Ok so how strong is your commitment to free speech

Well, there's Lolita and thousands of lesser books, and the most explicit depictions of child-rape I've personally ever come across were in books aimed at persons who were sexually assaulted as children.

So if people who were sexually assaulted as children are creating explicit accounts of sexual assault (involving real children, namely themselves) and distributing these accounts to other persons (including support groups, therapists, and online communities) would these materials be made illegal under the law?
 
ChristineR said:
Well, there's Lolita and thousands of lesser books, and the most explicit depictions of child-rape I've personally ever come across were in books aimed at persons who were sexually assaulted as children.

So if people who were sexually assaulted as children are creating explicit accounts of sexual assault (involving real children, namely themselves) and distributing these accounts to other persons (including support groups, therapists, and online communities) would these materials be made illegal under the law?
Click to expand...

I hope not. I plan to write one of those, someday.

But having a redeeming social or artistic value makes it not obscenity, according to the law.
 
slingblade said:
I hope not. I plan to write one of those, someday.

But having a redeeming social or artistic value makes it not obscenity, according to the law.
Click to expand...

Which, of course, leads back to the question of "Who decides whether it's redeemed or not?"
 
corplinx said:
If this passes, then all those fans of child-sex hentai will be pissed.
Click to expand...

Many anime fans are quite uncomfortable about this sort of law. "Lolicon" (a Japanese abbreviation for "Lolita complex") is a huge part of anime culture, for better or worse. Anime makes an artform out of playing in the borderline of pedophilia, and as simulated child pornography becomes more illegal, it puts anime fans of all sorts into a very awkward position.
 
UserGoogol said:
Many anime fans are quite uncomfortable about this sort of law. "Lolicon" (a Japanese abbreviation for "Lolita complex") is a huge part of anime culture, for better or worse. Anime makes an artform out of playing in the borderline of pedophilia, and as simulated child pornography becomes more illegal, it puts anime fans of all sorts into a very awkward position.
Click to expand...

I think that anime fans of "Lolicon" would find themselves in awkward positions in public society in the U.S. anyways...
 
Lonewulf said:
I think that anime fans of "Lolicon" would find themselves in awkward positions in public society in the U.S. anyways...
Click to expand...
I think if we could view the hidden minds of the typical US citizen we would all be uncomfortable.
 
RandFan said:
I think if we could view the hidden minds of the typical US citizen we would all be uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

I should know. The "Sexual fantasies not to be talked about" thread demonstrates that.
 
RandFan said:
I think I missed that one.
Click to expand...

Plug!

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77708

According to Dustin, anybody with a fetish that he considers bad should go see a psychologist. :D

Also, the only thing keeping people that play violent videogames from killing people is the law alone.

I think that Dustin's new signature is a poorly executed attack on me, based on a quote from that very thread. He claims it's the one thread that made me his nemesis or somesuch.
 
Undesired Walrus said:
Evidence that people who fantasize about children are mentally imbalanced please, rather than an appeal to emotion.
Click to expand...

For many people, this is a recursive statement. It's like saying, "Evidence that people who suffer from PTSD are mentally dysfunctional, please." People who suffer from PTSD are mentally dysfunctional by definition.
 
Well, I think drawings and CGI of crap like that would be disgusting but if people who watch that crap don't hurt anybody, particularly children, I really don't care much -- I think if I had a kid, I'd want to want to keep my kid away from a person who watches them though to be absolutely honest.

Wolfman makes a good point though, there should be laws that would restrict such material to pedophiles (I mean real pedophiles, not a 19 year old who had a 15 year old girlfriend)
 
Joshua Korosi said:
For many people, this is a recursive statement. It's like saying, "Evidence that people who suffer from PTSD are mentally dysfunctional, please." People who suffer from PTSD are mentally dysfunctional by definition.
Click to expand...
Joshua,

While I don't really agree with UW's argument, the fact is that your response is not really valid, either. After all, homosexuality was classified as being a psychological disorder not that long ago (and still is in some countries, like China); today, it is considered by most to be a biologically determined state which is not in any way indicative of a psychological disorder. I believe that a decent argument can be made that if sexual preference for gender is not considered a psychological disorder, but rather is simply a form of "sexual orientation", then a similar argument could be used for sexual preference for children or adults.

"It is not normal" or "I find it disgusting" is not exactly a demonstration that it is a "mentally dysfunctional" condition. In fact, historically, in many cultures sex with children was considered normal, or at least acceptable. From wealthy Greek men keeping young boys to satisfy their sexual cravings, to the numerous cultures in which marriage to and sex with girls as young as ten to twelve years old (marriages at even earlier ages were also common, particularly arranged marriages, but tended not to include sex).

So while I don't fully agree with UW's position, I think he deserves more of a response, and more quantifiable proof/statistics/arguments.
 
There used to be, and possibly still is, a disclaimer I read after watching certain movies: "No animals were harmed during the production of this movie".

