Talk:Prostitution in New Zealand

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Historic legality

changed 18 to 17 as 18 year olds are allowed to be sex workers. added latest report --Rbaal 03:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the bit about UK law as it was incorrect, the act of prostitution has never been illegal in NZ. tidied up a couple of other places no major changes. --Rbaal 08:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't? My understanding was that in 1840 or thereabouts the laws of Britain became the laws of NZ. Was prostitution not illegal in Britain? Could you put it some kind of history summary? --Helenalex 14:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not certain about the status/history of prostitution in the UK. Currently it is not illegal, running a brothel, soliciting, living of third party etc are illegal. I cannot find a good source that gives its status in 1840. I suspect it was not actually illegal and might never have been generally so (though there might have been local laws etc.). Therefore if NZ copied UK that might be why it has never been illegal here.

That is why there were 70 "brothels" in Auckland according to a survey just before 2003. The way they operated from a legal point of view was that you actually entered into two contracts, one with the massage parlour the other with the sex worker. You did this by paying at the front desk for the "massage" ($60-$80) then in the room you paid the sex worker ($80-$100). The parlour owner kept the $80 for their cut and she kept the $100 for her "tip". Hence everything was legal as there were two contracts but only one was for sex and as it was person-to-person it was legal.

I don't know when this system was first used but it was certainly present in the 1950's though I do not know what the fees were then.

--Rbaal 01:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above statement is only partially correct. The old Massage Parlours Act ( repealed by the new PRA ) actually made all acts of prostitution occurring within a massage parlour an offense under the Act. Thus the attempts by parlours and masseuses to separate the transaction into parts did not actually change the illegality, but simply made it difficult for the police to prove a case as an officer would have to go into the room with the masseuse. This makes the main article also somewhat incorrect as prostitution itself was illegal if it occurred within a massage parlour. Confused ? That's why the move to reform. Under the old system massage parlours were licensed but had to play a dance with the police over not being brothels, while additionally the workers were not allowed to be masseuses if they had drug convictions, which forced such people onto the streets and into unsafe environments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.86.103 (talk) 13:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Copeland and Sweden

(moved from article) - note left in relation to Copeland's press release - Note: the figures named in the article are not the same as found in Sweden (this editor is from Sweden). Police reports about 130 street prostitutes in Stockholm. Other sources estimates an additional 600-800 over the internet, in houses etc. The law is questioned in Sweden. To note is that there is very little debate nor research done in Sweden regarding prostitution. A report from the government from year 2004 can be found at: http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/Publicerat/2004/8449/Summary.htm. Never reports from 2007 also exists. Prostitution is about the same before and after the law, maybe slightly higher. The difference is mainly that it has moved from the streets to other places where it is more difficult for government to track it. The intention from the government is however that the law shall be further more strict.

talk) 07:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Flags on 'by Country' articles

I reversed the removal of the flag, because I think that it helps unite the various New Zealand topics. It's not irrelevant, just to prostitution, not to New Zealand, where this is a very important topic 142.239.254.19 (talk) 15:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The {{
CC-BY.-gadfium 18:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
Someone could set up the kind of cheesy pic they sometimes use to illustrate newspaper articles on the story - like a woman in lingerie (no face shown) counting money or something. There might be a generic one on Commons but it would be likely to show foreign currency or driving on the right side of the street or something. --Helenalex (talk) 21:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Needs significant re-writing

This article needs significant re-writing. It has very poor sentence structures and grammar. JohnC (talk) 00:03, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and the article does not cover the law that was repealed by the new Act, namely the Massage Parlours Act ( MPA ). The MPA was introduced in the 1970's and it provided the legislative and regulatory framework for the sex industry prior to the introduction of the PRA. The article also appears to have a left wing bias. The PRA was only passed as a result of National party member support, notably leader Don Brash and high profile members such a Maurice Williamson making valuable speeches in the House. The article mentions support for the Bill from women's rights groups but opposition from only ' some ' feminists while the police were neutral. In fact the feminists were divided down the middle. The radical feminists, along with the gay community and prostitutes supported the Bill, while the traditional feminists, police and church groups opposed the Bill. The feminists debate was quite heated. The radical feminists supported the Bill as they saw prostitutes as the high priestesses of the matriarchal society who had been persecuted by the patriarchal society. The traditional feminists, many of them Marxist, saw prostitutes as victims of the patriarchal society and an example of the objectification and exploitation of women. The article needs a complete rethink. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.86.103 (talk) 14:24, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Radical feminists are opposed to prostitution

Radical feminists
do not support prostitution and its legalization. Liberal feminsts do.

