Talk:Statue of Peace

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: LA4Sooners.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wartime Comfort Women by Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan

"Wartime Comfort Women" Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan--RXX-7979Ⅲ (talk) 06:41, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Read comfort women. The Imperial Japanese military forced tens or hundreds of thousands of women and girls into sexual slavery. The Japanese government's article above is written to save face. It is not a wp:reliable source Jim1138 (talk) 07:02, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Please read WP:V.--RXX-7979Ⅲ (talk) 07:09, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Japanese government said "Wartime Comfort Women".--RXX-7979Ⅲ (talk) 07:14, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

They were "sexual slaves". The article is well-sourced per WP:V as being "sexual slaves". Raped, sodomized, beaten, and murdered. Jim1138 (talk) 07:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Views of the Japanese government should be emphasized by WP:NPOV.--110.133.204.182 (talk) 07:47, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

NPOV doesn't give any weight to governments. wp:Identifying reliable sources (law) points out that government sources are wp:primary sources which are contrary to wp:reliable sources. i.e. don't use as they are often self-serving. Jim1138 (talk) 09:24, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

• The key here is WP:DUE weight. What the Japanese government calls them is only one source to be weighted in comparison to the various reliable sources out there. Secondary and tertiary sources have more weight because they do not require editor interpretation. Also, we need to remember that Wikipedia is not censored. This means that sometimes the English language Wikipedia may use language that seems offensive in other languages, or that it may take a "blunt" approach, but that is because hiding mistakes in history makes us more likely to repeat those mistakes. For example, we do not use euphemisms when referring to the Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We do not call them the "liberation of..." or "victories at..." or something else like that, we call them what they were. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:32, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
• This article describes facts of Korean citizen groups etc. as facts and is not neutral. The opinion of the Korean side should be described as an opinion and the opinion of the Japanese side should be written in parallel. There is also objective evidence that the testimony of Korean prostitutes who self-named as a comfort woman is a lie or a memory mismatch. It is proved by historical fact that there was no compulsion on the Japanese side. Wikipedia must not be politically used by activists.--210.142.104.167 (talk) 23:38, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

And Japanese nationalists shouldn't try to whitewash Wikipedia by removing all mention of the term "sexual slavery" when that is indeed what comfort women were part of, not to mention part of the name of an organization. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 00:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) 210.142.104.167, you have cited no reliable sources for your claims. Japanese historian admits that "comfort women" were coerced (, ), and so has the Japanese government, so your claim that they were not coerced is nothing but politically-motivated Historical negationism.

This is about more than Japanese or Korean opinions, there are historians from all over the world who affirm that "comfort women" were coerced. 90% of the sources in this article are from the West, not from Korea. We do not create a fake balance when one view has support from everyone but an overly-vocal group of historical revisionists from just one country.

Jim and I are Americans who have never been to Korea, we have no stake in this issue beyond neutrality. You are the only political activist here. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

No personal attacks. I'm not political activist. The only testimony that forced comfort women by military order has a lie. It was a fabricated article of the Asahi Newspaper. It is reported that erroneous facts spread to the international community by "compulsory entrainment propaganda" in 2015. . It seems that Korean brothels were compelled. It has been found that there is no evidence that the Japanese army was involved. Do you know the 2015 report that the erroneous facts spread to the international community by the Asahi Newspaper propaganda? The source before 2015 is content based on forgery testimonies, it can be said that the judgment material is wrong. Reference jp:朝日新聞の慰安婦報道問題. --210.142.99.91 (talk) 22:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

It has been well known decades before 2015 that the Japanese military forced women into prostitution, i.e. sexual slavery, and called them "comfort women". Your argument is irrelevant. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 00:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

It is recently proved completely that the testimony of Seiji Yoshida that caused so called was a lie. Seiji Yoshida lied. And Asahi Newspaper lied. Japan paper Yomiuri Shimbun retracts 'sex slaves' references. Do not state the argument that there is a serious controversy as a fact.--210.142.99.209 (talk) 17:12, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

210.142 (who I can only assume is RXX-7979Ⅲ), you're being a hypocrite. You said "Wikipedia must not be politically used by activists" and the only way for that to have been relevant was if you were implying that Jim and I are political activists. Then you hide behind WP:PA when I pointed out that you're the one whose in a position to be a political activist here. It's not a personal attack, it's pointing out that you (not me or Jim) are the only user in a position to be a political activist and you are the only user pushing for a position sought by political activists -- see WP:SPADE. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:07, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Sex slave is deemed false in Japan. Historically there is no evidence. It is clear that there is not only truth but also falsehood of the testimony of a comfort woman and others insisting. For the following, it is considered false in Japan.

