South Korea enacts chemical castration law against child sexual abuse
414 replies, posted
Here's a little more on our earlier discussion.
[url]http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2010/12/01/16387391.html[/url]
[I]"Most obvious and most significant of our findings is that the number of reported cases of child sex abuse immediately dropped markedly after [sexually explicit material] was legalized and became available," the report, which was published in the journal Archives of Sexual Behaviour, reads.[/I]
[url]http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.htm[/url]
[I]Results from the Czech Republic showed, as seen everywhere else studied (Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Finland, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sweden, USA), that rape and other sex crimes have not increased following the legalization and wide availability of pornography. In addition, the study found that the incidence of child sex abuse has fallen since 1989, when child pornography became readily accessible -- a phenomenon also seen in Denmark and Japan.[/I]
Still, legalising child porn even though you're not legalising the creation of child porn basically legalising the existance of child porn, there should be no child porn. And I highly doubt the child rapists aren't actually already watching child porn.
If I was sentenced I would actually prefer having my balls cut out.
[QUOTE=XxTheAvengerxX;31336394]This is against human rights. It's quite clearly cruel and unusual punishment.[/QUOTE]
Unusual, maybe, but not entirely cruel. Chemical castration is reversible, as said in the OP.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;31346265]Still, legalising child porn even though you're not legalising the creation of child porn basically legalising the existance of child porn, there should be no child porn. And I highly doubt the child rapists aren't actually already watching child porn.[/QUOTE]If it reduces the number of children abused I'm for it, if it doesn't they can ban it again and I wont argue against that.
[QUOTE=Nerts;31324380]It's not a surgical procedure, It's an injection, and the chemicals they use for it cause loss of bone mass, depression and erectile dysfunction.[/QUOTE]
Oh, gee, erectile dysfunction from being turned sterile. WONDER WHY THAT HAPPENS.
[QUOTE=eatdembeanz;31348882]Oh, gee, erectile dysfunction from being turned sterile. WONDER WHY THAT HAPPENS.[/QUOTE]That's [i]after[/i] they stop taking it.
Not gonna read ten pages. Has the issue of an 18 year old having sex with a 17 year old already been discussed in here? I don't know if that's a problem in South Korea, but in the US its considered a sexual offense.
shit page king
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;31346265]Still, legalising child porn even though you're not legalising the creation of child porn basically legalising the existance of child porn, there should be no child porn. And I highly doubt the child rapists aren't actually already watching child porn.[/QUOTE]
There should be no child porn? Why not, if it means less children will be harmed?
That's the whole idea, legalizing the possession would make child sex abuse drop. If you have another way to lessen the amounts of child sex abuse, that would be great. As you have mentioned, rehabilitating the offenders could work, and the two ideas don't conflict with each other.
It still stands that you cannot completely eradicate the existance of a given thing. We've tried before. It just won't happen no matter how hard we try.
I'm guessing this thread is basically pedophile apologists
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;31349455]There should be no child porn? Why not, if it means less children will be harmed?
That's the whole idea, legalizing the possession would make child sex abuse drop. If you have another way to lessen the amounts of child sex abuse, that would be great. As you have mentioned, rehabilitating the offenders could work, and the two ideas don't conflict with each other.
It still stands that you cannot completely eradicate the existance of a given thing. We've tried before. It just won't happen no matter how hard we try.[/QUOTE]
How do we know it will mean less children will be harmed if child porn is legalized? I don't think child sex abuse would drop if it's legalized, if anything I think it would just make people get the urge to have sex with children.
what the hell
[QUOTE=Clark21;31349694]How do we know it will mean less children will be harmed if child porn is legalized? I don't think child sex abuse would drop if it's legalized, if anything I think it would just make people get the urge to have sex with children.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Nerts;31325539]I think you should [url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=913013]read this[/url], it shows pretty convincingly that having porn readily available makes rape a lot less common.
Here's one of the graphs from it, porn started becoming available around 1972, and the number dives pretty sharply once the internet was easily accessible.
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5636656/porn%20vs%20rape.png[/img][/QUOTE]
I've already pointed out that more porn leads to less rape.
[QUOTE=ThePutty;31349583]I'm guessing this thread is basically pedophile apologists[/QUOTE]
Nope.
[QUOTE=Clark21;31349694]How do we know it will mean less children will be harmed if child porn is legalized? I don't think child sex abuse would drop if it's legalized, if anything I think it would just make people get the urge to have sex with children.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;31327766]I have also provided these links:
[url]http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/2005to2009/2009-pornography-acceptance-crime.html[/url]
[url]http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1999-effects-of-pornography.html[/url]
[I]"A vocal segment of the population has serious concerns about the effect of pornography in society and challenges its public use and acceptance. This manuscript reviews the major issues associated with the availability of sexually explicit material. It has been found everywhere scientifically investigated that as pornography has increased in availability, sex crimes have either decreased or not increased."[/I][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][url]http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2010/12/01/16387391.html[/url]
[I]"Most obvious and most significant of our findings is that the number of reported cases of child sex abuse immediately dropped markedly after [sexually explicit material] was legalized and became available," the report, which was published in the journal Archives of Sexual Behaviour, reads.[/I]
[url]http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.htm[/url]
[I]Results from the Czech Republic showed, as seen everywhere else studied (Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Finland, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sweden, USA), that rape and other sex crimes have not increased following the legalization and wide availability of pornography. In addition, the study found that the incidence of child sex abuse has fallen since 1989, when child pornography became readily accessible -- a phenomenon also seen in Denmark and Japan.[/I][/QUOTE]
What you said is similar to what Jack Thompson says about video games, by the way. [I](Not trying to ad hominem you here, just hoping that maybe it would make you reconsider what you're saying)[/I]
[QUOTE=Nerts;31349790]I've already pointed out that more porn leads to less rape.[/QUOTE]
First of all, that's for victims of the age 12 and more, and the decrease has been going on for longer than that. And legalising the existance of child porn is very hypocritic.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;31353619]First of all, that's for victims of the age 12 and more, and the decrease has been going on for longer than that. And legalising the existance of child porn is very hypocritic.[/QUOTE]Why would it work differently for sexual abuse aimed at people under 12? Unless paedophiles are fundamentally different from other rapists and I'm wrong about it not being a mental disease it shouldn't be any different.
[QUOTE=Nerts;31353786]Why would it work differently for sexual abuse aimed at people under 12? Unless paedophiles are fundamentally different from other rapists and I'm wrong about it not being a mental disease it shouldn't be any different.[/QUOTE]
I do believe asasulting pre-teens is different than to assaulting ex or present teens, because as I said I don't believe it's purely sex drive that drives someone to rape a child.
[editline]26th July 2011[/editline]
I don't think sex is what drives you toward rape in any case, but especially when it's pre teens.
[editline]26th July 2011[/editline]
If you couldn't have sex with women, would you rape one?
[QUOTE=ThePutty;31349583]I'm guessing this thread is basically pedophile apologists[/QUOTE]
The logic is this: If there's already child porn around, making it legal while keeping the production of it illegal will allow pedohphiles to have something to get off on without being tempted to approach children in real life.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;31354508]I do believe asasulting pre-teens is different than to assaulting ex or present teens, because as I said I don't believe it's purely sex drive that drives someone to rape a child.
[editline]26th July 2011[/editline]
I don't think sex is what drives you toward rape in any case, but especially when it's pre teens.
[editline]26th July 2011[/editline]
If you couldn't have sex with women, would you rape one?[/QUOTE]To be blunt, I think you're wrong, sexual attraction to the victim is a big part of a rapist's choice of victim, and being unable to get laid through other means is pretty much certainly a contributing factor in some cases.
[QUOTE=Nerts;31355360]To be blunt, I think you're wrong, sexual attraction to the victim is a big part of a rapist's choice of victim, and being unable to get laid through other means is pretty much certainly a contributing factor in some cases.[/QUOTE]
Look what I mean is, why would he target children instead of targeting older victims?
Even if he is sexually attracted to youngsters it would still only be a preferable, a fetish, and he could easily just avoid it and go with women (or men) in his own age. He wouldn't even have to rape anyone in that case.
And also, alot of rapists targeting children go fine with both boys and girls and often the rapist isn't bisexual.
There are people who have fetishes for older ladies but don't tend to act upon it, and would never rape a mature woman.
[editline]26th July 2011[/editline]
It's not like you're heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or pedosexual or something along that.
[editline]26th July 2011[/editline]
So either the rapists don't have that right/wrong thing in their head that tells them not to go for young children or they're simply suffering from some other mental disorder or alike. In anyway, peadophilia should be treated as a mental issue.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;31355441]
So either the rapists don't have that right/wrong thing in their head that tells them not to go for young children or they're simply suffering from some other mental disorder or alike. In anyway, peadophilia should be treated as a mental issue.[/QUOTE] I think paedophilia itself should only be treated as such if it presents legitimate problems that either cause the affected or people around him problems, and that the real issue isn't with the kind of person that is attracted to children, but with the kind of person who desires sex to the point of risk (which happens in a decent sized number of non-paedo people).
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.