Talk:Prostitution in China

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

{{FAC}} should be substituted at the top of the article talk page

Scope and NPOV issues

Prostitution has existed in China for centuries. Why start only with the Communists?

Parts of the article seem to be written from the point of view of the PRC government. It presents prostitution as a problem that clearly needs to be eradicated. this is not npov. For example, instead of stating "governmental authorities of mainland China have acknowledged that prostitution has not only reappeared, it is also becoming an endemic problem", we can state something like "since the loosening of government controls over society in the 1980s, prostitution has reappeared..." --Jiang 04:56, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Communists brought a particular approach to the eradication and now the control of prostitution, which was sort of a mixture of Confucian moralism and Marxism. Their strategies for the elimination of prostitution are quite particular and different from that of previous regimes, so it is appropriate to write an article particular to the period after 1949. Also, by using the title of "Prostitution in mainland China", the article focuses on mainland China, at the exclusion of Taiwan, Hong Kong etc., where the environment is completely different.

I appreciate your concerns about NPOV. I don't see a problem with stating the position of the Chinese government, but I agree that the introduction needs rework. As per your suggestion, I've changed the offending sentence to: Since the loosening of government controls over society in the early 1980s, prostitution has not only reappeared, it has also been associated with a number of endemic problems. I think all sides of the prostitution debate would agree that a lot of problems are associated with prostitution.

I just started the article. As other parts come together, I'm sure there'll be a better sense of balance. Yeu Ninje 05:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How about renaming to "Prostitution in the People's Republic of China" like we have economy of the People's Republic of China, education in the People's Republic of China, etc.? and add "Prostitution in Hong Kong" and "Prostitution in Macau" as "see also" links. This way, the scope of the article is clearly from 1949 onwards.--Jiang 12:28, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Since the PRC includes Hong Kong and Macau, distinguishing these two areas within the article is a bit problematic. I'm inclined to stay with the term "mainland China". I'm thinking along the lines of Internet censorship in mainland China. I think the same principle should be applied to the two articles you mentioned. What's the point of disambiguating at the top of the page when you could more easily do so within the title? Yeu Ninje 14:29, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I have with the title is that it does not clearly imply that the chronology begins in 1949. This article is history-heavy, unlike "Internet censorship in mainland China" which only applies to the last decade. There's no need to use a disambiguator at the top. links at the bottom will do. Besides, prostitution has existed for a long time while 1997/1999-2005 is not a long time. --Jiang 02:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In that case I agree. Yeu Ninje 04:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to oppose the move. From a geographical aspect Hong Kong and Macao are not within the scope of this article. Furthermore there's little reason not to cover prostitution in mainland China before 1949. Same for the economy article. — Insta ntnood 07:20, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

