Talk:Prostitution in South Korea/Archive 1

the existance of prostitution in Korea
prostitution exists in Korea, it is not a product of the USFK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardyandtiny (talk • contribs) 23:40, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

temp situation
I worked in Seoul during this illegality of prostitution. For about one month there were stories in the news papers about arrests and the neon lights were off for places like anma. After one month all the lights were back on as normal. Just like the banning of eating dog meat during the Seoul Olympics (which is delicious). These days you are more likely to hear about someone attacked in a room salon or anma because the police refused to investigate the crime because room salon and anma no longer officially exist. jushin100 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.203.21.106 (talk) 02:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

This article seems somewhat outdated, and many statements seem fishy. The numbers in the introduction are meaningless unless identified by year. Are they for 2005? 1995? 1985? Dollarfifty 18:19, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * They're all cited in the sources, but the government stopped keeping official estimates a few years ago. So they should all be from about 2002. I wonder why you say it seems dated, or fishy? The only thing that seems dated to me is that it doesn't discuss the impact of the Special Law, which has actually seen the industry become more lucrative.--ThreeAnswers 14:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

It just didn't sound plausible that 20% of all young women are in the sex industry. I understand it's one of those things very difficult to study accurately, and estimates vary widely. The studies should be identified by year in the introduction, and some sense of the credibility of the studies should accompany the estimates in the text. I'm not saying the numbers are wrong, but that the current version doesn't lay the foundations of credibility. Just my comment for other editors who may be more interested in improving this article.Dollarfifty 22:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

–I edited the opening paragraph. Statements violate npov and denote infererences that are not supported by sources. Hijklmnop224 01:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)hijklmnop224

The numbers from the institute of criminology cannot be wholly trusted. There is massive corruption among lawmakers and politicians and they are known to bolster numbers when there is something they want passed. For example dog meat and prostitution. Neither of which are nearly as large. Korean society is largely conservative and a number like that produces fear and surprise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Subvertmsm (talk • contribs) 08:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

NPOV
"Out of a total population of about 48 million, there are 1.2 million women engaged in the sex industry, according to one civic organization."

I have to question what this 'civic organization is. This sentence is from the source 4, which does not say anything about this organization. It gives me an impression that the writer of the source 4 said it in order to exaggerate her point. Note that, while the writer of source 4 cites most other sources in correct MLA format, he or she does not even give a hint of what this organization is. And if he or she indeed got the data from some organization, this is a blatant plagiarism. I believe the above sentence lowers the quality standard of this article and wikipedia, especially when we have the data by the South Korean government. Therefore, I'll delete the sentence from the article.

Also:"Korea has a long history of kisaeng as its cultural part, somewhat of a mixture of prostitute and geisha who provide entertaining performance."

Kisaengs were not prostitutes. They were female performers who were usually hired for high-class parties, including those held by the government. For those who can read Korean, here is a link of a Korean . This sentence contains a very commonly misunderstood concept (just like people confuse geisha with Japanese prostitute), and therefore I'll delete this sentence also. -- — Preceding undated comment added 02:29, 30 June 2007

Inaccurate
1. The government estimates 500,000 women are engaged in the industry.
 * This inaccurate news quickly denied by s.korea goverment. and s.korea goverment request to newspaper company for correct errors and official apology.(sorce are korean language)

2. ''Prostitution in South Korea is a large illegal industry. The Ministry of Gender and Family Equality estimated that it comprises over 4% of South Korea's GDP, with revenue exceeding $22 billion; this would make the industry the country's fifth-largest if accurate''
 * first is blog source. it was uncertain & self made blog source. blog is anti-korea Japanese made POV site. i can't trust that blog. no citation.(skip)
 * Regardless if you feel that that blog can't be trusted, the blog source for the passage you have an issue with is taken from The Seoul Times. So, your issue lies with a Korea-based news source. Since your dispute is about the blog, I have since changed the source to show that the same citation is coming from the Korean media source, instead.Gbozz (talk) 01:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * secound source, can't find "GDP 4%", "$22", "fifth-largest".
 * I've just reviewed the 2nd source and I see that it indeed states figures such as 4% of GDP and $21 billion a year. Full passage from source is here.

Today, sex work accounts for 4 percent of the country's gross domestic product, according to government reports. Prostitution brings $21 billion a year -- more than electricity and gas combined. There are an estimated 330,000 sex workers, 80,000 brothels and 69 red-light districts in a country the size of Indiana. .

