| Revision as of 21:14, 25 June 2024 editAndyTheGrump (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers54,017 edits Undid revision 1230993337 by 2601:603:5000:DAF0:57DA:6FD:AED0:ADBA (talk) not a requestTag: Undo← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 05:47, 7 January 2025 edit undoJohnuniq (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators86,680 editsm Reverted edit by 103.88.90.242 (talk) to last version by Lowercase sigmabot IIITag: Rollback | ||
| (29 intermediate revisions by 25 users not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| {{WikiProject Pornography |importance=Top}} | {{WikiProject Pornography |importance=Top}} | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Pedophilia Article Watch/WikiProjectNotice}} | |||
| {{controversial}} | {{controversial}} | ||
| {{Copied | {{Copied | ||
| Line 34: | Line 33: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{old move| |
{{old move|date1=16 December 2023|destination1=Child Sexual Abuse Material|result1=not moved|link1=Special:Permalink/1190731991#Requested move 16 December 2023|date2=16 August 2024|destination2=Child sexual abuse material|result2=not moved|link2=Special:Permalink/1241121078#Requested move 16 August 2024}} | ||
| ⚫ | == Gamer's Dilemma == | ||
| == Possible section regarding the history of child pornography before the internet == | |||
| I |
I feel that this is largely out of place with the page as it discusses ] rather than "real" child pornography, should this be moved to the aforementioned page or similar ones or be kept as is? ] (]) 16:32, 29 February 2024 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | :I second Magi's opinion, I believe it should be moved elsewhere as it seems to be conflating the two as if they were equivalent which said relation is hotly debated at very best and can be seen as outright slanderous at worst. Though this might just be because I am not sure if the "Gamer's Dilemma" is referring specifically to hyperrealistic simulations made to be indistinguishable from actual child pornography, or instead was referring to/also including cartoon/anime pornography such as lolicon/shotacon where a direct relation between the fictional material and realistic depictions of actual child sexual exploitation is pretty much nonexistent, in general, I think it is important that we differentiate the two from each other, but I still think either way it should probably go to another article. ] (]) 00:08, 10 March 2024 (EST) | ||
| :Do you have ] on it? If so, be ] and add it. ] (]│]) 05:20, 31 January 2021 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | == Requested move 16 August 2024 == | ||
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |||
| ⚫ | <div class="boilerplate mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top --> | ||
| I'm quite sure that there was child pornography before the Internet, although how it would have been distributed in the days before emails, I've no idea. Perhaps under the counter in certain newsagents shops. But still photography has been around for over 170 years and cine photography for 125 years, so assuming that human nature hasn't changed in all that time and that there's nothing new under the sun, there must have been a lot of it produced since then. How much of it has survived is anyone's guess. However, the definition of child porn has changed a great deal since the 1980s. It used to mean films or photos of children taking part in sexual acts, but now, any film or photo of a naked child is regarded as child porn. I remember when, back in June, 1976, I was in a WHSmith's store and on the shelves was that months issue of Parents magazine. On the cover was a photo of two naked children, a boy and a girl aged about three years old. No one thought anything of it at that time, but anyone buying it back then and still having it in their possession would find themselves in a lot of trouble now if the police found out. The question posed by the above anecdote is this: If it wasn't wrong to possess that magazine in 1976, why is it wrong now? David Rayner, September 7th, 2021. | |||
| ⚫ | :''The following is a closed discussion of a ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a ] after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.'' | ||
| :I can't speak speciically to the Parents magizine cover in question you recall seeing but I can say that it is not now nor has it ever been illegal in the UK to possess images of non-sexual child nudity in and of itself (contrary to popular misconception in the UK and US) so likely the cover wouldn't be illegal by todays legal standards just as it wasn't back then in the UK or US (assuming it indeed just shows mere nudity that is not sexual/lewd, lacisviouse, etc as you seemed to suggest it did). Since this is something that reliable source have addressed both in the UK and US and in other countries (i.e. IS underage nudity illegal in and of itself and if so when often in regards to failed attempts to prosecute people for content with mere underage nudity, that is something soomeone with some time could specifically address in the article better. Here is a link to an PDF document that talks about the legal differences in how many difference countries around the world define and legislate CSAM (aka Child