How to reduce the availability rates for child porn: a contentious debate -

[chimpburgers]

I loved what @Wildchild had to say in the Alison Rapp thread. For those who didn't read it, this is what she said:

I can kind of understand the view point of spending less energy enforcing the downloading or viewing of childporn, but still enforce the manufaction, distribution, buying or selling of childporn. There have been studies done on the Czech Republic showing that the rates of sexual abuse against children decrease when childporn is decriminalized. I find childporn to be sick and personally wouldn't want to stumble across it, but there is a difference between someone who views CP and someone who molests a child.

My personal feelings is that CP is sick because a child gets abused in the manufacturing of it, I would prefer legalizing artificial images of Children and keeping CP illegal, which may have an effect on decreasing CP rates.

Not talking about Child Pornography then the increasing avaibility of porn has decreased sexual abuse and rape against women.

There's also the possibility that needs to be considered that CP would increase rates, because it would make fantasies seem more acceptable, especially when pedophilles view them in access.

I think it's only fair to have a discussion about this topic in this kind of setting rather than having this get in the way of discussing why Rapp is or isn't a lolcow. I want to hear the arguments and some well founded ways of debunking a particular position without resorting to getting really upset about it. Would decriminalization actually be effective or are there much better alternatives to resolving this issue more effectively?

 

[Optimus Prime]

More effort needs to be put into tracing the routes CP takes from distributor to "client" so to speak. Figure out the highest traffic nodes in that supply chain, analyze if similar practices exist elsewhere, and then shut them down.

 

[AnOminous]

Would decriminalization actually be effective or are there much better alternatives to resolving this issue more effectively?

If so, that should be the basis for the discussion of whether to do it, not some tumblr bullshit about "child sexual agency" and "intersectionality" gibberish.

 

[chimpburgers]

If so, that should be the basis for the discussion of whether to do it, not some tumblr bullshit about "child sexual agency" and "intersectionality" gibberish.

The sexual agency thing is a new term.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/shameless-woman/201406/being-female-and-sexual-agency

It's been used in sex education now.

Spoiler: What sexual agency is supposed to mean

There is a new buzz term in sex education land, and it's called “Sexual Agency.” When people talk about any kind of personal “agency,” they are referring to an individual's ability to act in a way that accomplishes his or her goals. To have agency in any corner of your life is to have the capacity to behave or act in a way that will bring you the outcome or results that you desire.

When we talk about “Sexual Agency,” we may be talking about a complex group of rights, knowledge, skills, personal authority and/or abilities.

Sexual Agency can include:

The ability to give consent to participating in or declining a sexual activity and having your desires honored.

The right to choosing how you define your sexuality, such as: gay, straight, bi-sexual, asexual.

The right to choose your gender, such as: male or female or anything along the gender spectrum.

The ability to choose whether or not you want to engage sexually with a specific person, or in a specific place or even the time.

The ability to choose safer sex practices or birth control.

The ability to stop right in the middle of ANY sexual activity. Sexual agency includes your right to change your mind in the middle of any sexual encounter or act. Even if you said yes in the beginning. Your “No” can happen at any time.

 

[Cthulu]

Nope, bitterweet.

You mean the production, dissemination or production?

She also didn't say anything about that, either. Red herring, again.

Well would you specify which you think should be legal? If distribution of CP legal how do you distribute CP if someone somewhere in the world isn't making it?

Two so it should be legal but not freely accessible? Explain how that works?

 

[fuehrer_dessler]

Well would you specify which you think should be legal? If distribution of CP legal how do you distribute CP if someone somewhere in the world isn't making it?[...]

Why the fuck do you think that I agree with Rapp?

 

[Cthulu]

Why the fuck do you think that I agree with Rapp?

@Jaimas cleared up Rapp's position very well. Your still arguing the fact.

 

[Marvin]

I think whether it's decriminalized or not is a moot point.

Because of strong encryption, it's very difficult to enforce laws against someone who's merely consuming CP. And encryption is only going to get more convenient as time goes on.

It's similar to the situation with copyright. If it's intangible, it's getting super hard to pursue someone for it. It's approaching technical infeasibility.

 

[about:blank]

IMHO distribution and redistribution should be a felony, and simple possession should be a gross misdemeanor... a very gross misdemeanor...

 

[KatsuKitty]

There's plenty of Shallow Thoughts bans ready to go around for people who act retarded in this thread.

 

[Gato da Vida]

I'm going to keep a wary eye on this thread. I have a bad feeling it will explode. I mean, my god, I'm thinking that some people here are almost as thin-skinned as the usual Tumblrite, because apparently it's all well and good to make fun of people until a topic that might offend someone's sensibilities comes into play. Then everything explodes.

I'd personally rather avoid talking about the issue altogether. Apparently - for some reason - it's a really contentious issue. Talking about it in a setting like this does literally no good, and just causes the spergs to come out of the woodworks. And even if it didn't, most sane people share similar views, so the whole thing becomes something akin to saying murder is bad. It's pointless - because everyone knows that already - and if anything, it just makes the people continually talking about it seem like they might have feelings they're trying to compensate for.

All that said, I am a bit hopeful given that nothing too autistic has happened in this thread... Yet... So I will hold onto a little glimmer of optimism that this thread won't just explode.

 

[KingGeedorah]

Anyone who looks/talks/thinks about CP should have their dick/vag blown away like in this clip.

NSFW:

 

[LazarusOwenhart]

Punishing people who get caught with the stuff is one thing but nobody looks at pedophilia as a legitimate mental illness. I think offending rates would be slashed drastically if you could easily walk into a doctors surgery and say "Yo Doc I'm having weird thoughts about kids, I think I need therapy before I do something bad" without risking being reported to the police as an offender. If we stop labeling these people as perverts before they've even done anything wrong they can be treated. A lot of it is society vs instinct, sure people who wanna have sex with 5 year old boys and stuff are just responding to an urge but people who look at say, a 13 year old are looking at a biologically sexually mature individual and instinct says "Hey I can breed with this person". Society has overruled that for most of us but there are still people who feel that instinctual desire.

 

[about:blank]

I think offending rates would be slashed drastically if you could easily walk into a doctors surgery and say "Yo Doc I'm having weird thoughts about kids, I think I need therapy before I do something bad" without risking being reported to the police as an offender.

The only thing that a mental health professional has a duty to report is if you are an immediate threat to yourself or others. A person who wants help can simply say that they have an unhealthy attraction to children that they will not see through.

Now to play devil's advocate, I believe that pedophilia is a rather simple case of sexual preference that ignores the modern social stigma attached to it. Children and young teens have been sexualized throughout history, especially considering that people as recent as 200 years ago often died by the time they were 30. Even my own grandmother was married by the age of 13. There were no cameras documenting these acts though, so there is no real historical precedent supporting sexualizing children that you did not know.

With that being said, kids these days don't have to worry about dying young, so they don't need to have sex and start families young. The odds of producing offspring are not decreased by any significant values, so there is no evolutionary reason for a child to have sex. Child pornography is also a degradation to society, especially considering that there are healthy adults consenting to produce amateur and professional pornographic films.

Pedophiles think of viewing child pornography as an unjust or victimless crime because they aren't touching the child, but they don't realize that the display of that child performing sexual acts is perpetuating the exploitation of that child.

 

[fuehrer_dessler]

[...]Pedophiles think of viewing child pornography as an unjust or victimless crime because they aren't touching the child, but they don't realize that the display of that child performing sexual acts is perpetuating the exploitation of that child.

How does viewing a video perpetuate anything?

 

[Donald And The Immigrants]

It's a difficult situation to address. Part of the problem is how we define child pornography. If a teenager, possibly of legal age in his or her state, posts nudes online they are, in the eyes of the law, manufacturing, distributing and possessing child pornography. I think we can all agree that that makes no sense. I think a big part of addressing the problem is to reconsider what is and isn't child pornography.
When it comes to pornography featuring actual children being abused by pornographers, that's different. I feel as if manufacturing and distribution should certainly be punished, but not necessarily possession. It should be treated like a drug offense, sort of. Don't aim for the guy who's buying an ounce of marijuana, aim for his dealer.
If someone is taken to court for possession, I feel as if they should be given options: Prison and a place on the sex offender registry, or mandatory therapy and psychoanalysis to determine if they are a potential rapist.

 

[about:blank]

How does viewing a video perpetuate anything?

it perpetuates the exploitation

A child (resource) is exploited in the production of the porno and it is made. When someone else then watches the porno, receiving full use of and derived benefit (by obtaining sexual pleasure) from the production, the child (resource) is exploited again. The exploitation has been perpetuated.

 

[fuehrer_dessler]

it perpetuates the exploitation

A child (resource) is exploited in the production of the porno and it is made. When someone else then watches the porno, receiving full use of and derived benefit (by obtaining sexual pleasure) from the production, the child (resource) is exploited again. The exploitation has been perpetuated.

What kinda voodoo bullshit is that, viewing of a video magically harming an actor of it? Damn, how autistic.

 

[DangerousGas]

How does viewing a video perpetuate anything?

Intentional consumption of any commodity automatically confers an ongoing demand for its presence and production.

 

[about:blank]

What kinda voodoo bullshit is that, viewing of a video magically harming an actor of it? Damn, how autistic.

Are you kidding me? Actor? Magically harmed?

Let's look at the definitions:
Perpetuate - preserve (something valued) from oblivion or extinction.
Exploit - make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource)

The exploitation is perpetuated. Nobody said anything about a second bout of physical violence, but THE EXPLOITATION IS PERPETUATED