3. ''The government stopped keeping official figures in 2004. South Korea is also a source, destination, and transit country for human trafficking; a significant number of women from Russia, Uzbekistan and Southeast Asia (particularly the Philippines) are brought to the country to work as prostitutes or "juicy girls", many of whom are believed to be virtual slaves''
 * human trafficking? virtual slave? can't find this fact from given source. maybe HOAX?

4. An increasing number of women are being taken to the United States, Canada, and Australia to work as prostitutes, and a number of them claim to have been tricked or forced.
 * This is uncertain silly POV sentence. unreliable. no source.

5. ''In 2004, the government passed the Act on the Prevention of the Sex Trade and Protection of its Victims, a sweeping new law criminalizing human trafficking and stiffening penalties for brothel owners, establishing a number of shelters for victims and ending their automatic deportation. Some Korean sex workers, however, protested what they saw as a threat to their livelihoods. The law's passage was followed by a crackdown which reports indicate was unsuccessful at making prostitution less lucrative or popular.''
 * need citation.

6. In 2000, 222 girls under 18 were arrested for engaging in wonjo gyoje, or compensated dating with older men, and in 1999 the Commission on Youth Protection reported that over half of girls arrested for prostitution were under 16.
 * This is unsuitable in article. some personal crime.

7. ''In December 2006, The Ministry for Gender Equality, in an attempt to address the issue of high demand for prostitutes among, offered cash to companies whose male employees pledged not to pay for sex after office parties. The people responsible for this policy claimed that they want to put an end to a culture in which men get drunk at parties and go on to buy sex''
 * I checked citation. 'high demand'? it's POV word. In citaion, There is no word 'high deman'.

Juice8093 20:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Barber shop poles
There is no defined pattern in regards to how many barbershop poles are associated with massage parlors. The 'Two poles' myth is an old, unsubstantiated myth that the foreign community in Korea tends to perpetuate. However, many legit barbershops have 2 poles, as well as some massage parlors have 1 or more. I've cleared up the wording to avoid confusion. --Gbozz (talk) 04:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)--211.111.122.177 (talk) 03:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:NPOV violations / "Prostitution for tourists during the 1970s"
''(Some of my comments below were copied from this discussion at AN/I.--Endroit (talk))

There's a major WP:NPOV issue hanging in this edit. The part I detest is that the word "kisaeng" is being associated with prostitution at all.

P.234 of the cited source Yakuza: Japan's Criminal Underworld (ISBN 0520215613) says: So that's where the wording "official kisaeng houses" probably came from. Despite other sources such as this using the word "kisaeng" that way, I believe this wording to be in violation of WP:NPOV, and so I propose this wording be changed to "brothels approved by government officials". I suggest ALWAYS using the word "brothel" instead of "kisaeng house", and "prostitute" instead of "kisaeng". The Wikipedia articles should strive to use such NPOV words.
 * "In every major Korean city, large, government-registered "kisaeng houses" sprang up. One pair of houses sat in a wealthy area of Seoul, on either side of the Japanese ambassador's official residence.  Each could accommodate eight hundred men at one time.  The owner was reportedly a top politician with past service in the KCIA.  Along with the official kisaeng houses arose hundreds of brothels and tens of thousands of prostitutes." (bolding added for emphasis by Endroit)

Also I believe it may be safer to say that prostitution was "tacitly approved" rather than "officially approved" by the South Korean government. Surely, there's no way that the South Korean government overtly endorses prostitution. That's ridiculous.

Regarding government involvement, p.118 of Women's Lives and Public Policy: The International Experience (ISBN 0275945235) says: It's not clear what status this KITA actually had in the Korean government, if any. If KITA is the former name of the Korea Tourism Organization, then they were a "government-invested corporation responsible for the Korean Tourism industry" during the Park regime, perhaps not "officially" part of the government.
 * "This time the South Korean state encouraged and condoned prostitution because it saw women as a valuable resource with which to earn badly needed foreign currency. The kisaeng, the professional female entertainer, is officially registered with the Korea International Tourism Association (KITA) through the party house to which she belongs.  ....  KITA also sponsors an orientation program for these women, in which "renowned personages and college professors" give lectures and say such things as, "You girls must take pride in your devotion to your country, for your carnal conversation with foreign tourists does not prostitute either yourself or the nation, but expresses your heroic patriotism"."

Major WP:NPOV concerns exist, if this stuff needs to go on the article (ie: that the government "encouraged and condoned prostitution"). And there's still the question of whether the topic of "prostitution for tourists during the 1970s" is notable enough to be mentioned in the article. Please discuss, and make sure NPOV wording is used.--Endroit (talk) 17:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Unjustified prostitution protestations
I cant help thinking that all of these denials about South Koreas prostitution are from Koreaans living abroad or those from the usual weird "christian" or other religious groups that exist in Korean society. I think these people deliberately avoid their eyes when walking in any thoroughfare in a town or city. If you look in for example in any district of, for example, Seoul at night you can see many neon signs either explicet or not advertising "room salon" or "business club". It is possible to sleep with girls from these places.

The Gangnam-Yeoksam area is famous for the large "anma" massage places.

Buchangdong is internationally famous for its naked room salon and is a sex tourist resort even famous in Japan.

I worked in Seoul for 4 years for one of the countrys largest companies. We all looked forward to university holidays because the poorer students would earn some money in the sex trade.

I was in Seoul when the government "banned" prostitution. There were public protests from mens rights groups and a rally by female sex workers in Seoul. If you, the reader, don't think that this is indicative of the extent of the sex industry in Korea then there is no hope for you.

KOREAN FILMS - This sex industry appears in probably about 40% of all Korean films. Even films such as "Sex is zero", a popular modern comedy refers to male university students selling themselves to older women in a room salon - every Koren guy reading this will know that this is an old joke about how to make some quick money.

What I'd finally like to say is.... LEGALISE IT AGAIN! in room salon these days you often have the manager/ess coming to say the police have been called so can we please pretend we are all boyfriend and girlfriend. A Korean friend of mine was beaten to the ground outside a brothel in an arguement with the guy near the door - the police refused to investigate because of course there are no brothels (legally). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.217.165 (talk) 01:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Interesting point of view by an individual allegedly to have been in South Korea for years. However, you've got the wrong place to speak of your "demand" for the legalization of the prostitution in South Korea because here is neither a forum nor reportage. I checked your contribution due to your assaultive opinion on religion like usual weird "christian" or other religious groups that exist in Korean society.. Well I get to know that you're very interested in societies of South Korea, but please refrain from producing inflammatory and inappropriate comment like that. If you have some agenda and can't write articles with reliable sources, please find some place to suit your needs, because this article belongs to an "encyclopedia". Thanks.--Appletrees (talk) 12:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