we haven't mentioned Tibet or Gansu in the article either. Articles for HK and Macau can be considered subarticles and unavoidably must cover the period before 1997 or 1999 when these territories were not part of the prc. Prostitution before 1949 should be covered in a general Prostitution in China article, not in an article limited mainland China. --Jiang 08:57, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The scenario may be better illustrated with economy. The economies of Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan were separated from the mainland since they became colonies. Although Taiwan was for a short period under the same government as the mainland, It's far from integrated with the mainland. I'd suppose cultural elements like prostitution was also quite different over that short period of time. Post-1997/1999 prostitution issues in Hong Kong and Macau remains different from the mainland. — Insta ntnood 09:38, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Given the long period of separation, the period of "prostitution in the People's Republic of China" is largely synonymous with the "Prostitution in mainland China (after 1949)". Hong Kong and Macau can be subarticles whereas under the title "Prostitution in mainland China" we cannot all of a sudden add in the pre-1949 prostitution. I think we should make it clear that the article is on the mainland in the lead, though. --Jiang 06:20, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree the time frame of the term "mainland China" is 1949 (although it's true the term has become useful after 1949 and after 1997/1999, when simply saying "China" became ambiguous). — Insta ntnood 11:35, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is true that the term "mainland China" isn't confined to the period after 1949. That's the main reason I agreed with Jiang to move the article to "Prostitution in the People's Republic of China" - so there would be a more clearly defined time frame. The problem which arises from this is that Macau and Hong Kong are now part of the People's Republic and so strictly speaking, for the period from 97/99, they should be included. But to do so wouldn't be all that meaningful, since these two SARs still operate under different legal regimes and social conditions to the mainland and partially as a result, prostitution activities differ very widely. I'm not sure how appropriate the links to Prostitution in Hong Kong, Prostitution in Macau and Prostitution in Taiwan are in the see also section since these articles don't exist at the moment and probably won't be created in the near future. I'm more in favour of placing a disambiguation notice at the beginning. As I come closer to finishing the article, I'll also make it clear in the lead paragraph that the article refers to mainland China. Yeu Ninje 11:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In fact I'm interested to know why the time frame is set at 1949. :-) That's not a critical time of the history of prostitution that things changed drastically. — Insta ntnood 17:16, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In 1949 the Communists began enforcing controls on prostitution activities. In Beijing, all brothels were closed down and in other cities like Tianjin and Shanghai regulations were put in place which would eventually eliminate prostitution activities. So I would say that things did change very drastically and also quite dramatically. Yeu Ninje 19:45, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. IMO it'd better to include the history of prostitution in modern (mainland) China, including the time before 1949. If Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan are to have their own articles, history of prostitution in China after they became colonies would still be better covered by this article. — Insta ntnood 21:41, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The reason the period is confined to 1949-present is that the Communist Party brought a specific social policy on prostitution, which is markedly different to anything beforehand. Chinese regimes before 1949 were generally liberal on brothels and prostitution, representing what the Communist Party would call the "old society". Because of this, they should be treated separately. I'm not sure what your proposal on HK, Macao and Taiwan is. Are you saying they should be included in this article? If so, why? Yeu Ninje 22:36, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I said if there are articles for prostitution in Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan, prostitution in China after they became colonies would still be better covered by this article. — Insta ntnood 08:02, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I understand Yeu Ninje's concerns on why this article should only cover prostitution in mainland China from 1949 onwards (see peer review). Would prostitution in mainland China after 1949 (or perhaps prostitution in mainland China (2/2)) an acceptable title to everyone? — Insta ntnood 07:33, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

International Sex Guide

I'm a bit concerned about the inclusion of the International Sex Guide in the external links section. The site is basically an instruction booklet on how to engage in prostitution in China. On that site, the subpage "The debate about the legal situation" is very limited and in any case outdated. Each of the individual city pages include specific venues, prices etc. Some of the posts also seem to be mildly racist. For example, "Frankly, if you have to pay for it in China you are well and truly a loser." Leaving aside any moral objections, I don't think it's appropriate for Wikipedia to refer to an external link which is encouraging illegal acts. Also, the content of the site isn't serious academic discourse, a lot of it seems to be hearsay and more seriously, a lot of the language is demeaning to women (e.g. "whores", "sluts"). Yeu Ninje 03:21, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

see Wikipedia:What_wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_censored_for_the_protection_of_minors. We are not responsible for the content of external links. The site provides useful practical information on prostitution, about how to obtain prostitution, what the experience is like, etc. This article is titled "Prostitution in the People's Republic of China" and not "Legal status of prostitution in the People's Republic of China", so I don't see why you would want to exclude a site simply because it is lacking in legal discourse. Furthermore, we dont exlude sites just for not being "academic discourse". We would find none of the information there in an academic paper, but the information is still relevant. Leaving aside the slang used there, I think the site sheds good light on the practical aspects of prostitution. --Jiang 20:21, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The site you've now linked to is slightly different to the one before. Whilst I still have some reservations though, I'll leave them for now to concentrate on getting the article up to FA status. Yeu Ninje 23:44, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]