Porn) material since not all countries define CSAM exactly the same (it's from INHOPE, a internationally recognized group fighting to eliminate CSAM and operating a reporting network for CSAM): https://www.inhope.org/media/pages/articles/inhope-network-legislative-overview/4b1f18f61f-1623308197/legislativeoverview_final.pdf This should help as reliable source to use as a starting off point at least. Now To address the original question above: Before the internet, much of child porn was sent through the mail or passed around among individuals directly from person to person. Some European countries did not outlaw child porn until some time later than America and many European countries did and as such you could buy such content on the open market including in porn shops in those countries. Now all European countries outlaw it, if were talking about the type of CP/CSAM that every country has defined as illegal. When it came to clear cut CP (i.e. non-gray area content) in the prepublic intenret days, it was largely distributed via photographs, magazines, books, and 8mm/16mm films and later on video tape or via computer bulletin board services (BBS's) in the 80's/early-90's. Also, be aware that while the internet has become the main way to distribute CP these days, it hasn't completely wiped out other means of distribution such material such as via snail mail or via person to person as reliable news sources from time to time still report such cases still though much less frequently then internet related CP casesm these days. Since articles from notable publications exist on this specific question which were published in the years of the late seventies to thw mid 90s (before the internet was easily accesable by the general public) and thus you can find them if you search through public library newspaper and magazine archives, if anyone wants to add section regarding how CP was distributed, especially before the inernet, then there is no reason it can't be done in compliance with WP policies regarding sources and such. ] (]) 03:23, 20 November 2021 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | The result of the move request was: '''not moved.''' <small>(])</small> ] ] 06:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC) | ||
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | |||
| ⚫ | ---- | ||
| No, the photo on the Parents magazine cover from nearly 46 years ago was just nudity and nothing else. However, photos of simple child nudity are a bit of a grey area. I remember a couple of cases where parents who took photos of their children in the bath and then took the film in to be developed and printed were arrested and charged with child sexual abuse when workers in the photo lab saw the photos and called the police. One of them was ITN newsreader Julia Somerville. But when the cases got to court, the judge threw the cases out because he ruled that the photos were neither abusive nor pornographic. Such cases are unlikely to happen today because photos are now taken digitally and no film processing is involved. Therefore, there is no need for anyone outside of the family or close friends to see the images. David Rayner, Monday, December 27th, 2021. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 12:21, 27 December 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ] → {{no redirect|Child sexual abuse material}} – While "child pornography" has been generally accepted as the ] for this topic, the ] is clear that that is not the only thing we must consider, and that article titles must also be ]. I think there is also an argument that the common name has shifted in more recent times, with news outlets, academia, government agencies, and NGOs increasingly shifting to use "CSAM" (and similar terms). | |||
| That is somewhat misleading- while it is true that mere nudity is not pornography, at least in the United States, the question as to whether something is mere nudity vs. pornography is a highly factual issue that juries must decide in adherence to the jury instructions given, which typically heavily involve the Dost factors which distinguish the difference between nudity vs. pornography for purposes of law in the United States. Rather, in the context of U.S. law, it can be an extremely complex grey area, given that the original doctrine in Miller v. California and obscenity doctrine in general is by no means a neat and clean doctrine of the U.S. supreme court. For example, Free Speech Coalition v. Ashcroft created a major exception to the legal definition of child pornography under U.S. law by striking down the language "appears to be" from the statutory law, and instead requiring the government to prove the actual involvement of a child. ] (]) 19:25, 11 February 2022 (UTC) | |||
| As is outlined in ], there has been a broad shift towards using "child sexual abuse material" (or similar terms) as the more neutral term that avoids the inaccurate description of abusive material as consensual pornography. This usage is supported by experts and academics as well as industry/law enforcement organizations including ] () and the US Department of Justice () in the US, the UK Home Office () in the UK, etc. Per the : {{tq|While this phrase still appears in federal law, “child sexual abuse material” is preferred, as it better reflects the abuse that is depicted in the images and videos and the resulting trauma to the child. In fact, in 2016, an international working group, comprising a collection of countries and international organizations working to combat child exploitation, formally recognized “child sexual abuse material” as the preferred term.}} ] (she/her • ]) 17:05, 16 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ---------------------- | |||