What a strange comment from Appletrees... 1. I have been in South Korea for many years. Of course I can prove that if pushed, passport stamps etc... also, is it really difficult to believe? that someone has lived in Korea for some years? Many do! 2. "However, you've got the wrong place to speak of your "demand" for the legalization of the prostitution in South Korea" I have no demand for the legalization of prostitution in Korea and I have never said otherwise. 3. "I checked your contribution due to your assaultive opinion on religion like usual weird "christian" or other religious groups that exist in Korean society." Well done Sherlock! Yes, I have interests, and you found some of them. Actually my main interest is to try and stop mis-information. That is why I write about cult figures in weird semi-christian religions and other cults - they deceive the gulable. That is why, for example, I published the details of the USA educational authority details regarding the "education" of Mr. Yonggi Cho on the Talk page of Yoido Full Gospel Church (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yoido_Full_Gospel_Church) to show that he had no right to call himself "Dr.". Even this information with proof was difficult for many people to beleive. He claims to be Doctor of this PhD of that but none of his qualification are accredited and therefore they are worthless. 4. Let me give you one example with Yonggi Cho's beliefs. He claims to be a Christian but he believes it is his duty to be rich. Now Jesus said that you cannot be rich and go to heaven (eg. camel and eye of the needle etc.. and other sayings). Now Cho has decided to completly ignore Jesus. Jesus was explicit about this. Instead Cho has decided to claim that Paul was talking about material wealth (most people think that Paul talks about spiritual wealth because all works attributed to Paul talk about the spiritual). Cho and some other pentecostalists choose to ignore Jesus's specific teachings on poverty as an excuse for making money. Paul's teachings are obviously secondary to Jesus's to a Christian even if Paul did mean material wealth (which most Christians - Catholic, Anglican, Orthodox, doubt) Pauls ideas should be disregarded if they contradict with Jesus - to a Christian. This is just common sense isnt it? By-the-way I'm not a Christian of any kind. I'm Buddist. 5. "please refrain from producing inflammatory and inappropriate comment like that." Haha, like what? You dont mention anything. I will produce thought provoking and challeging ideas on the "Talk" boards - which is where they belong because I am fed up with unbalanced views. THIS IS A DISCUSSION BOARD ABOUT THE MAIN ARTICLE! 6. I need reliable sources for the main article only! Hopefully these discussions will, for example, allow others to provide the sources when I cannot find them. It will allow others to build on the article from the information that has built up over time on this Talk page. You should not be so narrow minded - THIS IS A DISCUSSION! THIS IS NOT THE WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.109.116 (talk) 00:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your complimentary comment about my ability. However, the overall tone of yours still sounds very rude. If you wish to keep a discussion with somebody in Wikipedia, be civil as possible as you can. Until then, I don't waste my time talking with you. Your viewpoint toward Christianity is not an irrelevant subject, so why don't you try to save this page? Bye--Appletrees (talk) 00:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE DO SOME SERIOUS RESEARCH BEFORE ADDING INFORMATIONS TO THIS ARTICLE
The article says, "Since 2004, Prostitution in South Korea prohibited by law." Besides the apparent gramatical error, this sentence is very misleading. It sounds as though prostitution was legal or allowed before 2004. The author of this sentence seems to be referring to "성매매특별법," which can be roughly translated as "Special Law on Prostitution." South Korean congress did establish that legislation in 2004 in order to fight the growing sex industry. However, this does not mean that prostitution was allowed before the legislation, as the sentence clearly implies. Think of it this way: was terrorism in the US legal before the PATRIOT Act?

As you can see from the example I've just given, this article, as it stands now, is extremely poorly written. I see some of these authors may be ignorant, but some definitely seem to be intentional in writing these misleading sentences. This article needs to be fixed up by some people who know enough, have enough time and energy, and have some RESPECT. _Hychu —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hychu (talk • contribs) 07:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I copy this from comfort women pages. It contains many references.

Why Korean comfort women during Korean War and why Korean collaborators? Because it is true. It all happened and it was all discuss probably before you were born. So we look to the academics and newspapers for reference.

From, The Construction of US Camptown Prostitution in South Korea: Transformation and Resistance by Lee, Na Young, 2006 'The term “comfort women” (wianbu) to refer to military prostitutes serving American soldiers signals the widespread acceptance of camptown prostitution as an inevitable means to entertain foreign soldiers. This term was commonly used in newspaper articles throughout the 1950s along with such phrases as “prostitutes catering to UN soldiers” and terms like yanggongju (Western princesses), or “UN madams” (woman getting a livelihood by serving UN soldiers).129 This usage continued during the 1960s and 1970s when camptown prostitution became more differentiated from non-U.S. military prostitution. The Korean government’s policy on prostitution reflected its public’s perspectives on prostitution, which was, in the decades after the war, regarded as a necessary means to feed Korea’s impoverished population.'

The Chosun Ilbo or Daily News is major newspapers in South Korea 2,200,000 readers. Examples given are in Chosun Ilbo 23 August, 1960, it mentions, "In Pup’yLng, some 150 'comfort women dealing with American troops'. Similar reports using the words "comfort women" are: KyLnghyang Ilbo, 11/25/1955; Chosun ilbo, 11/08/1957; Chosun ilbo, 8/23/1960; Chosun ilbo, 12/03/1963. A “Comfort Women’s demonstration” is also reported in 1966.

In the mid- to late-1960s, there were numerous articles in Chosun ilbo reporting crimes committed against camptown prostitutes by American soldiers that continued to used the term 'comfort women'. Korea college girls recruited for the Nangnang Club were also viewed as "yanggongju" or comfort women (Seoul Sinmun 26 July, 1952; 10 October, 1953). Post-war military brothels were still known as comfort stations and the system based on the Japanese one.

In 1958, the Chosun ilbo also accounts for the number of women involved as 300,000. The women who served “one American husband” were called “yangbuin” (Western madam) instead of the usual "yanggalbo" (western whore) who were generally treated by Korean society as “non-human beings”. Generally, the Yanggongju have been ignored in official Korean histories as a national shame until recent.

Song-gun Chong in 1967 wrote, 3,000 so-called “comfort women” registered with the Health Section of the Military and the Military Police Corps of the U.S. Army (“Current Situations of Korean Prostitutes and Countermeasures.” Pophak-nonchong 8:65-87.)

You can download the main reference at http://www.lib.umd.edu/drum/bitstream/1903/4162/1/umi-umd-3959.pdf

References also arise in Yi, Imha. 2004a. The Korean War and Gende (Hankuk Chonjaengkwa Jaendo). Seoul: Sohaemunjip.

Have you seen The Women Outside: Korean Women and the U.S. Military. Directors J.T. Takagi and Hye Jung Park. 1995. 60 minutes. VHS?

Many of Korean women were also forced, tricked, financial compromised or even kidnapped into sexual slavery for American troops in South Korea. As example, the documentary features Yang Hyang Kim, who "applied for a job in what she thought was a coffee house, only to be sold to a brothel outside Camp Stanley".

Same as Japanese Imperialists before them. They both documents how the Korean and American governments were involved, how Korean officials portrayed the women as “personal ambassadors” fulling their patriotic duty to nation by sexually servicing soldiers. The rape and murder of women by the pimps and the soldiers.

It says. "Drawing upon interviews and testimonies, emphasize that many of the women who "serve" the US military as so-called voluntary sex workers were in fact recruited in the same brutal ways as were their earlier counterparts in Japan's 'comfort system', that is, through coercion, trickery, and even force - because both Korean and American governmental interests have viewed men's access to female bodies for R & R as so crucial to military morale."

-- Priorend —Preceding unsigned comment added by Priorend (talk • contribs) 16:11, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

an illegal industry
Please change first sentence to, Prostitution in South Korea is an illegal industry.

Crstnaknt (talk) 12:14, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

an illegal industry
Please change first sentence to, Prostitution in South Korea is an illegal industry.

Crstnaknt (talk) 12:14, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

question
How about these now?
 * Prostitution barbershop
 * Korean Turkish bath(korean soap land)
 * 588 --Zerosen (talk) 13:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Question: why did you false accuse me of blanking contents without any given explanation? Obviously, you're not a new user per your exact target points to the articles that you edit as a new user. You did not even carefully check the history and assumed that I might blank the content. Tell me who are you, Japanese POV newbie.--Caspian blue (talk) 14:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh,sorry.I mistook rv. This is unexplained blanking of sourced materials --Zerosen (talk) 14:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Chinese prostitute in South Korea
Chinese woman hundreds of thousands of people are engaging in sexual intercourse for money in Korean '휴게텔' 'karaoke' 'pleasure liquor shop' 'massage room' 'coffee shop' ground. As for the Korean Chinese prostitution woman, social position is various. =>visa : a marriage emigrant person,A foreign student,A person of illegal stay,A person of legal stay,Tourist visa.

Most of the clients of the Korea woman are Korea men.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Playerdragon (talk • contribs) 12:21, 29 May 2009

Ruemignon (talk) 12:38, 16 June 2011 (UTC)The three reference pages used to prove the statement below are not valid.

"Most of Chinese prostitutes are legally staying in Korea by getting greencards by marrying Koreans, or visas for study, travel, work. About 20,000 Chinese women marry Koreans every year and a quarter of them disguise their marriages. Most of these women are engaged in the prostitution businesses in Korea. "

None of the sources claimed that most of the Chinese women legally resident in South Korea engage in the sex industry. The three reference pages were talking about fake marriage, questionable college graduate certificate, and Massage industry with no apparent focus on Chinese women.

For those who do not read korean, at least do a machine translation to verify the references.

Ruemignon (talk) 09:55, 17 June 2011 (UTC)Please provide solid evidence with accurate numbers to back your claims like "Most of those 20000 Chinese women who come to S.Korea through international marriages are engaged in the prostitution businesses in Korea."

Otherwise I believe it is inappropriate to make such a generalization.