• sex slave
• snatched from her home
• more than 200,000
• coerced into sexual slavery
• crimes

At least, I think that what Japan insists as false should be noted in parallel.--RXX-7979Ⅲ (talk) 07:57, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

It has also been found that this Asahi newspaper's report was false（ jp:朝日新聞の慰安婦報道問題）.--RXX-7979Ⅲ (talk) 08:01, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I think it's safe to assume that you and 210.142.99.91 are the same person. It's clear that you're just a political activist with no interest in real history, please leave the article alone or someone will press for a topic ban.

At any rate, this is the wrong place for your rape denialism, that would be the Comfort women article itself. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:07, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

There is no grounds and opinions and all different. I just wrote by common sense in Japan, and ordinary Japanese other than activists would argue like me.--RXX-7979Ⅲ (talk) 09:59, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Just because an idea is popular in one country and only one country does not mean that it is correct, especially when that country has a motive for pretending something did not happen. Again, this is the wrong place for your rape denialism. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

It is not proven that Japan's claim is 100% wrong. We should write claims of Japanese and Korean neutrally.--RXX-7979Ⅲ (talk) 10:15, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

It's not an issue of "Japan vs Korea." It's Japan, Korea, America, China, Britain, France, India, Australia, Egypt... Every country in the world! And everyone (including many historians in Japan) sees the same event in history, even if a small group of political activists in just one country want to deny it. It is only right-wing political activists in Japan that pretend that comfort women were not sex slaves. The more you pretend that it's just Japan vs Korea, the longer you continue the war. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:23, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I am not an activist. Please stop individual attack. Do not ignore the assertion of Japan. Both arguments should be written.--RXX-7979Ⅲ (talk) 10:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

It is not "the assertion of Japan," it is just one assertion among some vocal far-right nationalists in Japan, an assertion that many Japanese AND THE REST OF THE WORLD knows to be wrong. As has been explained before, we do not create a fake balance between mainstream academia and ideas that are rejected by almost everybody.

If you truly believe you are right, stop pushing your belief here -- do it at Comfort women. Why are you focusing on this smaller article that fewer people watch instead of the one that people pay attention to? Ian.thomson (talk) 10:39, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

It is not a fact. Because it turned out that the evidence of the Asahi Shinbun was a lie. This is a diplomatic matter between Japan and Korea, and it is clear that some were fiction. Do you read jp:朝日新聞の慰安婦報道問題? We should write a variety of opinions based on the source, and you should not repress other's in Wikipedia.--RXX-7979Ⅲ (talk) 11:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

The enslavement and rape of "comfort women" by some Japanese during the 1930s and 1940s is a fact. Do a web search on the matter. Googling "comfort women" japan (quotes included) returns 434,000 hits. Searching for "comfort women" japan in books at the English Amazon: dozens of books. You may be able to call into question a few sources but there are way, way too many records of witnesses to deny them all. Get over it. Jim1138 (talk) 20:50, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Also, we don't accept Wikipedia as a source for Wikipedia, even if it's a different language Wikipedia. Again, if you think that comfort women were not sex slaves, you need to try to change the Comfort women article instead of targeting this one. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:40, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Other statues inspired by the statue

There is a copy of this statue near where I live in Melbourne Australia, in front of a Korean society building. I took a photo of it while on a walk and I have uploaded it to Wikimedia commons. If this article needs any more photos of copies of the statue, my photograph can be used. https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Comfort_woman_statue_outside_The_Korean_Society_of_Victoria_in_Melbourne,_Australia.jpg --Apriljennifer (talk) 12:25, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Peace statue comfort woman statue 위안부 소녀상 평화의 소녀상 (3) (22609310033).jpg
• 평화의소녀상(Statute of Peace).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:25, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

demonstration against the removel of the Friedensstatue in Berlin-Moabit

c:Category:Berlin, sei mutig! Die Friedensstatue muss bleiben! --C.Suthorn (talk) 16:24, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Johnny Somali?

Should the Johnny Somali incident (where he did sexual dances, kissed and rubbed himself in baby oil on various statues) be included in the history of this article, or was it a different statue that he violated? IIRC he specifically said that he wanted to get to all the comfort women statues in Seoul. - OpalYosutebito (talk) 22:51, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Even if it was the same statue, why would it be important to mention in this article? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 00:36, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Fair point, but his actions resulted in the comfort statues being barred from interacting with for a while. - OpalYosutebito (talk) 12:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I imagine minor disruptions and vandalism of this type occur all the time, and it wouldn't make sense to list them all, unless they are particularly noteworthy or destructive. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Makes sense - OpalYosutebito (talk) 04:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Current issues with article for cleanup

There are a number of issues with this article, I'm going to tag them but I'll provide an explanation here for further discussion:

• Tone — there are sections of this which feel essay-like in a potentially NPOV-violating way. I've removed one WP:SYNTH instance already but I feel there may be more.
• Sources need verification — I'm worried this article may be misrepresenting it's sources; for example, the article currently claims that this source says that South Korea has consistently argu[ed] that the Japanese government has never officially admitted the direct involvement of its military in the comfort women issue, but all the source says is that Korean news media reported that Japan was resisting Ms. Park’s calls for Mr. Abe to be more forthcoming in acknowledging the abuses suffered by the women.
• No description of the statue — it's odd that the article about the statue currently does not have a description of it. Also, according to several sources, the statue had (at least at some point) another statue of a Chinese girl alongside the Korean girl. However, this is not present in the article's photos, and is not mentioned at all. Some research may be needed.

🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Seconding this-- I came to Talk because I read the article and still genuinely do not understand if it's a single statue or a style of statues. 108.28.40.96 (talk) 01:13, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Thirding this -- Surely we could do better than a picture from behind that shows relatively nothing and focuses on the Embassy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-23224-23 (talk) 07:48, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Description needed

This article does not describe the statue or explain the significance of the empty chair.

Here is a copy of the description of the Peace Monument of Glendale which appears to be an identical copy.

Appearance

"The 1,100 pound bronze statue monument is a replica of the original comfort women statue located in Seoul, South Korea. It depicts a girl sitting in a chair, with an empty chair beside her. The chair represents aging survivors who have not yet received justice, as well as space for people to sit and reflect on how women and girls were subjected to become sex slaves during the Japanese wartime. The statue of the girl herself represents many different aspects and effects of the violence and exploitation experienced by comfort women. For example, the statue portrays a girl with unevenly cut hair due to it being torn off. The unevenness and rough appearance of the hair represents the suffering comfort women endured as a result of being taken from their homes and forced into sex slavery. Her clenched fist represent her resolve for justice, as well as her resolve for endurance and defiance against her injustice. Her bare unsettled feet represent being abandoned by the world, along with her inability to ground and settle herself, unable to completely trust her environment. The bronze bird located at the top of her left shoulder symbolizes not only the connection between the living and the deceased, but as a symbol of freedom and peace. The shadow behind the young girl is of an elderly woman, fragmented pieces of painful memories symbolizing the passing of time with her trauma left unspoken. Finally, is the butterfly located at the center of shadow's body, right at her heart. This butterfly depicts the hope to be reincarnated with a new life in a different world, but also that one day, whether in this life or the next, the sexually exploited victims of Japanese colonial rule, comfort women, will receive their apology."

Alas, the Peace Monument of Glendale description is very poorly sourced, with no indication of where they got the information. If someone can find reliable sources (much of which are most likely in Korean or perhaps Japanese) and creates a description, they should also update the description of all the other copies of the monument. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:43, 7 May 2026 (UTC)