST) is travel to engage in commercial sex acts with minors." which is a rewrite of what the source says "Child sex tourism (CST) involves people who travel from their own countries to another and engage in commercial sex acts with children." thankyou ( DrakeLuvenstein ( talk) 03:49, 22 December 2008 (UTC))
I agree that there are serious issues with POV in this article. Calling the pubescent sex worker business "Child sex abuse" is slander. Weasel words like "exploited children" and "victimizes" litter this article. Almost all of the 13,14,15, 16 year olds that engage in sex work do so in a consensual manner for extra money. This article screams America-witch hunt. Even the DSM5 differentiates between pre-pubescent sex and post-pubescent sex.
This article needs serious POV clean up and is an embarrassment to wikipedia. Right now it reads like a page out of the Bible. - 24.239.124.140 ( talk) 22:38, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
This is the edit in question. On most other articles, this would be accepted as a rational part of the POV check. I looked through it and could not find any edits that were objectionable from the WP:NPOV standpont. Indeed, one was a minor edit. And no article dealing with a type of activity so diverse in age, culture, history and specific activity should attribute victimhood unquestionably to all individuals who fall under its gaze. This is one of the main reasons why CS Tourism and a host of similar articles seriously fail NPOV as weasel-worded proponents of a rather dogmatic "pro child" psychiatric/healthcare POV. forestPIG (grunt) 14:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Just saw the external links, and the whole host of them link to advocacy pages and campaigns. This is an article about an issue not a campaign. Wikipedia says "Wikipedia's purpose is not to include a comprehensive list of external links related to each topic." With this in mind "affiliated agencies" are out-of-scope.
'The Code' is also a subjective opinion and an institution sanction (ie- the un, or whom ever polices this sort of thing)
Finally, 'Virtual Worlds' is a charity working for safety. They either ought to have their own wikipage or do their own marketing/recruiting elsewhere. The guidelines also say "Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links, or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links." Lihaas ( talk) 18:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
There ought to be additional information about the sexual orientation of child sex tourists. The reason for this is that there is a fairly widespread urban legend that child sex tourists are disproportionately of a homosexual orientaton. [1] ADM ( talk) 02:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
The 02:55, 2 April 2010 SmackBot version of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia.-- Wing ( talk) 14:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Last sentence, "The Protect Act shifted the burden, making predators liable for the act itself" is contradictory. In legal terms if the burden shifted then the presumption is of the intent to travel abroad for sexual predation on children. Burden shifting does not create liability, but instead changes the presumption of some fact (presumed true versus presumed untrue), but allowing evidence to the opposite. Either the Protect Act shifted the burden, or it was the organic act that initially created liability, it cannot do both.
Nowhere in the act does it say "burden" "shift" "persuasion". Of the 12 times the act mentions "evidence" the one time it deals with child sex tourism it states "it is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant reasonably believed that the person with whom the defendant engaged in the commercial sex act had attained the age of 18 years." It doesn't seem that the act shifted the burden of proof for the element of travel with intent. 05:30, 24 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DespicableJay ( talk • contribs)
Can i put some links to Youtube videos which i think are interesting for this issue? Peter Moulton ( talk) 21:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
I didn't know countries can set laws that apply in areas not under their jurisdiction, why wouldn't it fall under Cambodian law instead? And are there any other laws besides this that can apply abroad? The snare ( talk) 14:19, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, I wonder also if the people from the piratebay came to the US, they would be liable for what they have done. They are not US citizens though The snare ( talk) 02:32, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
This article states/defines the illegal fact as "commercial sex act as any sex act, on account of which anything of value is given to or received by a person under the age of 18..."
Does that mean that a sex act involving a minor in which the payment is made to the pimp, NOT to the child, is legal?? ( Dumarest ( talk) 01:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC))
Our article claims that "the majority of the exploited children are under 12 years old." To support this, we cite an opinion piece from ABC that says:
The article's claim only pertains to pedophiles. Pedophilia is, by definition, a sexual preference for prepubescent children, i.e., mainly those under 12. As our own article states, most child sex tourists are not pedophiles.
Next we claim that child sex tourism "victimizes approximately 2 million children around the world", citing a series of non-academic sources which provide no explanation for this obviously wrong estimate. Only one cites its own source: the UNICEF fact sheet, which actually puts the figure at "as many as 1.2 million children" (again with no empirical basis). A statistic that serious should have a stronger source than tabloids and charity 'fact' sheets. KateTheSpy ( talk) 12:17, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Lies, Damn Lies and Thai Statistics. I am extremely sceptical about the figure of 40% of Thai prostitutes are children (under 18). Not so long ago, one NGO came up with a figure of 2,800,000 Thai women were involved in prostitution. This represents about 1 in 12 of all Thai females. Other figures have been mentioned, but the general consensus is that the real figure is in the region of 200,000. My scepticism arises from the question, that if you do not know how many prostitutes there are, how can you tell what percentage are children. Pattays has a reputed 50,000 prostitutes, yet the local newspapers typically only report a handful of cases of child sex tourists arrests monthly. The economics are such, that in order to sustain 20,000 child prostitutes, there needs to be in the region of 6000+ Child Sex Tourists at any given time. If that were the case, you would expect many more arrests. My suspicion is that the true figure is probably nearer 5%, the majority of whom are working in Thai brothels servicing Thai men and have little or no contact with Sex Tourists. 86.44.145.223 ( talk) 13:30, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm concerned with the information in the section concerning regional government actions. A lot of the information given concerns governments that have taken no action. All Caribbean countries mentioned, for example, were described as having taken no action or minimal action. Information in this section also indicates areas within certain countries where CST is especially problematic (i.e., available).
I'm in favor of the free flow of information, but at least for the sake of editorial consistency, I think the section discussing government actions should only refer to governments which have, in fact, taken action. Mentioning a nation such as Trinidad and Tobago, only to say that "there were no reports nor prosecutions on child sex tourism," implies there was a reason to list that nation other than to describe its government's actions concerning CST. I'm sorry, but this section reads like a guide on which countries to visit for CST without getting hassled by the local government.
For this reason, I think it's important to remove all listings in this section that indicate only a lack of governmental action. If it's important to include this information, then it should be included in a separate section with a title indicating the inaction (or inadequate action) of the governments listed, and there should be a consensus here giving a good reason for having such a section. Dcs002 ( talk) 04:57, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
In the section "International law enforcement activities" the letters RTP are used in the phrase:
In both cases, local ICE agents work with their RTP counterparts to monitor the suspects’ movements while in Thailand
Yet there is no explanation as to the meaning of this acronym.
Aethalides ( talk) 06:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
This part seems ambiguous:
Under the PROTECT Act of April 2003, it is a federal crime, prosecutable in the United States, for a U.S. citizen or permanent resident alien, to engage in illicit sexual conduct in a foreign country with a person under the age of 18, whether or not the U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident alien intended to engage in such illicit sexual conduct prior to going abroad. For purposes of the PROTECT Act, illicit sexual conduct includes any commercial sex act in a foreign country with a person under the age of 18.
If any sex act is unlawful, then it should just say "any sex act".
If it is ONLY a "commercial" sex act that is unlawful, then "includes" should be removed and replaced with "is" - 75.71.20.179 ( talk) 04:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Flyer22 keeps reverting this to make a statement that suggests child pornography possession is illegal in Argentina. I have many sources for this. I used one from the United States Government https://www.dol.gov/ilab/reports/child-labor/findings/2012TDA/argentina.pdf
"The Penal Code criminalizes facilitating, promoting, or benefitting economically from child prostitution.(36, 37) The Penal Code also prohibits the use of children in pornographic shows and in the production, publication, and distribution of child pornography. However, it does not criminalize the possession of child pornography for personal use." Boilingorangejuice ( talk) 22:18, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Child 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:49, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Child 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Child 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:39, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Child 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:08, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Child 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:37, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
The format of the paragraphs in this chapter is not coherent and consistent. For some reason only in SK paragraph it is talking about the policing in extrajudicial regions, not the tourists WITHIN the country. If that is the case, there should be paragraphs for the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, and France too, as the majority of child sex tourists are coming form those countries.
If people wanna understands more about which countries sends the most child sex tourists and extrajudicial policing of each countries, there should be independent sections. - strawburry17c ( talk) Edited at 6:29 PM, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
First of all, the source is not directly linked to the reports so i think it's better to change it to this.
https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/142982.pdf
It says, "According to the The Trafficking in Persons Report of 2010 reports that the sale of virgin girls continues to be a serious problem in Cambodia, and that a significant number of Asian and other foreign men, primarily South Korean, travel to Cambodia to engage in child sex tourism."
However, if you look at the original quote, it says like this. "The sale of virgin girls continues to be a serious problem in Cambodia, with foreign (mostly Asian) and Cambodian men paying up to $4,000 to have sex with virgins. A significant number of Asian and other foreign men travel to Cambodia to engage in child sex tourism."
There isn't any information or indication in the report that South Korean is the major child sex traveler.
According to Protection Project (2007), United States citizens appear to be frequent perpetrators of child sex tourism in Cambodia, constituting nearly 27 percent of offenders arrested in this country for child sex tourism offenses, as based on available data. - strawburry17c ( talk) 20:14, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200510/kt2005103118273511990.htm the original source stopdemand.org was entirely dependent on while making its page doesn't even exist, which significantly reducing the credibility of the entire sources.
There are more reliable explanation based on vastly more credible sources (i.e, Trafficking in Persons report 2019) available so i think it's enough. - strawburry17c ( talk) 16:40, 20 April 2020 (UTC)