Talk:Sex industry

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 September 2019 and 9 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Exoticgiraffe, Fletchal.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 8 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sdesilva11. Peer reviewers: Axelman03, Sgraney.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

representations of Black Women in Porn
I went and reworded Black Women in porn I will be adding more information. I was trying to rework an earlier submission that got taken out. I hope this accepted thanks!(DiaEdie (talk) 19:20, 20 November 2019 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DiaEdie (talk • contribs) 22:53, 18 November 2019 (UTC)


 * This is an American peculiarity, limited to relatively small parts of the world. Focusing in 2021 on the skin colour of a client or sex worker comes across as racist.78.16.51.157 (talk) 11:22, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Sexist?
Hello I want to ask one question. Why it says "making their bodies an object that MEN can buy for a price". This expression is sexist unless this is quote from book writer. Because women can also pay for prostitution and objectify other women, so it seems wrong that only men are mentioned as objectifying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.26.211.1 (talk • contribs) September 30, 2021‎ 16:38, (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose merging Sex work into Sex industry. There is too much overlap between the articles since the topics are hardly different words. Content that is in one article and missing in the other would still fit in the article it was missing in. Thus, adding them together would just get a richer article and less people missing one article or the other. JustBeCool (talk) 15:48, 25 April 2023 (UTC)


 * ❌ (1) Currently, your proposal is a bit vague; which sections of the articles overlap? What issues would be better in one over the other? (2) There's already hatnotes on both pages. Why not add wikilinks to both pages in the hatnotes? (3) Even if there is overlap, I think both articles cover separately notable topics; one covers issues regarding what sex work is, how it's regulated, and how commenters have reacted to it. The other article discusses the sex industry more broadly.
 * Maybe asking for expert help on some relevant noticeboards would be helpful. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:09, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * "I think both articles cover separately notable topics; one covers issues regarding what sex work is" Whatever was mentioned to what sex work is such as pornography, stripping etc can be and has been covered in both articles. "One covers,...how it is regulated" How it is regulated is covered in the sex work article but not in the sex industry article but that is only because no one has added it yet as it is only appropriate that regulation of the sex industry should be mentioned in an article on sex industry. "One covers,...how commenters have reacted to it" As you can see in both articles, how commenters have reacted to it is covered in both articles. "The other article discusses the sex industry more broadly" What is something more broad about it in sex industry that cannot also be included in the sex work article? "What issues would be better in one over the other?" Exactly, it is not shown how one issue is better in one over the other. JustBeCool (talk) 23:31, 30 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Whilst there is some overlap between the two, the topics are sufficiently different, as noted by voorts above, to justify an article for each --John B123 (talk) 20:17, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose i agree with the arguments made above in opposition to this merger. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:02, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose Sex work is a subset of the sex industry as in mention in the sex industry article, but sex work is a subject that is notible enough to have its own article. Issues is sex work are not the same as issues in the sex industry and the merger of the two will prevent those notible issues from being properly discuss . Demt1298 (talk) 18:07, 26 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose per @Voorts
 * Elttaruuu (talk) 23:46, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

As industry
The merge proposal with sex work failed so it would be best to more clearly differentiate the two articles. There were only vague points made in how the topics are different, so I looked to other similar comparisons, like healthcare and healthcare industry. As the short description for healthcare industry says it is the 'economic sector focused on health', it would help to make this article about the industry aspect and shift the other content to the sex work article. JustBeCool (talk) 18:52, 13 September 2023 (UTC)