| I concur there should be a section but sources would be hard to come by and the only information I've ever come across is online forum discussions. One involved a magazine like Hustler if I'm correct showing a girl in a suggestive pose. In the next issue another girl was in a suggestive pose looking at the page of the first girl. I think this would count as pornography because of where it appeared defining its purpose. It appears that before laws regarding CP there was the occasional image in a mainstream magazine. ] ]|] 19:01, 3 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
| * '''Oppose.''' I don't think that the current title implies that child pornography is consensual. Besides, , while "child pornography" is still the mainstream definition by a big margin. Only five of the 86 sources in this article seem to refer to this as "child sexual abuse material". Titling this article with a new term used by only a minority of reliable sources would not be neutral, at least not until the paradigm possibly changes in the future. ] (]) 21:40, 16 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| What about the fully nude shoot of Brooke Shields she posed for Playboy at age 10? I'm not sure if really pornographic but the purpose was clearly erotic in nature and even if legal would cause a big stir today. ] ]|] 15:40, 12 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
| *'''support''' per nom—] 00:58, 17 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | *'''Strong oppose.''' Many reliable sources continue to call it "child pornography", so it remains the current common name. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 07:04, 17 August 2024 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Strong oppose'''. The nominator has provided no evidence that child pornography is a non-neutral term. The opinions of these agencies don't appear to be widely held views.] (]) 17:39, 17 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Oppose''', per others. It is the common name. ] (]) 18:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :'''Oppose''' for all the reasons we opposed it last time and the evidence that it is non-neutral is slim and do not outweigh COMMONNAME. ] (]) 19:30, 17 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ==Wiki Education assignment: LLIB 1115 - Intro to Information Research== | |||
| {{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/Idaho_State_University/LLIB_1115_-_Intro_to_Information_Research_(Fall_2023) | assignments = ] | start_date = 2023-08-21 | end_date = 2023-12-08 }} | |||
| :'''Support''' the common name is inaccurate and reflects misconceptions that child abuse sexual material could ever be in the same category as consensual pornography. The current name is non-neutral with a bias towards advocates of legalized pedophilia which is something we should strongly oppose regardless of how it was normalized in the past. ] (]) 16:59, 18 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| <span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by ] (]) 17:24, 4 October 2023 (UTC)</span> | |||
| *'''Oppose''': The term 'child pornography' is the established and commonly used phrase. ]] 17:19, 18 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | *'''Oppose''' per very clear common name. Nothing has changed since the previous RM nine months ago. -- ] (]) 11:11, 19 August 2024 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Oppose'''. While I can understand the motivation of those who wish to encourage alternative terminology, 'child pornography' is currently by far the most commonly used term. Misplaced Pages reflects current usage, it does not set out to change it. ] (]) 12:48, 19 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | <div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: var(--color-error, red);">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!-- from ] --> | ||
| ⚫ | </div><div style="clear:both;" class=></div> | ||
| ⚫ | == Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2024 == | ||
| ⚫ | == Requested move 16 |
||
| ⚫ | <div class="boilerplate mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top --> | ||
| ⚫ | :''The following is a closed discussion of a ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a ] after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.'' | ||
| {{edit semi-protected|Child pornography|answered=yes}} | |||
| ⚫ | The result of the move request was: '''not moved.''' |
||
| Add this to the Distribution and receipt section: | |||
| ⚫ | ---- | ||
| In 2023, the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children’s CyberTipline received 36.2 million reports of suspected child sexual exploitation, an increase of 12% from 2022.{{redacted}} | |||
| References: | |||
