should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?

[Gnu Ordure]

Why is it wrong to possess? Can you explain how the anonymous possession of it harms anyone?

What exactly is 'anonymous possession' ?

Do you mean that the child concerned doesn't know who is invading her privacy? Or do you mean that the invader doesn't know whose privacy he is invading?

Either way, it's wrong.




A five-year-old child cannot consent to photos of its abuse being published. So publication of such photos should be prohibited, on grounds of invasion of privacy, at the very least.

And as I said, it is highly unlikely that an adult survivor of sexual abuse would consent to such photos being released into the public domain.

Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that all publications of images of child sexual abuse are non-consensual, and therefore they should be confiscated and removed from the public domain.

[shnozzola]

In this discussion we can’t forget the evolutionary roots that drive everything.  I believe most men would also be attracted to the girl in the photo because she is probably old enough to reproduce.  While societies have rightly changed the rules about age, monogamy, etc. for all kinds of reasons, including the maturity and other social working norms needed to have a family, etc., we males are evolutionarily programmed to “spread our seed.”  I would say we are normally attracted to a teenager more than a 50 year old just because of the chances of successful reproduction – society fights that  urge, but I believe the urge is there for that reason.  Pedophilia involving children incapable of reproduction is obviously something else.

Even beauty, for men and women, simply helps the chance for reproduction.  Even for women – (if I may, as the romantic novel covers show) -  the beauty of the man, looking strong, fierce, and intelligent enough to protect the woman and children – is what drives the basic urge, no matter how many morals and taboos society has placed into things. 

Understand, I agree with civilized society’s rules that have changed how all this is viewed, but we all may be somewhat more basic than we like to believe.

[joebbowers]

I simply mean sexually viable, as in, based purely on her physical appearance, assuming everything else about her met your standards, (you're a dog person, she's a dog person, whatever floats your boat) would you have sex with her?

Then the answer would be no. It takes months, maybe years, to become attached to someone on the level required by me to have sex with someone.

Then the answer is not no, you're saying you would not have sex with her right now, which is a non-answer that deflects the question. I very very clearly stated repeatedly that I was not asking if you wanted to have a one night stand with her. Are you intentionally confusing the issue or do you really not understand this simple question? Also Lucifer, aren't you gay? Or are you bi-sexual? I mean, it seems dishonest of you to omit that when offering your opinion of a female's sexual attractiveness.

Do you think she's sexually attractive?
Well, I think the photographer blah blah blah.
Ignore the photographer and think about the girl. Do you think she's sexually attractive?
Well, I don't know anything about her personality.
Imagine she has a great personality. Do you think she's sexually attractive?
Well, I need to get to know her for a while.
Imagine you've known her for long enough (And you can decide how long that is.) Do you think she's sexually attractive?
Random excuse #4....

I am amazed that so many people seem to have trouble understanding this, but I don't doubt that some people are intentionally complicating the question to avoid answering truthfully.

[lotanddaughters]

Do you think she's sexually attractive?
Well, I think the photographer blah blah blah.
Ignore the photographer and think about the girl. Do you think she's sexually attractive?
Well, I don't know anything about her personality.
Imagine she has a great personality. Do you think she's sexually attractive?
Well, I need to get to know her for a while.
Imagine you've known her for long enough (And you can decide how long that is.) Do you think she's sexually attractive?
Random excuse #4....

I am amazed that so many people seem to have trouble understanding this, but I don't doubt that some people are intentionally complicating the question to avoid answering truthfully.

+1 for this. We need to remember this sort of summary-layout for recapping and picking apart Christian question-dodgers. Thanks, Lucifer, for playing the role of the Christian.

[joebbowers]

Do you mean that the child concerned doesn't know who is invading her privacy? Or do you mean that the invader doesn't know whose privacy he is invading?

Both. The child doesn't know who or really if anyone is looking at the photos. The viewer doesn't know who the child in the photos is. Completely anonymous from both ends.

A five-year-old child cannot consent to photos of its abuse being published. So publication of such photos should be prohibited, on grounds of invasion of privacy, at the very least.

And as I said, it is highly unlikely that an adult survivor of sexual abuse would consent to such photos being released into the public domain.

Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that all publications of images of child sexual abuse are non-consensual, and therefore they should be confiscated and removed from the public domain.

As I've already said, the production and distribution of child pornography should be illegal. You aren't making a compelling case against possession unless you can apply the same logic to all cases non-consensual publication. Would you say that any non-consensual images of anyone should be removed from the public domain? Paparazzi photos, hidden-camera and ex-girlfriend sex tapes, people photographed in public places?

Should the people who produced the material be punished? Should the people who viewed it be punished equally?

And, with the knowledge that the war on pornography only leads to more victims, how can you justify this position?

Quesi has posted links to articles which she says contradict this claim. In fact they do not. They simply state that most rapists use porn. It can obviously be stated that most porn users are not rapists.

The consensus among experts is that increased access to pornography reduces the number of sexual crimes. I will read any scientific paper that says otherwise, but I believe that the only articles you will find that claim the opposite are the sole opinions of the authors, and not based on solid research.

[lotanddaughters]

Should the people who produced the material be punished? Should the people who viewed it be punished equally?

He's not available to answer that right now. He's too busy watching the John F. Kennedy assassination that John F. Kennedy never gave him permission to watch.

[lotanddaughters]

Would you rather have your head blown off, or would you rather have been a child involved in one porn film with one other child of the opposite sex?

As a matter of fact, I would be willing to go back in time and be involved in a child porn film as a child, if, immediately after, I was given an atheist mentor to kick-start my atheism at whatever age I was for the filming of the porn. I became an atheist at around age 20, but the damage of my theism lasted for another 10 years or so. That's how fucked up Christian bullshit is.

[Mr. Blackwell]

Just for fun... what do you think of this woman? Purely based on her appearance, honestly, do you find her sexually attractive? (Assuming you are a heterosexual, straight male.)

As a 37 year old straight male with 3 daughters, yes...based solely on the appearance of the girl in the picture, I find her sexually attractive. But, even though her breasts are developed or developing, she is too young for me.

Adult bull males who seek underdeveloped or immature females are the lowest of the low. I have 0 respect or tolerance for men or women who prey on adolescence. It's like taking candy from a baby. Regardless of sexual attraction, adults who seek out children for sexual pleasure are insecure, lecherous cowards.

And if I had my way, I'd have all of them shot.

[Mr. Blackwell]

Both. The child doesn't know who or really if anyone is looking at the photos. The viewer doesn't know who the child in the photos is. Completely anonymous from both ends.

Whoever took the photo knows who the child is. The photographer has friends. These things are connected.

It is not "completely" anonymous.

Child pornography should not be tolerated because tolerance leads to acceptance.

Children are not equipped, mentally or physically, to accept the sexual advances of an adult.


Decriminalizing the possession of or "free" distribution of sexually explicit photographs/videos of  children in sexually suggestive poses or explicit sexual acts only encourages adults who are sexually attracted to minors.

It tells them that their behavior/desires are "normal".

Do you, joebbowers, think it's "normal" for an adult to be sexually attracted to a pre-pubescent child?

 

[joebbowers]

If you knew she were 18, you wouldn't hesitate. It's only her age that gives you pause, is that correct? Your social conditioning makes you resist because of her age, and that's good, but the point is, you find her sexually attractive based on her physical development, as I believe most straight men would.

Now, before I tell you all how old she is, would you like to guess? Posting the photo one last time so you can take a good look.



By the way, if you know who she is, please don't announce her age before others have had a chance to guess and spoil the fun.

[Mr. Blackwell]

If you knew she were 18, you wouldn't hesitate. It's only her age that gives you pause, is that correct?

Not so much. I forgot to mention that I am happily married.

18 or 40, makes no difference to me because I am in love with my wife but even if I were single I would hesitate because she looks so young.

I would guess that she is between 13 and 23. It's so hard to tell with asian chicks.

[pingnak]

Hard to tell from a picture.  She's older than that, now.  Actually, I can tell for sure that she's 18 now, but probably not whenever that picture was taken.  I was able to look her up from your image link.

Sort of like online dating sites.  How recent is 'recent' for a photo?  They can post a picture like that, and look like Jaba the Hut.

It's one of those things that ruins 'old' movies for me.  I always subconsciously add the years onto the actresses.  I watch a movie from the 1930's and realize, "Holy crap, most of these people are dead!"

Ginger or Mary Ann?  Heck, they're both old ladies.  'Mary Ann' is like 74 years old.  'Ginger' is 78.  If you were stuck on Gilligan's Island with them today, you'd be building bamboo walkers for them.

Is it normal to be attracted to pre-pubescents?  No. 

Unfortunately, puberty comes pretty young, and there can be a lot of years between puberty and 'legal' adulthood. 

As it was crudely put to me, once upon a time, "Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed."

Would I tap a girl that young?  Nah.  Given the "(0.5*age)+7" formula for 'creepy', I'd have to draw the line at 30.

[joebbowers]

Whoever took the photo knows who the child is. The photographer has friends. These things are connected.

It is not "completely" anonymous.

And yet again, sadly, I am forced to explain that I am against the production and distribution of child pornography, but in favor of legalizing the simple possession. I will not respond to any more comments like this one. I've made my position clear.

Child pornography should not be tolerated because tolerance leads to acceptance.

Yes, accepting people for their sexual orientation is difficult for many people.

Children are not equipped, mentally or physically, to accept the sexual advances of an adult.

Agreed, as I've stated.

Decriminalizing the possession of or "free" distribution of sexually explicit photographs/videos of  children in sexually suggestive poses or explicit sexual acts only encourages adults who are sexually attracted to minors.

What is your source for that claim?

Multiple studies by multiple organizations in multiple countries have demonstrated the opposite. In fact, pornography use serves as an outlet for sexual energy and decreases instances of rape and molestation. Strict control or the ban of pornography leads to an increase in sexual assaults.

If you disagree with the results of the studies, please explain how their methods were flawed and what academic qualifications you possess to give credence to your statement over the opinions of trained experts.

It tells them that their behavior/desires are "normal".

Do you, joebbowers, think it's "normal" for an adult to be sexually attracted to a pre-pubescent child?

I've explained that for the purposes of this discussion I'm using the most widely accepted definition of pedophile, not the clinical one. The age of consent is far over the age of puberty. Sexually explicit photos of a 17 year old will land you in jail, and you will be labeled a pedophile by the media regardless of the fact that you do not meet the clinical definition.

Having said that, I will answer your question on your terms. Even if you limit the discussion to those who are primarily attracted to pre-pubescent children (ie. the clinical definition of pedophile), pedophiles represent approximately 3-9% of the population, making them roughly equal a percentage of the population as homosexuals.[1][2] Would you consider homosexuality normal?

Do you understand that "normal" is meaningless when discussing sexual orientation, a factor that an individual has no control over? Is left-handedness normal? Is red hair?

1.	Ahlers, C. J., Schaefer, G. A., Mundt, I. A., Roll, S., Englert, H., Willich, S. N. and Beier, K. M. , How Unusual are the Contents of Paraphilias? Paraphilia-Associated Sexual Arousal Patterns in a Community-Based Sample of Men. The Journal of Sexual Medicine
2.	Seto MC.(2009) Pedophilia. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 5:391-407.

[joebbowers]

If you knew she were 18, you wouldn't hesitate. It's only her age that gives you pause, is that correct?

Not so much. I forgot to mention that I am happily married.

Sigh. So we're still playing this avoidance game?

Imagine you were not married. Do you find her sexually attractive?

You already admitted that you do, that it is her age that gives you concern.

[joebbowers]

Would you rather have your head blown off, or would you rather have been a child involved in one porn film with one other child of the opposite sex?

Man I wish I could have gotten some attention from older women as a child. I had a crush on my babysitter, my teacher, my neighbor... I had very sexual fantasies about them and I certainly wouldn't have been a victim of any kind if I had somehow figured out how to get my 20 year old babysitter to have sex with 10 year old me. Legend is a better word.

Society likes to pretend that children aren't sexual but they are. Most begin masturbating years before puberty. We like to forget that historically women girls were married as soon as they could menstruate. Not rarely, not just sometimes, but this was the norm.

[Van Persie]

And yet again, sadly, I am forced to explain that I am against the production and distribution of child pornography, but in favor of legalizing the simple possession. I will not respond to any more comments like this one. I've made my position clear.

Yo. Magicmiles here. Sigh. I....just couldn't resist responding to this. ( I also note with happiness that Jay is back )

Joe, how can you possess it without someone producing and distributing it?

[joebbowers]

Hard to tell from a picture.  She's older than that, now.  Actually, I can tell for sure that she's 18 now, but probably not whenever that picture was taken.  I was able to look her up from your image link.

Awe, Pingnak cheated. You were supposed to guess.

[joebbowers]

Yo. Magicmiles here. Sigh. I....just couldn't resist responding to this. ( I also note with happiness that Jay is back )

Joe, how can you possess it without someone producing and distributing it?

You can't, obviously.

[Van Persie]

then your position appears rather ridiculous.

[joebbowers]

Do you think that if all future child porn production were halted, that all currently existing child porn already in circulation would suddenly cease to exist?

Do you think that banning the production of child porn effectively prevents 100% of it's production?

If you believe either of those things, then I believe your position is rather ridiculous.

[Van Persie]

Do you think that if all future child porn production were halted, that all currently existing child porn already in circulation would suddenly cease to exist?

no.

Do you think that banning the production of child porn effectively prevents 100% of it's production?

No

If you believe either of those things, then I believe your position is rather ridiculous.

I haven't stated any position. But your position remains ridiculous, because the only thing that can prevent it's production is to have everyone agree that it's existence is intolerable. Making possession of it legal hardly helps in that (admitettedly nigh impossible) goal.

[Timo]

And yet again, sadly, I am forced to explain that I am against the production and distribution of child pornography, but in favor of legalizing the simple possession. I will not respond to any more comments like this one. I've made my position clear.

Indeed.

I'd also add that it's not impossible to have child pornography on your computer without even knowing it.  We live in a world where pornography is often produced by amateurs and delivered for popular consumption by aggregators, which in some cases is just a fancy word for dudes on tumblr, dudes who might not bother to or even have the means to verify the age of all of the young men and/or women pictured in the images or videos they upload.  And guess what?  If you've visited a site like that you might therefore have child pornography on your hard drive at this very moment if you haven't cleared out your cache since your last visit.

I also think that the discussion of distribution could use a little reality check.  In the US, something like 70 or 80 percent of teenagers have cell phones, most of which come equipped with digital cameras and the means to send any images or video captured to other mobile devices or to image or video hosting sites.  In other words, any one of them can become a producer and distributor of child pornography if they are so inclined.  There doesn't always need to be some creepy dude with a camera for child pornography to be produced and distributed.

So there's that.

[Timo]

Man I wish I could have gotten some attention from older women as a child. I had a crush on my babysitter, my teacher, my neighbor... I had very sexual fantasies about them and I certainly wouldn't have been a victim of any kind if I had somehow figured out how to get my 20 year old babysitter to have sex with 10 year old me. Legend is a better word.

Isn't this mostly you projecting your adult self onto your ten year old self though?  I mean, if you're keen on studies, what do the studies say about young boys who had some sort of sexual contact with older women?

[joebbowers]

Isn't this mostly you projecting your adult self onto your ten year old self though?

Absolutely not. I clearly remember having vivid sexual thoughts and desires at that age, and I wasn't alone. Lots of the boys in my class would try to sneak a peek into the girls' locker room, look down the teacher's shirt, etc. One of the girls got pregnant at 13, the boy who did it was 2 or 3 grades ahead of her.

Try to remember how old you were when you first started masturbating, or when you first watched porn or tried to look down a girls shirt. Probably before puberty.

[joebbowers]

I haven't stated any position. But your position remains ridiculous, because the only thing that can prevent it's production is to have everyone agree that it's existence is intolerable. Making possession of it legal hardly helps in that (admitettedly nigh impossible) goal.

It's intolerable to you. It isn't intolerable to others. Are you aware that possession is legal in 129 of 187 countries, and that even the production is not illegal is 93 of them?[1] What you have brought up to believe are universal codes of morality simply aren't so.



Also, you're ignoring another important point. As I repeatedly stated, with sources, access to pornography decreases instances of sexual crime. It's continued ban and restriction only serves to create more victims.

1.	"Child Pornography Not a Crime in Most Countries" (PDF). International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children. 2006.

[Van Persie]

It's intolerable to you. 

Child pornography, be it production of, distribution of or possession of, is intolerable to anyone who isn't a depraved, sick puppy. Are there any decent vets in China Joe?

Also, you're ignoring another important point. As I repeatedly stated, with sources, access to pornography decreases instances of sexual crime. It's continued ban and restriction only serves to create more victims.

I am rather dubious on that point. But I'll go back and look at your sources.

[Timo]

Absolutely not. I clearly remember having vivid sexual thoughts and desires at that age, and I wasn't alone. Lots of the boys in my class would try to sneak a peek into the girls' locker room, look down the teacher's shirt, etc. One of the girls got pregnant at 13, the boy who did it was 2 or 3 grades ahead of her.

Try to remember how old you were when you first started masturbating, or when you first watched porn or tried to look down a girls shirt. Probably before puberty.

If I'm being honest, I'd rather not bring my own sexual development into this discussion.  It's kind of all over the place and in a way that has little to do with this conversation.

Still, I don't think that your recollections are helping your point.  I mean, I knew girls that were pregnant by the time they were in 8th grade too.  But didn't their pregnancy itself kind of demonstrate that they probably weren't ready to be having sex in the first place?  I mean, I remember dudes begging girls to have abortions.

In any case, I think you're confusing two different things.  Being sexually curious and being sexually mature.  And I just don't think that being sexually curious isn't the same thing as being prepared to actually have sex with a much older woman, let alone a woman that is ostensibly acting as your guardian, or deal with whatever issues one might have surrounding that experience.

[Timo]

Child pornography, be it production of, distribution of or possession of, is intolerable to anyone who isn't a depraved, sick puppy. Are there any decent vets in China Joe?

What if it's produced, distributed and consumed by children, as is often the case when our young people have access to a cell phone or a web cam and some alone time?

[joebbowers]

Child pornography, be it production of, distribution of or possession of, is intolerable to anyone who isn't a depraved, sick puppy. Are there any decent vets in China Joe?

That sure sounds like the same kind of language people use to describe homosexuals.

I know that as a Christian you're not used to backing up your statements with facts and logic. You throw out your emotional opinions and insult anyone who doesn't share them. That doesn't make you right, and that isn't how you convince someone they're wrong.