"

 Adult-child sex & child sexual abuse 

Copied from WP:ANI ohio 

 I've asked this question before, but I've never had an understandable explanation:  How is the article a POV fork?  If it's been explained previously, just point me to the diff.  I've seen plenty of people say it's a POV fork, but what I see is a value-neutral etic approach to a topic that's as old as humanity itself.  Even if the title is POV, the content can be used in other articles, so why delete it? ohio 

 ""Adult-child sex"" is a euphemism (for child sexual abuse), and any article titled ""Adult-child sex"" is prima facie assumed to be apologistic for child sexual abuse. Exactly as if someone took an article ""Nazi genocide"" and retitled (or made a fork) entitled ""Nazi demographic adjustments"". We understand that you don't agree with this but if you still don't understand it then you had better look to yourself.   

 Exactly as Hero said. As a contemporary example, Ethnic Cleansing and Genocide. One is just a fancy name for the other.  •   •  • 03:41 (UTC)  6 Mar '08

I don't see the logic of that.  Adult-child sex (the term) goes no further than plain description.  I can see where some editors were trying to insert POV material about child sexual abuse into the article, but I don't see how it logically follows that the term itself becomes a euphemism for child sexual abuse.  The term itself can advance no agenda.  It is materially different from the genocide = demographic adjustments example, which may invoke Godwin's law.  As for VP's example, ethnic cleansing means something different from (but related to) genocide, just as adult-child sex does with child sexual abuse.  The repeated assertion has been made that the term itself is POV.  Where is the POV in it?  Since this seems not to be much of an AN/I question, I invite replies at my talk page. ohio "