And

radical feminists
are not "traditional", they oppose everything which is traditional.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.9.90 (talk) 13:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The

radical feminists are the ones who see prostitutes as victims of the patriarchal society and an example of the objectification and exploitation of women. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.9.90 (talk) 13:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Radical feminism is a philosophy emphasizing the patriarchal roots of inequality between men and women, or, more specifically, social dominance of women by men. Radical feminism views patriarchy as dividing rights, privileges and power primarily by gender, and as a result oppressing women and privileging men.

gender roles
, and they aim to end the oppression of women and the male domminance from society by attacking the underlying causes of these problems and by addressing the fundamental societal components that support them.

Radical feminists see prostitution as an integral part of the patriarchal system, as a way of maintaining patriarchy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.9.90 (talk) 15:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Radical feminists are not the ones who support prostitution; it's the sex positive feminists
who support it.

Sex positive feminists believe that women can have positive experiences working as prostitutes, and that prostitution isn't necessarily bad for women if prostitutes are treated with respect.

There have been objections to the term "sex-positive feminism", as this implies that feminists who oppose prostitution are "sex-negative".

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.9.90 (talk) 14:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Broader article needed?

An article about the broader subject or sex/sexuality/sexual behaviour in New Zealand might be a good idea, assuming nothing like that exists at present, which I don't think it does. Richard001 (talk) 01:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bias

It is pretty obvious that since the last major re-write of this article I did in early 2009, a small number of anonymous sources have devoted considerable energy to giving the article a negative spin, largely based on dubious sources and opinion. For instance Melissa Farley, one of the most outspoken critics of sex work, never wrote any report on the situation in New Zealand she merely stated her opinions on her own website. I have attempted to clean some of this up without removing material.

talk) 13:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

More Bias

I have removed or reduced the material concerning underage sex work. The article has been spun in such a way as to make it seem the the 2003 act resulted in a major problem. The reality is that it is a very minor problem that existed before the 2003 change.--Rbaal (talk) 22:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To the person who is conducting an edit attach from a unidentified IP address - talk here dont just try and reverse my edits because you dont like them. Demanding cites for very entry is a blocking tequnique that wikipedia does not allow

--Rbaal (talk) 01:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have to understand that you can't just write here anything you want without providing a reliable source. You have offered absolutely no citation for the claims you have made, which is in direct violation of

WP:V
. No, not every single phrase written on WP needs a citation, but the things you wrote cannot, under any circumstances, remain without a citation, and I am determined to take this further, if you continue adding these paragraphs. 188.25.173.10 (talk) 01:34, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I note that anonymous coward 188.25.173.10 continues to use cites to try and block edits they don't like. However strangely does not bother about cites on edits they the do like!. Double standards or what!

I guess I will just have to remove edits they like that don't have valid cites and see how they react.

If we are going to 100% cite on this article then things are going to get into a real mess. But I guess coward is not interested in this.

--Rbaal (talk) 01:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop insulting each other and
verifiable source. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 01:41, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
I concur. Placed a notice on Rbaal's talk. Falcon8765 (talk) 01:49, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stickee - I am assuming good faith with editors but its very hard when the other person is working behind a anonymous Ip address. "Anonymous Coward" is common Internet terminology for such a user. I did not invent it.

what makes my edits rather dubious? The fact that I am a New Zealander? That I am local and hence actually know what is happening from being on the ground? I am sorry but I don't mark down every think I read from local sources perhaps I should start doing that!

I understand tthat citing is important and have actually told off users before abut this but in thsi case its being used as a blocker not as a way of improving wikipedia!

Sorry if I sound a bit hard but the article had a very misleading bias within it. --Rbaal (talk) 01:55, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If people don't login, their "username" will be their IP address. Perhaps that person simply didn't want to sign up.
In response to the added material to the article, the part where you state "...Police later admitted that he children has been removed because of their age and not because of the suspicion of selling sex..." certainly helps the article adhere to a
neutral point of view, however it is completely unsourced, thus I cannot tell if it is true or not. That statement would be a good addition to the article if it was sourced. (If you make any further comments here make sure to tell me on my talk page; I might not notice them here). Thanks, Stickee (talk) 02:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

I think we can remove the tag on prostitution of minors now having checked all the references - it is a controversial issue with conflicting claims, in NZ as elsewhere

talk) 16:47, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Vague and unsourced

"The vast majority of New Zealand sex workers are biologically female, but there are also male and transgender workers, particularly in Auckland. Both engage in sole operator businesses as described above, and a few male brothels and escort agencies exist. In addition, transgender street walkers are not uncommon. Male prostitutes aiming at a male clientele usually advertise in the gay newspaper Express or in New Zealand Truth." This is very uninformative, and unreferenced. --Hugh7 (talk) 21:26, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessarily verbose and confusing article

I'm an American human rights lawyer and I had significant trouble understanding the state of prostitution (or sex work) in Australia after reading this article. The summary the top _stops_ with the 2003 act when it should start with it as it's the current law. It wasn't until the 7th paragraph within the section "Prostitution Reform Act 2003" that it actually started talking about what the Act did. I'm not against the historical analysis, but place that in a different section, such as "Build up to the 2003 Act." 122.160.69.181 (talk) 12:34, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 19:48, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 21:08, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 15:17, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 16:43, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 18:07, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 09:56, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 12:26, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 22:20, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 15:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 17:13, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 14:50, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—

Talk to my owner:Online 13:11, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

This message was posted before February 2018.

