Talk:Sexual abuse/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

"Leave me alone you dirty cuckold"

Does this image really help the article? It's a rather realistic drawing of a child being molested, and might be rather triggering for some. This is real armour (talk) 04:35, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

It is difficult to say, so I will lay the variables out for consideration.

On the one hand, Wikipedia is not censored, and the potential for a image to be "triggering" is considered inadequate grounds for removal. Triggering is highly subjective and can just as easily occur with stimuli that are completely neutral in the general sense. Furthermore, in this particular instance it is fallacious to assume the image would trigger and the text would not.

On the other hand, there are questions of WP:PERTINENCE with this image. While it seems laypeople like to put images in articles, from a professional standpoint it's not required nor even particularly necessary with many subjects, including this one. Furthermore, Martin van Maële drew these images to be erotic and it would not be a great leap to infer he was a pedophile from that. I would prefer to give such works as little recognition as possible.Legitimus (talk) 12:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

For documentation on this talk page, this is the image in question (and where it was placed in the article). In addition to what Legitimus stated above, there is also the WP:Offensive material guideline, which states, "[O]ffensive words and offensive images should not be included unless they are treated in an encyclopedic manner. Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available." It also has a note beside "typical Wikipedia readers" to clarify what it means by that. Like Legitimus, I would not mind removing the image in question. Flyer22 (talk) 19:07, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2016

Please add "1in6, based in the U.S., is one of the leading organizations dedicated to helping men who have had unwanted or abusive sexual experiences. The non-profit provides information & resources related to the issue, specifically for male survivors and those who care about them. The organization is named after the statistic, which indicates the percentage of men in the United States who have experienced some form of sexual abuse before age 18. To address the growing need for support groups dedicated to male survivors, 1in6 & RAINN jointly created a weekly online peer support group, facilitated by a professional counselor. It's a chat-based resource available to male survivors all over the world." because 1) male survivors need to know where they can find support, 2) the statistic (most well-researched) needs to be discussed as a means of creating awareness & fighting through the isolation and shame often associated with this issue, and 3) 1in6 is a leading organization, backed by decades of research and knowledge from top-tier clinical psychologists. Thank you.

Andrewplangdon (talk) 00:30, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done for now: (1) request is not clearly stated in the "change X to Y" format and (2) we have no article on 1in6. Establish the notability of the group first (WP:WTAF). EvergreenFir (talk) 19:23, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Latest additions

Proxima Centauri, regarding this, this and this, the solution is not to re-add the material. Yes, I see that you changed it after re-adding it, but the text is still problematic. For one, we should not be directly talking to our readers, and/or giving them medical advice. See WP:Medical disclaimer and WP:MEDMOS. Two, big blockquotes can be a WP:COPYVIO concern. And three, we should be using quality sources per WP:MEDRS. I might go ahead and ask WP:Med to weigh in on this. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 14:55, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Queried them here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 15:03, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Proxima Centauri, the following is fine, but it should be sourced: "Sex abuse is one of the most common forms of abuse in nursing homes. Sex abuse is any type of non consensual sex. If a nursing home fails to do proper background checks on an employee who subsequently abuses residents, the home can be liable for negligence. When nursing homes fail to supervise staff or train staff to recognize signs of abuse the home can also be liable for negligence." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 15:06, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

I made the reference clearer. Proxima Centauri (talk) 16:07, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

concur w/ Flyer22 Reborn on [1]--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 20:07, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Proxima Centauri, like I stated on my talk page, problems are still there. And I'd rather you learn to fix them instead of me going in and cleaning up the text and/or adding better sources.

Diannaa, do you mind weighing in on this matter, regarding the copyvio concerns? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 04:34, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

We should not be giving advice, especially medical advice. Even if it's presented as advice coming from the Alzheimer's Society or some other outside source, advice should never be given. Framing it as a quotation does not make it okay to add this stuff either. A statement (properly sourced) that sex abuse is common in nursing homes is appropriate. The Alzheimer's Society website is not a very good source for this. What you need is something that qualifies under WP:MEDRS. I have removed three paragraphs of advice from the article. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:51, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Diannaa. You explain copyvio matters much better than I do and that's why I pinged you. That you cleaned up the article is a bonus, but my lazy self should have simply taken the bullet and did it myself. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:44, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sexual abuse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090730101002/http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/pages/child-sexual-abuse.asp to http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/pages/child-sexual-abuse.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100121143245/http://www.thelutheran.org/article/article.cfm?article_id=8572 to http://www.thelutheran.org/article/article.cfm?article_id=8572

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:22, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Usually

The word 'usually' appears twice in this article but I do not see it quoted in any sources. I am concerned about original research here, is this derived from some synonym? ScratchMarshall (talk) 06:43, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sexual abuse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120519155442/http://www.clarku.edu/offices/dos/survivorguide/definition.cfm to http://www.clarku.edu/offices/dos/survivorguide/definition.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:13, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Possible Articles To Add To Page

Sears, H.A., Byers, E.S., & Price, E.L. (2007). The co-occurrence of adolescent boys’ and girls’ use of psychologically, physically, and sexually abusive behaviours in their dating relationships. Journal of Adolescence, 30, 487-504.

Foshee, V.A. (1996). Gender differences in adolescent dating abuse prevalence, types and injuries. Health Education Research, 11(3), 275-286.