| ] → {{no redirect|Child Sexual Abuse Material}} – I was previously undecided on what to do, but now I feel that a discussion is necessary. Recently, I noticed that the ] began using this term because it is more accurate than the current title. I also did further digging, and found that the ] also uses this term. According to ], the move towards this terminology started in 2021, and has only gained traction since then. I am can't think of any reason to keep the title as it is, but I'll start a discussion anyway. ] (]) 01:33, 16 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
| <ref>National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. “CyberTipline Data.” Last modified 2021. Accessed September 12, 2024. https://www.missingkids.org/cybertiplinedata.</ref> | |||
| * '''Oppose''' per ]. At least that's my impression. But I am not actually going to search for either term on the internet to confirm that. ] (]) 02:14, 16 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
| <ref>National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. CyberTipline 2023 Report. Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, 2024.</ref> ] (]) 20:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | * |
||
| {{reflist-talk}} | |||
| * '''oppose''' No evidence provided by nom. Ngrams and g scholar clearly show current title is overwhelmingly dominant—] 16:48, 16 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
| :{{done}} <code>]! ]? .</code> 03:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| * '''Neutral''' ] doesn't depend only on the most common name but also on being precise and neutral. Having an article called "Child pornography" can be interpreted as an oxymoron and imprecise and misleading such as the same as writing an article called "Slave volunteer". One person could also make the assertion that the current title is not neutral such as if someone were to move the page about "Psilocybin" to "Shrooms" simply because it's more common especially for the people who enjoy it. I cannot agree with the suggested new title if only because of the capitalization which is not how we name things on Misplaced Pages but I do see how the current title is not neutral or precise and could be due for a change. ] (]) 18:45, 17 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
| :I have removed some copyvio from this-- -- ] (]) 13:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Oppose''' The proposed name narrows the scope, since it requires abuse. Sexting between teens would manufacture such material, but does not necessarily involve abuse, unless the nominator proposes that all minors are abused whenever they make such material, whatever the circumstances, even if they are a boyfriend and girlfriend who are under the age of majority. (such as the current U.S. law defines it, which makes such teens have a lifetime label of registered sex offender, for filming themselves for their same-aged partners). Instead of "sexual abuse" it should be "sexually explicit" because of the production by teens for their teen partners, which is still illegal and still covered by this article; ] or a more descriptive title ] because the categorization of child is different in different jurisdictions, where the limiting age of child may be significantly younger that the oldest minors, but they are minors in whatever jurisdiction, as they are below the threshold age for the production of such material. Note the the age of majority and the threshold ages for the production of such material varies across the globe. ;;; OR we just keep the current name, since it is the common name. ;;; the nominator has not used non-US sources to support the rename, so this could be U.S.-biased as well. -- ] (]) 06:09, 19 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | *'''Oppose''' per very clear |
||
| ⚫ | <div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: |
||
| ⚫ | </div><div style="clear:both;"></div> | ||
| == Moving to Child sexual abuse material == | |||
| ⚫ | == Semi-protected edit request on |
||
| Just wanted to add my support for this article to be moved to "Child sexual abuse material". | |||
| Multiple sources have already been shared above, I'll add one: Task Force Argos, an Australia police unit, clearly explains that "porn" is made between consentent people. Speaking of "child porn" (with children or even infants) completely inaccurately reflects that the children have been abused. | |||
| https://play.listnr.com/podcast/disclosed | |||
| https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/387-hunting-warhead | |||
| ] (]) 07:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :This has already been discussed twice before. You can read the two discussions . ] (]) 17:40, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Semi-protected edit request on 1 January 2025 == | |||
| {{edit semi-protected|Child pornography|answered=yes}} | {{edit semi-protected|Child pornography|answered=yes}} | ||
| SaaS Platforms used to catch what should never have never been uploaded in the first place. | |||
| Add https://www.preventcp.org as a relevant resource for preventing child pornography, in the organizations section. ] (]) 18:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| https://www.youtube.com/csai-match/ | |||
| :Sorry, but no. We don't link obscure websites that offer advice like "Lean in the direction of prayer and asking God for help" as a means to deal with a global issue. ] (]) 18:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