A picture where no human child was involved hurts....who exactly?

Picture simulation software, and movie simulation software is getting ever better. At some point, we'll start seeing true-to-life movies where all the actors are simulated.

Who has been hurt when this simulation software depicts sex with minors?

Yes, it is despicable to watch, but so are splatter movies.
 
Wolfman said:
Joshua,

While I don't really agree with UW's argument, the fact is that your response is not really valid, either. After all, homosexuality was classified as being a psychological disorder not that long ago (and still is in some countries, like China); today, it is considered by most to be a biologically determined state which is not in any way indicative of a psychological disorder. I believe that a decent argument can be made that if sexual preference for gender is not considered a psychological disorder, but rather is simply a form of "sexual orientation", then a similar argument could be used for sexual preference for children or adults.
Click to expand...

The problem with the "as with homosexuality" argument is its premise; "child" is not a gender. Indeed, it is often argued (even by themselves) that pedophiles have "sexual orientations" (i.e., are homosexual or heterosexual) independent of and unrelated to their kid attraction.

Wolfman said:
"It is not normal" or "I find it disgusting" is not exactly a demonstration that it is a "mentally dysfunctional" condition. In fact, historically, in many cultures sex with children was considered normal, or at least acceptable. From wealthy Greek men keeping young boys to satisfy their sexual cravings, to the numerous cultures in which marriage to and sex with girls as young as ten to twelve years old (marriages at even earlier ages were also common, particularly arranged marriages, but tended not to include sex).
Click to expand...

The same can be said of slavery, female subservience, and many other once-widely-accepted practices of which our society has divested itself in modern times. I also happen to believe that anyone who thinks slavery is a-OK is also suffering from something of a mental imbalance.

Wolfman said:
So while I don't fully agree with UW's position, I think he deserves more of a response, and more quantifiable proof/statistics/arguments.
Click to expand...

As is your right; I, however, do not.
 
Joshua Korosi said:
The same can be said of slavery, female subservience, and many other once-widely-accepted practices of which our society has divested itself in modern times. I also happen to believe that anyone who thinks slavery is a-OK is also suffering from something of a mental imbalance.
Click to expand...

This is a problem. Why is it better to believe that the vast majority of the world's population prior to the 1700's were to some degree insane, than to believe that mentally healthy people can hold objectionable viewpoints?

Even today, a large portion of Mauritania's population are mentally ill by your definition, because their variant of Islam promotes chattel slavery. Are they really all mentally ill? It would seem to make the definition of mental illness nebulous to the point of meaninglessness.
 
quixotecoyote said:
This is a problem. Why is it better to believe that the vast majority of the world's population prior to the 1700's were to some degree insane, than to believe that mentally healthy people can hold objectionable viewpoints?
Click to expand...

If you write off anyone that disagrees with you or is icky to you as "mentally insane", life becomes much easier. You don't have to make any actual arguments.
 
Joshua Korosi said:
The same can be said of slavery, female subservience, and many other once-widely-accepted practices of which our society has divested itself in modern times. I also happen to believe that anyone who thinks slavery is a-OK is also suffering from something of a mental imbalance.
Click to expand...
Some people believe that peanut butter and anchovies go together but I'm not going to eat it.

I think pedophilia disgusting and just up, slightly, from murder. I veiw slavery about the same as I do pedophilia. In some severe cases of pedophilia part of me wants the perpetrator to be cruelly and inhumanely punished.

I suffer from a heightened sense of empathy. I had to seek therapy for awhile because reading about specific cases of child abuse could render me incapable of dealing with every day life. It disturbed and depressed me horribly.

That said, child sexual fantasy does not necessarily indicate a pathology. It can simply be a fetish. Humans can fetishize just about anything including inanimate objects, animals and even abstract concepts (Santa Claus, fairies, ghosts, etc.) A fetish is not considered a mental defect.

There have been societies, particularly native (non-civilized) societies that have engaged openly in adult child sex. It was part of their culture. Researchers have not found evidence of harm to children in these societies.

There is no objective data that adult child sex, absent societal prohibitions, is per se inherently harmful.

There is, on the other hand, objective data that in societies where child sex is taboo the acts are stigmatized and the contact is often a non-consensual one and the child is entirely unfamiliar with what is happening or knows of the stigma attached to the act and IS often very seriously harmed.

So, let me be clear.
  1. Pedophilia in modern, civilized societies, because of taboos has a great potential to cause harm from the sexual contact alone.
  2. The perpetrators know that the act is illegal and therefore are more likely to cause additional harm by killing the child or acting in additional aberrant behavior.
  3. A perpetrator who is willing to break the law to engage in sex with a child is more likely to suffer mental or emotional problems exacerbating the problem and causing harm.
  4. Adult child sex is not, per se, inherently harmful.
I hope that helps. However, due to the provacative nature of the subject matter I would not be surprised if my intent is still missed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom