Template talk:Sexual abuse

Justification
Whilst these topics are worthwhile on their own, I would like to know why you are proposing a template for "sexual" forms of violence and victimisation. Do you have any just criteria for the template? What unites the topics other than the way that violence is inflicted? Is there a social stigma?

I am also concerned about mentioning pedophilia, especially under sociology. The topic primarily relates to feelings/preferences/psychological disorder, not behaviours. Any confusion to the contrary will muddy the waters even more than they are already. forestPIG(grunt) 03:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

A better suggestion
I had another look over your template and it would appear that usage is inevitably open to value-judgements. I would propose that we move to a more value-neutral "Sex and the law" type template, which would also correspond better to the portals we already have. forestPIG(grunt) 03:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems that there has been no opposition to my comments. In a couple of days, I will start work on turning this into a proper, value-neutral sociolegal template. forestPIG(grunt) 19:47, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * see below. I think there is use/need for a general sexual violence template and a more law based one. Having said that, the original templ. needed a lot of work (it use to be in one of the articles).--SasiSasi (talk) 00:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

See now
Template:Rape and Template:Sex and the Law forestPIG(grunt) 22:39, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Good sex and the law template. I have turned this template back into a general sexual violence template (this does include rape). One can argue about whether "violence" is neutral. Also, I have replaced the pictures (the original showed abduction not rape), the pic is not gender neutral (although i doubt we can find one).--SasiSasi (talk) 00:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Sexual violence
Although I have serious philosophical issues with the term "sexual violence" (not quite a misnomer, but far too specific and over-used IMO) this is probably not the place for them. However, if we are to use this term, we should consider some removals. I would suggest the following:

Statutory Rape

Incest

Domestic Violence

Sexual abuse

Child sexual abuse

Sexual Harassment

Pimping

Sexual slavery

Human Trafficking

None of these are necessarily sexual and violent, and must therefore be removed from the section entitled Forms of sexual violence. We can get round this problem by placing them in a section entitled Acts associated with sexual violence, or dumping them altogether. I would certainly not support placing the template on any of these pages, as it would probably look like a moral imposition/value judgement.

The same goes for the four articles listed in the child section. It is certainly simplistic and misleading to describe all child sexual abuse as violent. It has been known for decades now that the issue is far more complex.

I am also concerned about the last section, entitled Sociological theories. Whilst Pedophilia is a Chronophilia and/or diagnosis at best associated with nonviolent child sexual abuse, it is studied via a range of disciplines, and not primarily sociology. Most researchers see pedophilia as an erotic preference which is relatively fixed and hard to explain with sociological models. I have similar concerns about Rape trauma syndrome, which like Pedophilia should be eliminated completely. forestPIG(grunt) 18:26, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I am quite happy to work on the re-categorisation (many of them are from the old template which needed work). However I do think that the following are form of "sexual violence": Sexual abuse, Child sexual abuse, Sexual slavery. In that they are of sexual nature and involve a strong element of force. Statutory Rape and Sexual Harassment are not necessarily violent, so maybe put them under the section "Acts associated with sexual violence" as you suggested.
 * Its probably practical to keep the definition of violence to acts that do involve physical force of some sort (e.g. not along the line that all prostitution is a form of sexual violence, as some argue).--SasiSasi (talk) 20:13, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I have taken out some of the stuff, still needs work. Also removed pic, it was better than the last one, but does not add a lot, and we are not going to find a pic appropriate to all issued covered.--SasiSasi (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It has been suggested in Talk:Pedophilia, that this template might be better renamed to 'sexual abuse.' I am inclined to agree that that might be better. Zodon (talk) 09:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * There being no dissent or further discussion, renamed template to template:sexual abuse. Zodon (talk) 08:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Suggest convert to navbox template
This template might be better as a navbox. Since this is a WP:navigation template, not very narrowly focused, and several of the articles it is on have other sidebar templates - making them rather crowded. I thought this also might help address the issue of that some of the items on this template are only tangentially related to sexual violence. (e.g. Pedophilia, where there seems to be considerable difference of opinion about whether ).

Having a glaring red sidebar at the top of an article might tend to overemphasize possible connections between items on this template and sexual violence. Zodon (talk) 10:35, 26 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Change made, there being no discussion for 3 weeks. Zodon (talk) 08:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Female child molesters
The article Female Child Molesters suffers from the lack of internal links. This template seems like a rights place for it.90.181.138.240 (talk) 02:04, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Raptio
Could the word "raptio" be italicised as it is a Latin term? Thanks, 207.161.217.209 (talk) 04:48, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: It's unclear why non-English words should be italicized. Is there a stylistic guideline that points this out? — Andy W.  ( talk  · ctb) 06:30, 26 September 2016 (UTC)