Stets, J.E. & Pirog-Good, M.A. (1989). Patterns of physical and sexual abuse for men and women in dating relationships: A descriptive analysis. Journal of Family Violence 4(1), 63-76.

Poitras, M. & Lavoie, F. (1995). A study of the prevalence of sexual coercion in adolescent heterosexual dating relationships in a Quebec sample. Violence and Victims 10(4), 299-313.

Wingood, G.M., DiClemente, R.J., & Raj, A. (2000). Adverse consequences of intimate partner abuse among women in non-urban domestic violence shelters. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 19(4), 270-275.

Brousseau, M.M., Hebert, M., & Bergeron, S. (2012). Sexual coercion with mixed-sex couples: The roles of sexual motives, revictimization, and reperpetration. Journal of Sex Research, 49(6), 533-546.

Bergen, R.K. & Bukovec, P. (2006). Men and intimate partner rape: Characteristics of men who sexually abuse their partner. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21(10), 1375-1384

Maxwell, C.D., Robinson, A.L., & Post, L.A. (2003). The nature and predictors of sexual victimization and offending among adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 32(6). 465-477. Caregan25 (talk) 04:26, 1 August 2018 (UTC)Christine Regan

Caregan25, I reverted you per WP:MEDRS, WP:Undue weight and formatting issues. For health material, make sure that you adhere to WP:MEDRS. Adhering to WP:MEDRS for example, means generally avoiding primary sources. See WP:Primary. Also, a number of topics in this article have their own articles. So only summaries should be covered here in those cases; see WP:Summary style. I'm not sure if any of your content was a copyright violation, but keep WP:Copyvio in mind. If you reply here, there is no need to WP:Ping me since this article/talk page is on my watchlist. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:08, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Gay

Homosexual, or attracted to his/her own gender. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:8480:49F0:95D7:B2AA:579:A9CF (talk) 03:56, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Um science standards not met.

No first hand statistics. Also directly plagiarizes form sourses. On a personal note this article claims 78% of abuse is by men without any explanation of how this info was gathered. Additionally even if more men are charged or/and convicted, this does not necessarily indicate more abuse but rather a scued perception the importance/affects on the abused based on gender. I would like to see an accusation verses conviction ratio. In order to make the claim that men do more abusing this ratio must be consistent from accusation to investigation to charge and finally to conviction. Dcpacho (talk) 10:30, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2021

Add a section for vulnurable people and talk about the higher raates of sexual assault towards women of color, trans people, particularly trans women, as well as the high rate of sexual assault from straight people towards bisexual and pansexual people. 47.195.225.100 (talk) 16:49, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:12, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2021

Section Other animals, "Main article: Sexual coercion" should link to Sexual coercion among animals. 151.177.57.31 (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for your suggestion. Dimadick (talk) 19:31, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Subheadings read as racist comment - could someone please change this?

Could someone with editing skills please remedy the following:

The subheading of 'Minorities' is directly followed by the subheading of 'Other animals'.

There is clear potential for this to be read as implying that 'minorities' are 'animals'. I checked through the whole article and cannot see mention of any animal prior to the 'Other animals' section - possibly such a reference was removed in an edit. Hopefully so.

Also, I noted a number of other issues with the 'Minorities' section. I will try to flag these up sometime in the near future. If anyone else can help it would be much appreciated.

Thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by PenfoldBrown (talk • contribs) 06:30, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

You make a good point. I've moved "minorities" into the section where different groups are discussed. - Bilby (talk) 06:42, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Cheers PenfoldBrown (talk) 08:28, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Informal edit request: No mention of Groping?

No mention here of groping (a page which has only 8 interlanguage links, but is currently highly topical in the UK)? I feel it should at least be listed under ==See also==. 86.140.161.188 (talk) 10:03, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

sexual abuse

the act of Sexuall force to a minor.this has to stop .break the silence. Pls contact Childline if you are or saw a victim.thank you 168.167.247.27 (talk) 22:17, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2023

I suggest you should change the phrase “ by a woman's husband or ex-husband” to “ by one’s partner or ex-partner”, due to the fact that spousal sexual abuse can happen to anyone of any gender. Slasher husband (talk) 20:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 00:12, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

N v e

What is the meaning of drug abuse among student — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.112.224.6 (talk) 05:15, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Child On Child Sexual Abuse

Child Are Abused By Family Member 2607:FB91:145A:1985:A9C3:48FF:F672:9A51 (talk) 18:03, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2023

Can the picture be removed? I don't think including a graphic illustration of sexual assault is ok.

I haven't included the picture here due to the subject matter. There is only one picture.

Thanks PenfoldBrown (talk) 05:53, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done – I'll provide a more detailed explanation of why, however. While Wikipedia is not censored and images will not be removed purely because they may be objectionable, the image in question does not provide additional information or add additional relevancy to the article. I have therefore removed the image per MOS:OMIMG. Tollens (talk) 06:36, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Animals

There is a top-level section on animals and a sub-section on animals. These need to be combined, preferably into the sub-section.

Additionally, one of the references in the sub-section is a Wikipedia article. That's not right.

--24.80.199.58 (talk) 09:19, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Maybe remove the link to this one comment on "molester" being a pejorative or reinforce its significance, as it holds nothing at the moment?

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1020603214218?error=cookies_not_supported&code=f9c116d1-bc53-414a-ba25-2e86b9493300 108.183.57.52 (talk) 09:58, 19 November 2024 (UTC)