This whole scetion should be comibine into next sectio Huamn TaffickingSmiling Demon Lord (talk) 16:35, 9 April 2012 (UTC)]

Question about 2008 content that was removed
Aside from the fact that most of the content in this revision is from a banned user, why aren't we actually using such content? It appears validly sourced, far more expansive, contains a historical record, and is a much better article in scope of content than the present one. rootology ( C )( T ) 16:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Content_noticeboard#Theory_.26_policy_question.2C_good_content_by_a_later_banned_user.3F_Prostitution_in_South_Korea. Related discussion about the policy & theory] behind this reversion is on the content noticeboard. rootology ( C )( T ) 16:47, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure, and it's part of the reason that I requested un-protection. There was no rationale for an indefinite semi-protection, and there was no rationale to remove and edit war over content that was valid and cited with reliable sources. FPAP should have known better and exercised his administrative tools a little too preemptively, in my opinion. I'll be working to restore the content and do some general cleanup in the next few days. seicer  &#x007C;  talk  &#x007C;  contribs  16:48, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Outdated source

 * 1) Like above metioned, This article has been numerous dispute.
 * 2) This artcle is very lack of neutrality and Content POV forking
 * 3) Many article source is not backing up proven fact. many source are purely "hypothesis". even each source research are difference. (prostitute number and so on)
 * 4) I deleted outdated material Cherry Blossom OK (talk) 09:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Removing a large part of descriptions without consensus is considered to be a vandalism.
 * Please provide the newly found reason why this article is "Article issues|POV|OR|refimprove" by indicating the statement.
 * I reverted the tag to before your edit: "Refimprove|date=June 2009".Phoenix7777 (talk) 21:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Describing points of view
 * At Wikipedia, points of view (POVs) – cognitive perspectives – are often essential to articles which treat controversial subjects.

No original research
 * Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought. This includes unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position.

Like above metioned, this article disputed. dispute tag is absolutely proper tag. Removing a tag without consensus is considered to be a vandalism. Please provide the proper reason why this article must keep as outdated material. Cherry Blossom OK (talk) 22:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC) Cherry Blossom OK (talk) 22:26, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Please explain why the descriptions in "historical context" section are outdated. I moved the description to that section. Please read the change carefully. I reverted the description in that section leaving the tag as you edited. Phoenix7777 (talk) 23:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Simple. Your favored source are 2003 source. However, Prostitution in South Korea has been illegal since 2004. After 2004, Prostitute industry are largely changed. Why This article should be use 2003 years source? Please explain why article should be use 2003 (outdated source)? Cherry Blossom OK (talk) 23:48, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I rewrite Article. I moderated one sided claim, and remove unclear, original research. if you disagree, Please check citaions first, and show what is wrong or not at here. Cherry Blossom OK (talk) 00:48, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't want to continue this kind of childish edit war. Without concession by both sides, this war will continue indefinitely.

So I propose the solution as follows;


 * 1) I accept your addition "In 2004, The South Korean government passed an anti-prostitution law....".
 * 2) Other changes you made are not acceptable because your edit is too much focusing on minimizing the situation of Korean prostitution. Or in your favorite phrase, POV pushing.

Let's this edit a starting point. If you would like to change a statement, please obtain consensus before editing it. Please point out which sentence is one sided claim, unclear or original research.

If you would like to come to consensus, Please refrain from disruptive editing again. It is considered vandalism, and subject to reverting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoenix7777 (talk • contribs) 21:56, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I reviewed the article extensively and came to a decision to accept some of your modifications. I will review it further whether any of your modifications are acceptable or not, Please wait for a while. Phoenix7777 (talk) 07:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I added a modification you proposed. (Dabang &rarr; Ticket Dabang)

I think Tag"Fact"s you proposed are not necessary, because tag"Unreferenced section" already exists.

I continue to review the article, Please let me know your opinion. Phoenix7777 (talk) 11:23, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Chinese prostitutes
I've removed a paragraph about Chinese women in Korea, because not only did the sources cited apparently not support the claims made, but the claims themselves were not connected with prostitution. (Granted, the machine translation was a bit off, but there were no mentions, for example, of the specific numbers given, which would have stayed intact.) Unless a reliable source draws connections between fraudulent marriages and massage parlours and prostitution, we can't publish it. This is the heart of the core policy no original research. Also, any statistics really do need to be directly supported by a cited source, lest Wikipedia be yet another purveyor of the 43.5% of statistics that are made up. :) Danger (talk) 09:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And this is happening again, so again I point to my above explanation. --Danger (talk) 17:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * And again. Danger High voltage! 03:21, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

