Talk:Survival sex

Recent trends
I am having trouble finding peer reviewed evidence about recent trends. On one hand, there is record child homelessness up 33% over three years to 1.6 million kids in the US: one out of every 45. Teen unemployment is 25%, another record, but much worse when those who've stopped looking are considered.

On the other hand, anecdotal reports suggest street prostitution has plummeted:


 * "I am going to go out on a limb and venture to guess that once a girl finds out about RB and other sites similar to it, they stop working the streets and then work RB instead."

The idea that even broke homeless kids turn to the internet as soon as they can afford a cell phone and internet cafe fees seems reasonable, given the outcomes. From, e.g., Weitzer, R. (2005) "Flawed Theory and Method in Studies of Prostitution" Violence Against Women 11(7):934-49, on pp. 944-5:


 * "studies indicate that street prostitutes are substantially more vulnerable to victimization than indoor workers. A British study, for instance, of 115 women who worked on the streets and 125 who worked in saunas or as call girls found that the street prostitutes were more likely than the indoor workers to report that they had ever been robbed (37% vs. 10%); beaten (27% vs. 1%); slapped, punched, or kicked (47% vs. 14%); raped (22% vs. 2%); threatened with a weapon (24% vs. 6%); strangled (20% vs. 6%); stabbed (8% vs. 0%); or kidnapped (20% vs. 2%; Church, Henderson, Bernard, & Hart, 2001). A comparison of street workers and escorts in Canada (Lowman & Fraser, 1995) found similar disparities: for robbery (37% vs. 9%), kidnapping (32% vs. 5%), sexual assault (37% vs. 9%), strangling (31% vs. 5%), being beaten (39% vs. 14%), and attempted murder (10% vs. 0%). Similar differences are found in other studies in Australia, Britain, Canada, and the United States...."

Yet so many people who honestly believe they are trying to help prostitutes want to eliminate all the internet sites on which they advertise, presumably out of moral panic. 85.230.127.113 (talk) 21:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I confirmed that the US Department of Justice has not measured the trends. The closest that they come, at ("comprehensive research to document the number of children engaged in prostitution in the United States is lacking") is to cite a 2001 study which suggests at least 150,000 underage girls engage in prostitution in the US. If that is anywhere near true, that is at least three orders of magnitude more minors than they say are involved in child pornography, and it's a repeated, ongoing thing. They spend so much more money going after child porn traffic -- because they can do that from a desk and they don't have to figure out what to do with thousands of girls? Weltoners (talk) 20:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Geographical bias
The section goes down to the USA state level to discuss runaway children and 2 paragraphs out of 3 are about the USA. The final paragraph discusses the rest of the world in a general way without the context of dates or statistics that has been given for the USA. This looks like Systemic bias due to the easier availability of campaigning material in the USA, however for an article on a global topic a better balance of sources and (geographic) points of view need to be maintained.

Sampling the sources, I note that the general (and credible) statement that LGBT youngsters are three times more likely to resort to prostitution is supported by Flowers' book (Street Kids) which is about American street kids rather than a global perspective. Flowers refers to other studies (which I have not checked) and these would need careful verification to ensure that this article is not giving the impression that studies about Americans are not being misrepresented as global facts. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 08:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Do you have sources that can be used to add info from places outside the US? Silver  seren C 15:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Information that's about prostitution not survival sex should be removed from the article
''Psychologist and researcher Melissa Farley, writing in the New York Times, says that prostitution is nearly always coercive and lacking in full consent. She says this is the biggest issue, not simple inequalities between buyers and sellers, nor health and safety risks. Farley says women rarely have viable alternative means of paying for the basic needs of themselves and their loved ones. Farley argues that even having the "job option" is immoral because it will most likely hurt women who are very vulnerable (psychologically, economically, or otherwise). Farley says for women looking to survive, the experience can be traumatizing, and she describes it as "Becoming objects for masturbation". She also warns that the men who pay for prostitution the most are usually the most violent towards women.[5]''

''According to Farley, research suggests that very few prostitutes (she estimates that only 5% of women) make the choice freely. She says that most women in prostitution, including those working for escort services, have been sexually abused as children. Farley claims that a majority of prostitutes would like to leave the industry.[12] Bob Herbert echoed a similar opinion, also in the New York Times. Herbert says "Those who think that most of the women in prostitution want to be there are deluded... the world of the prostitute is typically filled with pimps, sadists, psychopaths, drug addicts, violent criminals and disease." [13]''

I think these paragraphs should come out of the article. Mostly because they're about prostitution in general, not about survival sex, which is a sub-set of prostitution. A more minor point: it's not clear that Bob Herbert has any credentials for talking about this issue. Sue Gardner (talk) 08:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree with this. In addition, the sentences relate only to women and imply that only women are the victims of survival sex, harming the gender neutrality of the article.

Neilho (talk) 09:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Melissa Farley
Melissa Farley is no longer accredited psychologist of APA following ethics violation into fraudulent & fabricated research. All references to here work should be removed as unsubstantiated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.208.204.151 (talk) 18:54, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Post-earthquake Haiti
There should probably be a mention of Hatians having “transactional sex” with UN peace-keepers for basic necessities like food and blankets for years after the 2010 earthquake.

Blacklisted Links Found on Survival sex
Cyberbot II has detected links on Survival sex which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://news.change.org/stories/homeless-youth-and-survival-sex
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:55, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The wayback machine archive link seems reliable to me. However, it was merely an EL without any statements citing it. It should have been https://web.archive.org/web/20120304105736/http://www.endhomelessness.org/content/article/detail/2559 141.239.252.245 (talk) 01:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC)