[QUOTE=Pat.Lithium;34676685]Saying people who are naturally attracted to children is weird is like saying people who are naturally attracted to people of the same sex is weird. They don't have a choice.[/QUOTE]
This is basically how I think, you can be attracted to anything you like, and as long as what you do wont harm another person, or force them to do something, child or not, you're allowed to do whatever you want.
Society is fucked. Why is it more acceptable for a 40 year old to sleep with an 18 year old on her borthday, and tale videos of it, than a 24 year old beating off to someone less than 1/2 of a year younger than that girl.
[editline]13th February 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zoran;34668443]How does one make child pornography without sexually abusing a child?[/QUOTE]
If someone wanted to take suggestive photos
of me I'd be all "HELL YEAH NIGGA, SHOW THEM THE PIECE OF ASS THEY MISSING OUT ON"
[QUOTE=Swilly;34677751]What about the children's rights?[/QUOTE]
This.
I mean, forcing children to pose naked is extremely disturbing.
How would you feel like if someone would have masturbated to your picture which was taken when you were a young child?
Seriously, asking them to do it they won't. You'd have to trick them, plus their children so the parents must consent to it first which unless your parents are THAT fucked up...
[QUOTE=gamefreek76;34671806]Like how porn makes me want to rape people and video games make me want to murder people.[/QUOTE]
Yeah there is actually a huge link between porn, rape and child molestation.
That's why it's illegal for most Aboriginal Australians in the Northern Territory to possess it.
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/Alcohol_and_Pornography_warning_sign.jpg[/img]
It's obviously [i]much[/i] more complex than what I'm making it out to be, and a trillion times more complex than you're making it out to be.
But I'm not a bloody policy maker, I'm just point out what's wrong with things.
For instance, there are so many different variables in the research in the OP that you can't really take anything important from it other than "look at this interesting correlation, more research is needed in this area"
[editline]14th February 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Swilly;34677751]What about the children's rights?[/QUOTE]
And conversely, [i]what[/i] about the children's rights?
How can you say that children don't understand sexuality, or aren't capable of experiencing sexual love?
If we permit vulnerable women to sell their bodies (which is almost always a terribly poor and misguided decision), why not permit vulnerable children to do the same?
It's fairly hard to say that pubescent pornography is horrific yet 18+ pornography is not.
[QUOTE=Contag;34678434]
And conversely, [i]what[/i] about the children's rights?
How can you say that children don't understand sexuality, or aren't capable of experiencing sexual love?
If we permit vulnerable women to sell their bodies (which is almost always a terribly poor and misguided decision), why not permit vulnerable children to do the same?
It's fairly hard to say that pubescent pornography is horrific yet 18+ pornography is not.[/QUOTE]
If children are able to understand and make informed decisions on sexual matters as much as an adult, then couldn't you say they could also under stand the law and distinguished right vs wrong just as well? The reason we don't try children as adults is because we make the assumption that they don't know any better or can't understand the consequnce of their actions like an adult can.
Fapping prevents raping.
[i]Cosmic.[/i]
[QUOTE=imptastick;34672831]odd that his first post is right after angrychair's ban, and he made his first post about how the ban was unjustified.[/QUOTE]
As much as it looks like, it isn't him.
This is going to be a tad long. I'm still kind of surprised how nobody has directly addressed almost all of my posts...
[QUOTE=AngryChaiR]Porn of any sort makes you want it more. You don't just finish up some hardcore asian anal and say "Oh god no, I don't ever want to fap to asians ever again" because you obviously enjoyed it to be able to masturbate to it.
It may offer a temporary release, but they will go straight back to it and will want more.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Bawbag;34672184]Jerking off releases dopamine into your system. That feeling is addictive.
I don't know about you, but jerking off doesn't make me any less likely to want to get with a lassie.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=NorthernFall;34672196]Real life experiences will always beat seeing it on video.[/QUOTE]
Right, so, I might actually agree with this to an extend. Watching pornography, if it is a kind that appeals to you, then obviously you will want to watch it again. Like with any activity, if it feels good, it would seem obvious that the person would want it again.
However, you're assuming that these people will be tempted to take it a step further. I don't think that is the case, especially if you imagine it happening in a situation where child pornography is legal, but sex with children is still illegal. There would be a strong incentive to keep doing the legal thing.
AngryChaiR's example doesn't fit for this reason. I assume that most people who look at "hardcore asian anal" pornography don't actually go out and try to do that, they just watch it because it is appealing. Even if they did, there would be absolutely no repercussions from doing that in this situation. There's no legal or moral or any other considerations to make, so there's a big, significant difference there.
Pedophiles are people too, they make their own decisions based on thoughts just as any other. You make it sound like all these people are zombies who will just automatically ignore the fact that child molestation is harmful, that it is illegal, and that everybody will hate them, just because of some temptation that they could already fulfil if cp was legal.
Here is my take on it:
Pedophiles are going to make an evaluation of what they want to do. Let's say you have a pedophile that lives in a country where everything pedo-related is illegal: no actual sex, no cp, no lolicon.
Some pedophiles will choose to stay away from all of those. Others might choose to go against the law for whatever reason, whether it is because they have no willpower or whatever.
So, let's say we focus on these pedophiles, those that [i]will[/i] choose one of the three options no matter what the law says. They're going to want to find a balance that they agree with.
Some pedophiles would settle with lolicon, as there are no moral issues to think about, and the legality isn't an issue either because it doesn't matter which one the pedo chooses at this point.
Cp might be more appealing to others, and simultaneously more morally questionable. But on the other hand, there's nothing legally that differentiates it from lolicon, so why would the pedo choose the drawn version?
Actual sex with children would be the most appealing, but at the same time the one that is the absolute most objectionable. But if the pedophile isn't stopped by his own moral judgements, then there's really no incentive for him to stay away from doing it for real, because all the alternatives are illegal as well.
So if we consider these as 3 stages, then legalizing the stage before will make pedos flock to that option. So I don't think that legalizing child porn would make people go have sex with kids, they hear the same things as you hear, they know the same things as you do, so the vast majority of them probably do take into account that it would screw over the kid's life, whereas possessing child porn wouldn't.
Ideally, all the pedophiles would just stay away from anything that is illegal, but I think it is simply a reality that if cp is illegal, then there's going to be more pedophiles who go after the real thing.
[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;34672302]Even if you properly educated a child, most children still won't actually comprehend the severity of these situations. Plus they simply can't form logic the same way adults do which makes them easier to manipulate even if they are educated on the subject.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]"What is it about sex that children cannot understand?"
If there's something inherently harmful and incomprehensible about sex for kids, then I'll have to change my opinions. If children's inability to consent, and thus the harm, comes from society's attitude towards the whole issue, then it seems like the solution would rather be to change that attitude.[/QUOTE]
Indeed I don't think they can understand the severity of those situations with the way we handle them right now, but they would be able to if we stopped seeing something like sex as [i]"severe situations"[/i].
I think it's interesting to see that what I've talked about in a previous post suddenly became relevant recently. Reddit changed their rules to disallow some 'subreddits' (I've no idea how reddit works, I guess it's like a subforum) because they had child pornography-like contents. From the way I understand it, it was the kind where you can't really tell whether it is actually cp or what. Sometimes the age is questionable, as is the case in jailbait, and sometimes it's just hard to tell whether the image is actually pornography or not. In any case, they shut down these because they were considered child pornography, and thus unnacceptable.
I just find it interesting, then, that the subreddit, /r/PicsOfDeadKids, is still up and allowed.
It shows to me that it actually doesn't matter whether the children are being hurt, all that matters is the idea that cp is made with the intention of being sexually arousing. That is, apperantly, the deciding factor in making it illegal, otherwise, why is all other kinds of suffering not illegal to watch as well?
[video=youtube;8APlx9btTn8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8APlx9btTn8[/video]
[QUOTE=AngryChairR;34671914]Porn of any sort makes you want it more. You don't just finish up some hardcore asian anal and say "Oh god no, I don't ever want to fap to asians ever again" because you obviously enjoyed it to be able to masturbate to it.
It may offer a temporary release, but they will go straight back to it and will want more.
I don't understand why these people are allowed to speak publicly about allowing this, they should be shot right down. Paedophilia is not acceptable and it never will be under any circumstances - the only people that argue for it are clearly Paedophiles.[/QUOTE]
that makes sense
and yet, the data clearly shows that availability of porn is inversely proportional to sexual abuse rates, so it still doesn't work.
You don't magically become able to make a decision when you turn 18.
[QUOTE=WubWubWompWomp;34683455]You don't magically become able to make a decision when you turn 18.[/QUOTE]
You don't magically become a reckless driver once you go over 65mph, does that mean we shouldn't have speed limits? In fact, you could say "X doesn't magically become y when it hits z" for pretty much any thing we set limits for.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/pwPp9.gif[/img]
[QUOTE=Bawbag;34678988]As much as it looks like, it isn't him.[/QUOTE]
Not to sound rude, but how can you be sure? It is very easy to fake an IP and make an alt.
Even though it is morally wrong to legally allow child porn, I feel that it would lower the amount of child pedophiles drastically. I mean look at all the people who smoke pot and brag "ya i just smoked a joint". It's just because it's illegal. In countries in Europe where the drinking limit is much lower / nonexistent than that of America the children and teens are responsible with drinking while here teens chug every weekend.
[QUOTE=Swilly;34677815]Seriously, asking them to do it they won't. You'd have to trick them, plus their children so the parents must consent to it first which unless your parents are THAT fucked up...[/QUOTE]
Why don't you think they would do it voluntarily? Unless they're taught that nudity is bad, why would they feel bad about it? I guess you could say the same about sex if we take it that far, but if we're talking about, say, nude poses, then how different is it really from just posing for a camera while clothed? Of course it is different in our society because nudity is seen as really bad, but if it wasn't, then what would be the problem?
I'm not sure about my case here, I agree there's definitely problems. Some children would voluntarily do it, and in a society where it wasn't looked down upon I don't think it would be harmful, but in some cases it would go the same way as stuff like Toddlers and Tiaras, which is just horrible. But on the other hand, if it wasn't looked down upon, then I think it would be [I]just as bad[/I] as Toddlers and Tiaras. They'd both have to be dealt with, and I do think Toddlers and Tiara is horrible and has to be dealt with in some way. This tricking children thing would by no means be exclusive to pornography, it's a stand alone, already existing problem. I think.
[QUOTE=SlayerFin;34677802]This.
I mean, forcing children to pose naked is extremely disturbing.
How would you feel like if someone would have masturbated to your picture which was taken when you were a young child?[/QUOTE]
Forcing children to do anything is kind of disturbing I think. And your question is useless, at least if you're following the trend.
The thing is, some time ago, my mom gave me a photo album, and in it were pictures of me naked as a child. I honestly considered the idea of uploading it just because it would make for a senseless situation where I could get arrested for distributing and even producing child pornography, even though the child in question would be myself.
Honestly, if those pictures were on the internet, I wouldn't give a shit if someone masturbated to it. I'd give a shit if people bothered me about it and kept pointing it out, but if they just looked at it and masturbated to it, why would I give a fuck?
So I wouldn't feel bad about that, and if you follow the trend correctly, you'll just say something like "That's not a healthy way to think!" which would make the point of asking the question in the first place completely senseless. You're just assuming that everyone will have the same icky feeling about it, but really, why would you?
And this album thing is another reason, I think, to at least legalize the possession. If you have laws against pictures that have certain things in it, especially if the description of said things isn't very clear, [i]("Pornographic" isn't very clear at all.)[/i] then you're going to have cases where there's clearly nothing wrong, but is still against the law.
That would be the case with my and many people's photo albums. There's a child, there's nudity, so wham, child pornography. Then we start to argue shit like intentions; [I]why[/I] was the picture taken, or you start to look at poses and focus, trying to determine whether or not it is suggestive or not.
It's just a clusterfuck. Ultimately I just don't think it is worth it to keep child porn illegal, it even has negative effects like innocent people getting arrested for innocent [i](but nude)[/i] pictures. In any case I don't think it makes sense to illegalize any picture or video or other data at all. By all means let's stop child molestation and child pornography production, but data that is already floating around? Illegalizing that is just a mess.
Oh and by the way this post is pretty much just an advertisement for my other posts earlier in the thread.
no, pedophiles are not ok, and neither is child porn
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;34684670]Why don't you think they would do it voluntarily? Unless they're taught that nudity is bad, why would they feel bad about it? I guess you could say the same about sex if we take it that far, but if we're talking about, say, nude poses, then how different is it really from just posing for a camera while clothed? Of course it is different in our society because nudity is seen as really bad, but if it wasn't, then what would be the problem?[/QUOTE]
Because we're not talking about an ideal world.
We're talking about reality, and the reality is that children ARE taught that its bad. And they would become extremely confused from the double standards being imposed.
Until we can get to a world like that(I doubt it), its better to be safe than sorry in this case.
Drawn porn is drawn, that doesn't matter because no one is actually hurt. BUT IN THE CURRENT time, children are usually kidnapped, raped and then killed or kept as slaves.*
*This is from my understanding and personal experience, that little tid bit there could be really wrong and I have no idea so I'll admit fault if I am.
Small Note:We do have the photography manipulating tech that allows for making faux-child porn as well so we can leave children out of it completely.
[QUOTE=LCBADs;34679058]
and yet, the data clearly shows that availability of porn is inversely proportional to sexual abuse rates, so it still doesn't work.[/QUOTE]
correlation between a couple of variables between entirely different countries =/= causation
This thread is so full of secret pedophiles it isn't even funny.
[QUOTE=Swilly;34687009]Because we're not talking about an ideal world.
We're talking about reality, and the reality is that children ARE taught that its bad. And they would become extremely confused from the double standards being imposed.[/QUOTE]
Ah, indeed. I'm not denying that. It is indeed a harmful and undesirable thing in our world. But I've been arguing that it is so because of detrimental societal values and bad attitudes towards sex. The difference this makes is that, instead of trying ever harder to seperate children and sex, maybe we should try to change our attitudes towards sex.
A lot of people think that it is inherently harmful, and I'm arguing that it isn't. It is merely harmful because we've made it so. And that makes a huge difference. For example, murder is inherently harmful. There is no way we can change society so that murder becomes non-harmful.
In an "ideal world", which we can work towards, my points stand. In [I]our current[/I] world, we indeed do have reason to protect children from situations like that because they will be harmful.
You appear to agree that it is indeed harmful due to being taught that sex is bad. Thats why it is relevant to speak of an ideal world, because it is, I believe, a realistic alternative to what we have. So instead of continuing like we do, maybe we should just switch to not teaching them that its bad?
[QUOTE=Swilly;34687009]Until we can get to a world like that(I doubt it), its better to be safe than sorry in this case.[/QUOTE]
I agree. But why do you doubt that we can reach that world?
All we need is for sex, sexuality and nudity to stop being viewed as a shameful thing.
[QUOTE=Swilly;34687009]Drawn porn is drawn, that doesn't matter because no one is actually hurt. BUT IN THE CURRENT time, children are usually kidnapped, raped and then killed or kept as slaves.*
*This is from my understanding and personal experience, that little tid bit there could be really wrong and I have no idea so I'll admit fault if I am.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure in the cases of child pornography, but I do know that most cases of child molestation is not like that at all. Most of it happens in families, and the perpetrators are people who is known and trusted by the family and the child. Children being kidnapped and kept as slaves seems to me to be an uncommon thing that has been made out to be the norm by the media.
[QUOTE=Swilly;34687009]Small Note:We do have the photography manipulating tech that allows for making faux-child porn as well so we can leave children out of it completely.[/QUOTE]
I guess that'd be another solution :P
__________________________________________
I don't know why I didn't reply to this post right away when it was posted back then, and I'm not sure whether I should bump this thread now. The rules don't say anything about bumping oldish threads, so I'll just go ahead and do it.
Either way, I'm still completely perplexed and just a tad bit jimmyrustled by the fact that [b]almost all of my posts in this thread have been completely and utterly ignored[/b].
A few of them has recieved a couple of ratings. Some people responded to tiny parts of my posts on the first page. Several of my posts didn't even get a single rating. My stances have been quite edgy here, I believe, so I had expected at least a few dumbs, but I got [i]nothing[/i].
It is frankly creeping me out a little bit.
I get a feeling that I'm being universally ignored everywhere.
Is it because my posts are too long? Are they just so sinfully stupid that everyone gives up trying to reason with me? Or are they so magnificently clever that everyone gives up trying to counter me?
[B]What is going on??[/B]
To be fair, this is the author of the article in the OP.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/UXEuk.jpg[/IMG]
(okay, not really)
(also, some of you guys in this thread are [i]really fucking creepy[/i])
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;35487508]
Is it because my posts are too long? Are they just so sinfully stupid that everyone gives up trying to reason with me? Or are they so magnificently clever that everyone gives up trying to counter me?
[B]What is going on??[/B][/QUOTE]
Yeah, I'd say it's because they're too long. You should throw in a real quick get-to-the-fucking-point summary at either the top or bottom and keep the rest to prove your reasoning.
I don't care if it's legalised or not people that get off to that shit, children and child porn, are sick and disturbed fucks that need to be jailed or institutionalised.
We should allow rape too because that make all rape crime dissapear.
Yeah, this is just a bunch of baloney. All kinds of child porn, real or not should stay illegal
[QUOTE=Red scout?;35488017]We should allow rape too because that make all rape crime dissapear.
Yeah, this is just a bunch of baloney. All kinds of child porn, real or not should stay illegal[/QUOTE]
What's wrong if it's not real? Then it's [i]not real.[/i]
[QUOTE=Spacewolf;35488139]What's wrong if it's not real? Then it's [i]not real.[/i][/QUOTE]
it's pretty much like saying. "Oh, you cant smoke weed, but this artificial weed is perfectly legal though"
I think pedophilia is a crime against nature
[QUOTE=Red scout?;35488245]it's pretty much like saying. "Oh, you cant smoke weed, but this artificial weed is perfectly legal though"
I think pedophilia is a crime against nature[/QUOTE]
It's bad because it hurts children.
Artificial child porn doesn't.
[QUOTE=Red scout?;35488245]it's pretty much like saying. "Oh, you cant smoke weed, but this artificial weed is perfectly legal though"
I think pedophilia is more or less a crime against nature[/QUOTE]
Is homosexuality a crime against nature? Because you're born with that too.
[QUOTE=Red scout?;35488245]it's pretty much like saying. "Oh, you cant smoke weed, but this artificial weed is perfectly legal though"
I think pedophilia is more or less a crime against nature[/QUOTE]
every single sexual urge appears within the scope of the universe
therefore every sexual urge is natural
people just like to define what urges are "right" or "wrong" based on their opinions, biases, and morals.
saying that something is "unnatural" or "a crime against nature" is a terribly thought-out and completely inaccurate way of describing these types of things
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.