- '중국여자 수십만명 한국에서 매춘' “강남 일대 휴게텔은 20대가 대부분이지만 다른 지역은 중국인 여성이 많다” PLZ translate KOREAN into ENGLISH. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAKCYKATIK (talk • contribs) 04:02, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

- Well, in KOREA Chinese prostitutes is very common. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAKCYKATIK (talk • contribs) 04:11, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * On Wikipedia, statements must be backed up by reliable sources, not your own common sense knowledge. Danger High voltage! 04:39, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

-ARE YOU kidding ? '중국여자 수십만명 한국에서 매춘' “강남 일대 휴게텔은 20대가 대부분이지만 다른 지역은 중국인 여성이 많다” I EXPLAIN AGAIN. CAN YOU READ KOREAN? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAKCYKATIK (talk • contribs) 04:56, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

- '여수인권보호센터' : common sense knowledge ( ORIGINAL RESEALCH ) OK? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAKCYKATIK (talk • contribs) 05:02, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

-The whole Chinese prostitute article should be combine with Human Trafficking in next section, why is that so difficult to understand? Just point out Chinese in Korea and did not say anyone else is a discrimination because you are shooting on Chinese only. Smiling Demon Lord (talk) 16:55, 9 April 2012 (UTC)]

- Just point out Chinese in Korea :  because major prostitute in korea are Chinese women. not discrimination. plz Do not show hypersensitivity... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.248.67.13 (talk) 04:22, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

- if you don`t amend, do not delete. Be discussed again after debate

-I said so many times, this section is part of Human Trafficking in the next section. If you want, you can move it to the next section. Thanks.(Smiling Demon Lord (talk) 16:38, 10 April 2012 (UTC))

- I said so many times,too, this section(Chinese prostitute ) is not Human Trafficking. far from Human Trafficking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ooggii (talk • contribs) 03:54, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

- this section had previously. Blindly Do not erase — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ooggii (talk • contribs) 04:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

- I said so many time,too. Chinese prostitute Is voluntary. not Human Trafficking — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ooggii (talk • contribs) 04:32, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

-Please I don't want to call you liar but you did not say anything about it until today. Also, what do you mean Chinese been voluntary? That is discrimination against Chinese. First, no one said anything there is no Chinese prostitute, second, there are Russian, Japanese, Vietnamese been in the sex trade in there however, why you only state Chinese only? On your editing, you just simply left no information. That is discrimination. Also, even there are some Chinese woman voluntary engaged in sex work doesn't mean all of them are happy to enjoy it. Smiling Demon Lord (talk) 09:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

- I don`t understand you. discrimination ? I do not intend to... you right to add information about other nation prostitute in Korea. only 'Chinese prostitute in Korea' must be recorded this text. and this Social phenomena in korea is not regarded as only Human Trafficking. plz don`t eraze this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ooggii (talk • contribs) 11:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

-like yo say 'Young Russian girls been called "Coffee girls" because they can be found in a cover up coffee shop for entertaining' why you only state Russian only? and maybe I am chineses in Korea.. you shouldn’t have jumped to a conclusion. I Introduce chineses article Partially. http://www.hanguoxinxi.com/hnews/show.php?itemid=3711 http://www.hanguotong.cn/news/xwkx/sh/2012-01-21/3654.html

In conclusion, The 'Chinese prostitute in Korea = major prostitute in korea ' is based on hard facts only.

-Ok, let me put this straight, are there only Chinese been prostitutes? Are all of the Chinese are willingly, happily engage in such business? Then again, it is not what I said, it is the information in English so all of us can understand. Please go check what is meaning of discrimination and before you answer my questions, as you said, please don't jump to conclusion so fast! Thanks Smiling Demon Lord (talk) 17:51, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

-Chinese women top list of foreign prostitutes detained in Korea. major prostitute in korea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ooggii (talk • contribs) 01:36, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

1 million women in prostitution
I've removed a paragraph about this article. because

1. Katherine Hyun-Sun Moon (untruth women) : she is not master. NOT statistics calculation organization but '한국관계당국(the Korean Government) : more reliable authority. statistics calculation organization

http://dna.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1966072300099203004&edtNo=1&printCount=1&publishDate=1966-07-23&officeI

2. common-sense standpoint - US ARMY IN KOREA NUMBER : 30,000~40,000 points to be duly considered 1 million women in prostitution : NONSENSE DATA.

3. a disagreement of opinion : justly delete article  — Preceding unsigned comment added by SETYOUNE (talk • contribs) 05:54, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Katherine H.S. Moon is a professor of political science and Asian studies at Wellesley College. The fact that you have not personally heard of her does not make her unreliable.
 * The source that you have provided appears to be from 1966. It is not a reliable source for events that happened after it was published. I'm also confused about what you are claiming. Are you claiming that about 40,000 women were used as prostitutes by US servicemen in Korea or are you claiming that 40,000 US army servicemen were stationed in Korea? Are these numbers per year or do they cover the whole time period? (This is important: if 40,000 women were used as prostitutes per year and each woman is used for two years, then over 50 years one million women would have been used.) --Danger (talk) 06:06, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

4. briefly talk about the main points only

4-1. here and now number : 13,000~ 20,000  by '한국관계당국'(the Korean Government) http://dna.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1954122200209202007&editNo=1&printCount=1&publishDate=1954-12-22&officeId=00020&pageNo=2&printNo=9792&publishType=00020

http://dna.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1966072300099203004&edtNo=1&printCount=1&publishDate=1966-07-23&officeI

4-2. whole time period number : 40,000 ~100,000

http://dna.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1997022100329126003&edtNo=45&printCount=1&publishDate=1997-02-21&officeId=00032&pageNo=26&printNo=16029&publishType=00010

4-3. 1 million women in prostitution => insense data ( one point number only 20,000 ->   1 million number during 50 years.   One women Period of Service : for decades    and Katherine Hyun-Sun Moon  =>  NOT statistics calculation organization.     She is unable to do calculate data.

4-4. Controversial data should be delete. plz. consider my opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SETYOUNE (talk • contribs) 11:01, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

=> I explain this a moot point/question

4-5 again   Katherine Hyun-Sun Moon  =>  NOT statistics calculation organization. She is unable to do calculate data.

whole time period number : 40,000 ~100,000 '한국관계당국'(the Korean Government)

http://dna.naver.com/viewer/index.nhn?articleId=1997022100329126003&edtNo=45&printCount=1&publishDate=1997-02-21&officeId=00032&pageNo=26&printNo=16029&publishType=00010

Katherine Hyun-Sun Moon,   There is no substance in any of these allegations. '한국관계당국'(the Korean Government) more a reliable authority. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SETYOUNE (talk • contribs) 04:32, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Transnational Prostitution and "Pure Blood Theory"
Shrigley's edit is a another blatant POV pushing effort of "Pure Blood Theory". Shrigley's source is rather old(2000), and is not sufficient to make sweeping arguments about Korean men on an encyclopedia. In other words, opinion of ten Korean men is simply not enough to generalize Koreans on a controversial issue. Cydevil38 (talk) 11:13, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

"Teen Prostitution" Section Needs to Be Fixed
Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia, but I feel I need to correct this section. The numbers in this section are based on the questionable statistics from an Aljazeera article that does not cite its sources. For example, it appears the author of that article did a very superficial research. It claims that at least half of the runaway girls did prostitution according to the "latest government figures." That is contrary to the actual government figures, which shows that about 3% of the runaway youths were involved in prostitution (see below link). Note that this number includes runaway boys who BOUGHT prostitutes. So, the percentage of runaway girls who did conditional dating ("조건만남") are even lower. Note also that only 1/4 of these "conditional datings" actually resulted in sexual encounter. That further brings down the percentage by a factor of 1/4, unless you consider just going on a date for money (without sex) as a form of prostitution.

The link is here for those of you who can read Korean (Ministry of Gender Equality and Family statistics, 2012): http://www.mogef.go.kr/korea/view/policyGuide/policyGuide07_07_01.jsp?func=view&currentPage=0&key_type=&key=&search_start_date=&search_end_date=&class_id=0&idx=691646.

I'd like to urge the wonderful people who contribute to Wikipedia not to blindly trust newspaper articles. The Aljazeera article contains other very questionable figures. It seems the writer got those figures from the organization United Voice for Eradication of Prostitution, whose noble goals I respect, but I'd say their "statistics" reflect more about their strong feelings and agenda than reality, to say the very least.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.75.196.152 (talk) 05:00, 8 April 2014 (UTC)