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:35, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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:

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.

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:50, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Prostitution in New Zealand. 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:

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.

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign prostitutes in New Zealand

Dear Stuartyeates

Immigration New Zealand report say that

"Migrants working unlawfully in sex industry by choice Thursday, 1 August 2019 Immigration New Zealand has found a number of migrants working unlawfully in the sex industry, but no evidence of exploitation.

The Prostitution Reform Act 2003 (PRA) states that only New Zealand citizens and residents can legally work in the sex industry.

Immigration New Zealand (INZ) took a proactive approach to better understand issues within the sex industry as part of wider work on exploitation.

INZ Compliance Officers visited 57 brothels across Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga, Wellington, Christchurch, Queenstown and Dunedin.

When engaging proactively with small owner-operated brothel employers and workers, INZ found people on temporary visas working unlawfully.

Sixty-six migrant sex workers were identified 36 on visitor visas, two on student visas and the remainder held resident visas. All of the sex workers identified except for one were Chinese nationals. There was no evidence they were being exploited."

https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/migrants-working-unlawfully-in-sex-industry-by-choice

I described the text about foreign prostitutes in the same way.I don't understand what you said ( gross misrepresentation of a primary source ) Bablos939 (talk) 14:20, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The text you added was "INZ Compliance Officers visited 57 brothels across Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga, Wellington, Christchurch, Queenstown and Dunedin. All of the sex workers identified except for one were Chinese women", which says all but one of the women working at these brothels were Chinese. The figures only refer to the migrant women working there, not to all of women working there. As there may be 6 women working in each brothel (the others presumably being New Zealanders), "all but one were Chinese" is a misrepresentation. (Pinging
Stuartyeates as he was the one who reverted your edit.) --John B123 (talk) 17:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
Sub-title is 'Foreign prostitutes in New Zealand'Bablos939 (talk) 10:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You are making a misrepresentation. The number of 6,000 doesn't come from anywhere.Bablos939 (talk) 13:41, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No misrepresentation, figures come from New Zealand's Ministry of Justice Prostitution Law Review Committee Report --John B123 (talk) 13:56, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
INZ don`t has conducted a full investigation.That figure is a sample.Don't make your own research out of different sourcesBablos939 (talk) 14:03, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're missing the point, the news about the 66 Chinese prostitutes in Auckland is insignificant compared to the total number. Even if the report had a 50% error, 66 is only 2% of 3,000, using the figure of 1,700 you quote for Auckland the figure of 66 is still to small to draw conclusions from. --John B123 (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You are freely twisting.NZ Compliance Officers didn't figures the whole number.Bablos939 (talk) 14:37, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/migrants-working-unlawfully-in-sex-industry-by-choice Where is the number 6000 ?? Bablos939 (talk) 14:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Are you comparing 2005 source with 2019 source ? Bablos939 (talk) 14:43, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am saying that the finding about 66 prostitutes is not enough to enable sweeping statements to be made. The actual figure of the total number of prostitutes in NZ is irrelevant, what ever that figure, it's high enough to make only 66 prostitutes non-representative. --John B123 (talk) 14:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're talking as if a New Zealand immigration officer had less knowledge than you. #Redirect Wikipedia:No original research They determined that 51 brothels were appropriate samples.You are consistently ignoring state agency source as well as other taking page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Prostitution_in_Spain Bablos939 (talk) 10:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You try to explain this source. 'Asian prostitutes, who are mainly Chinese, make up a third of the 1700 sex workers in Auckland, according to the collective Many are sole operators working from urban homes or apartments.' https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10545882

"One of the authors, nurse specialist Bronwyn Schofield, said that "probably two-thirds" of the 38 non-resident sex workers she had interviewed over two years after the act were Chinese women." https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/migrants-working-unlawfully-in-sex-industry-by-choiceBablos939 (talk) 14:05, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Bablos939 (talk) 14:05, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Explain what? --John B123 (talk) 14:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is a variety of data. 'Asian prostitutes, who are mainly Chinese, make up a third of the 1700 sex workers in Auckland, according to the collective Many are sole operators working from suburban homes or apartments.' https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10545882 It is nonsense to say that there are 66 Chinese prostitutes.Bablos939 (talk) 14:39, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'NZ Compliance Officers visited 57 brothels across Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga, Wellington, Christchurch, Queenstown and Dunedin.When engaging proactively with small owner-operated brothel employers and workers, INZ found people on temporary visas working unlawfully.Sixty-six migrant sex workers were identified 36 on visitor visas, two on student visas and the remainder held resident visas. All of the sex workers identified except for one were Chinese nationals. There was no evidence they were being exploited.'
  • There is no mention of calculating the total number of people.Bablos939 (talk) 14:19, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Note that the source is a media release / press release by the party which performed the visits, not a detailed analysis by an independent party, making it a primary source and thus unusable as a source in wikipedia.
Stuartyeates (talk) 18:44, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
INZ Compliance Officers belong to the Immigration Bureau. and plz show me the rules to back up your opinion.Bablos939 (talk) 10:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Stuartyeates You will continue to be unresponsive and consider the debate to be closed.Bablos939 (talk) 00:09, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


There is a variety of data. 'Asian prostitutes, who are mainly Chinese, make up a third of the 1700 sex workers in Auckland, according to the collective Many are sole operators working from suburban homes or apartments.' https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10545882

"One of the authors, nurse specialist Bronwyn Schofield, said that "probably two-thirds" of the 38 non-resident sex workers she had interviewed over two years after the act were Chinese women." https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/migrants-working-unlawfully-in-sex-industry-by-choice

The reason for 'Foreign prostitutes in New Zealand' registration is sufficient.Bablos939 (talk) 11:15, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bablos949: You seem determined to establish that a high proportion of prostitutes in New Zealand are Chinese or Asian, but you are combining old data, data with very limited scope, and data which you have persistently misrepresented. What is your motive here? It does not seem to be an attempt to improve the article. You are edit warring against multiple other editors, and you are arguing tendentiously on this talk page without looking for any compromise. It seems you are following a similar pattern at other pages on prostitution.-gadfium 20:01, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please let me know the rule that old source cannot be contributed. The latest source is being blocked by user JohnB123. It's not me but user JohnB123 who often throws away disputes with other users. I want you to watch his talk page. He is even repeating the deletion without taking part in the debate.But you only take his side.
Wikipedia:BOLDWikipedia:ConsensusBablos939 (talk) 12:27, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
And I want tell you about this topic.

https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/migrants-working-unlawfully-in-sex-industry-by-choice

Many reliable sources say that Chinese women are the main members.Why should this source be removed?Bablos939 (talk) 12:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If 66 migrant sex-workers were found in 57 brothels, then either the number of sex workers per brothel is very low, or migrants are not a significant proportion of the workers. Why is it important for the article to mention the ethnicity or nationality of some sex workers? It seems to be undue weight.
You mention consensus, but the consensus here is clearly against you.-gadfium 06:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
'Asian prostitutes, who are mainly Chinese, make up a third of the 1700 sex workers in Auckland, according to the collective Many are sole operators working from urban homes or apartments.' https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10545882

"One of the authors, nurse specialist Bronwyn Schofield, said that "probably two-thirds" of the 38 non-resident sex workers she had interviewed over two years after the act were Chinese women." https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/media-releases/migrants-working-unlawfully-in-sex-industry-by-choice There are many other source. How will you explain?Bablos939 (talk) 13:41, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The proportion of immigrants in 2008 may have little bearing on the proportion now, as I would expect there's a substantial turnover of sex workers (particularly as the link you give indicate many current immigrant sex-workers are on visitor visas). The later figures are based on very small numbers, and it appears that Immigration New Zealand visited only owner-operator brothels, so the proportions may be completely different from those in larger brothels. If you could find a breakdown by occupation and ethnicity in the most recent New Zealand census, that would be worth discussing.-gadfium 22:16, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First sentence is a mess

The first sentence currently reads Prostitution in New Zealand, brothel-keeping, living off the proceeds of someone else's prostitution, and street solicitation are legal in New Zealand and have been since the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 came into effect. That sentence is a mess (Prostitution in New Zealand... is legal in New Zealand?), likely because someone thought we needed the title of the article in order to put something in bold. However, this is a case where

MOS:BOLDAVOID applies. I recommend simplifying the sentence to In New Zealand, prostitution, brothel-keeping, living off the proceeds of another's prostitution, and street solicitation have been legal since the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 came into effect. However, I am avoiding editing articles at this point -- I suggest someone else review this suggestion and, if they find it of merit, make the change. --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:41, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

That flows a lot better. If nobody else objects I'll change it in a day or two. --John B123 (talk) 20:14, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Prostitution_in_New_Zealand&oldid=1209887073"