| https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/photodna/CloudService?oneroute=true | |||
| https://protectingchildren.google/intl/en/#alliances-and-programs | |||
| https://us.vobile.com/ | |||
| https://azure.microsoft.com/en-ca/products/ai-services/ai-vision/#overview | |||
| Law in United States | |||
| ⚫ | == Gamer's Dilemma == | ||
| §2422. Coercion and enticement | |||
| (a) Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. | |||
| (b) Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life. | |||
| I feel that this is largely out of place with the page as it discusses ] rather than "real" child pornography, should this be moved to the aforementioned page or similar ones or be kept as is? ] (]) 16:32, 29 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | :I second Magi's opinion, I believe it should be moved elsewhere as it seems to be conflating the two as if they were equivalent which said relation is hotly debated at very best and can be seen as outright slanderous at worst. Though this might just be because I am not sure if the "Gamer's Dilemma" is referring specifically to hyperrealistic simulations made to be indistinguishable from actual child pornography, or instead was referring to/also including cartoon/anime pornography such as lolicon/shotacon where a direct relation between the fictional material and realistic depictions of actual child sexual exploitation is pretty much nonexistent, in general, I think it is important that we differentiate the two from each other, but I still think either way it should probably go to another article. ] (]) 00:08, 10 March 2024 (EST) | ||
| ] (]) 23:02, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| : You have not said what change you are suggesting be made to the wording of the article. Exactly what text, if any, do you wish to see added to the article, and what text, if any, you wish to see removed? ] (]) 23:48, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 05:47, 7 January 2025
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Child pornography article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 6 months  |
 | This article was nominated for deletion review on 26 August 2007. The result of the discussion was refer further disputes to ArbCom. Revisions prior to the first that contained the term may be restored.. |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
 | Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
|
 | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
Gamer's Dilemma
I feel that this is largely out of place with the page as it discusses Simulated child pornography rather than "real" child pornography, should this be moved to the aforementioned page or similar ones or be kept as is? MagiTagi (talk) 16:32, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- I second Magi's opinion, I believe it should be moved elsewhere as it seems to be conflating the two as if they were equivalent which said relation is hotly debated at very best and can be seen as outright slanderous at worst. Though this might just be because I am not sure if the "Gamer's Dilemma" is referring specifically to hyperrealistic simulations made to be indistinguishable from actual child pornography, or instead was referring to/also including cartoon/anime pornography such as lolicon/shotacon where a direct relation between the fictional material and realistic depictions of actual child sexual exploitation is pretty much nonexistent, in general, I think it is important that we differentiate the two from each other, but I still think either way it should probably go to another article. GigaMigaDigaChad (talk) 00:08, 10 March 2024 (EST)
Requested move 16 August 2024
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) SilverLocust 💬 06:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Child pornography → Child sexual abuse material – While "child pornography" has been generally accepted as the WP:COMMONNAME for this topic, the article title policy is clear that that is not the only thing we must consider, and that article titles must also be neutral. I think there is also an argument that the common name has shifted in more recent times, with news outlets, academia, government agencies, and NGOs increasingly shifting to use "CSAM" (and similar terms).
As is outlined in Child pornography#Terminology and definitions, there has been a broad shift towards using "child sexual abuse material" (or similar terms) as the more neutral term that avoids the inaccurate description of abusive material as consensual pornography. This usage is supported by experts and academics as well as industry/law enforcement organizations including NCMEC (ex) and the US Department of Justice (ex) in the US, the UK Home Office (ex) in the UK, etc. Per the DOJ: While this phrase still appears in federal law, “child sexual abuse material” is preferred, as it better reflects the abuse that is depicted in the images and videos and the resulting trauma to the child. In fact, in 2016, an international working group, comprising a collection of countries and international organizations working to combat child exploitation, formally recognized “child sexual abuse material” as the preferred term.
GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 17:05, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. I don't think that the current title implies that child pornography is consensual. Besides, "child sexual abuse material" is used only by a small minority of reliable sources, while "child pornography" is still the mainstream definition by a big margin. Only five of the 86 sources in this article seem to refer to this as "child sexual abuse material". Titling this article with a new term used by only a minority of reliable sources would not be neutral, at least not until the paradigm possibly changes in the future. Badbluebus (talk) 21:40, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- support per nom—blindlynx 00:58, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose. Many reliable sources continue to call it "child pornography", so it remains the current common name. O.N.R. 07:04, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose. The nominator has provided no evidence that child pornography is a non-neutral term. The opinions of these agencies don't appear to be widely held views.Esolo5002 (talk) 17:39, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose, per others. It is the common name. Svampesky (talk) 18:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for all the reasons we opposed it last time and the evidence that it is non-neutral is slim and do not outweigh COMMONNAME. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:30, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support the common name is inaccurate and reflects misconceptions that child abuse sexual material could ever be in the same category as consensual pornography. The current name is non-neutral with a bias towards advocates of legalized pedophilia which is something we should strongly oppose regardless of how it was normalized in the past. Jorahm (talk) 16:59, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: The term 'child pornography' is the established and commonly used phrase. Waqar💬 17:19, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per very clear common name. Nothing has changed since the previous RM nine months ago. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:11, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. While I can understand the motivation of those who wish to encourage alternative terminology, 'child pornography' is currently by far the most commonly used term. Misplaced Pages reflects current usage, it does not set out to change it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:48, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2024
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add this to the Distribution and receipt section: In 2023, the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children’s CyberTipline received 36.2 million reports of suspected child sexual exploitation, an increase of 12% from 2022.(Redacted)
References: TruthToPower2022 (talk) 20:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
References
- National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. “CyberTipline Data.” Last modified 2021. Accessed September 12, 2024. https://www.missingkids.org/cybertiplinedata.
- National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. CyberTipline 2023 Report. Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, 2024.
Done Scaledish! Talkish? Statish.03:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)- I have removed some copyvio from this-- -- Diannaa (talk) 13:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Moving to Child sexual abuse material
Just wanted to add my support for this article to be moved to "Child sexual abuse material".
Multiple sources have already been shared above, I'll add one: Task Force Argos, an Australia police unit, clearly explains that "porn" is made between consentent people. Speaking of "child porn" (with children or even infants) completely inaccurately reflects that the children have been abused.
https://play.listnr.com/podcast/disclosed
https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/387-hunting-warhead
LexisVD (talk) 07:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- This has already been discussed twice before. You can read the two discussions . Badbluebus (talk) 17:40, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 1 January 2025
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
SaaS Platforms used to catch what should never have never been uploaded in the first place. https://www.youtube.com/csai-match/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/photodna/CloudService?oneroute=true https://protectingchildren.google/intl/en/#alliances-and-programs https://us.vobile.com/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-ca/products/ai-services/ai-vision/#overview
Law in United States §2422. Coercion and enticement (a) Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
(b) Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life.
FedLawAuditing (talk) 23:02, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- You have not said what change you are suggesting be made to the wording of the article. Exactly what text, if any, do you wish to see added to the article, and what text, if any, you wish to see removed? JBW (talk) 23:48, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- B-Class level-5 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in Everyday life
- B-Class vital articles in Everyday life
- B-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
- High-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
- WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
- B-Class law articles
- Mid-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles
- B-Class Crime-related articles
- High-importance Crime-related articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- B-Class Pornography articles
- Top-importance Pornography articles
- B-Class Top-importance Pornography articles
- WikiProject Pornography articles
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics