As much as I hate pedofiles...

[Vuk]

...Paedophillia isnt a freaking fad, it's a mental condition, you cant make someone a paedophile from exposure, they're born that way its in thier DNA and those that are born a paedophile will fantasize on thier own with or without easy to reach wanking material, and to be quite frank I would rather them be able to jerk off to a drawn image than photographs and videos of real children.

That is absolute BS. If that is true, why then were such a high percentage of child molesters molested as children themselves? It is definitely a mental condition, but it is an acquired one. The last thing you want is for people who may have been abused, or underwent some other kind of trauma who would be more likely to be pedophiles seeing child porn and getting used to the idea of children as sex objects. It is dangerous, seriously dangerous to society.

[Montmorency]

Note the false equivalence between pedophilia and child molestation.

Is the stereotypical convict homosexual?

[Vuk]

Note the false equivalence between pedophilia and child molestation.

Is the stereotypical convict homosexual?

I am sexually attracted to women, and there is an extremely high likelihood that sometime in my life I have/will have sex with one. A straight woman is sexually attracted to men, and there is an extremely high likelihood that sometime in her life she will have sex with one. A gay man is sexually attracted to men, and there is an extremely high likelihood that sometime in his life he will have sex with one. A pedophile is sexually attracted to children, and there is an extremely high likelihood that sometime in her/his life s/he will have sex with one. Make sense?

[Montmorency]

Nope.

[Greyblades]

That is absolute BS. If that is true, why then were such a high percentage of child molesters molested as children themselves?

Because abusing children becomes accepted as the norm by those who were abused themselves, they dont do it because they prefer kids they do it because they think its what they're supposed to do. The true paedophiles are those who are born mentaly deformed with thier sexual wires crossed.

It is definitely a mental condition, but it is an acquired one. The last thing you want is for people who may have been abused, or underwent some other kind of trauma who would be more likely to be pedophiles seeing child porn and getting used to the idea of children as sex objects. It is dangerous, seriously dangerous to society.

Maybe, but that should mean that they shouldnt be allowed to distribute it publically or for profit, keep it out of the mainstream. Arresting people for making it in the first place, and arresting people for mere posession is just a waste of time as they already affected by it. Stick em on a list of people to investiagte first and that be the end of it.

But think about it. Have you ever gambled? Do you have a strong urge to gamble right now? Probably not, that urge is fired up by gambling and winning and playing slots machines and the like. Otherwise it's out of sight out of mind. I think that's a much more likely general model for pornography, despite the obvious differences. Exposure seems more likely to build urges than quiet them. Hence "porn addiction", however questionable the use of the word addiction is.

Except in this case I think it would make them have more urges for drawings of children, have you looked at the style of art they are using? They look wildly different to real human beings.

Plenty of religious groups have worked at techniques for squashing sexual desire.

Yeah, and they use it against homosexuals, most of the time it results in broken people and/or suicide.

[Vuk]

Because abusing children becomes accepted as the norm by those who were abused themselves, they dont do it because they prefer kids they do it because they think its what they're supposed to do. The true paedophiles are those who are born mentaly deformed with thier sexual wires crossed.

I don't buy that, as many children who were themselves abused, hate those who abused them, and know that it is wrong. They also then live in society long enough to know that it is wrong, but still sometimes become child-molesters themselves.

Maybe, but that should mean that they shouldnt be allowed to distribute it publically or for profit, keep it out of the mainstream. Arresting people for making it in the first place, and arresting people for mere posession is just a waste of time as they already have it.
Except in this case I think it would make them have more urges for drawings of children, have you looked at the style of art they are using? They look nothing like regular human beings.

You are right, people shouldn't be allowed to distribute it publicly, and people should be arrested for possessing it. You need to make distributers and potential buyers afraid to deal in it. Also, this guy was planning on translating and distributing it.
Yes, it is very stylized/abstract, but so was a lot of early porn. People associate the drawings with real people, even if they are stylized.

[Greyblades]

You are right, people shouldn't be allowed to distribute it publicly, and people should be arrested for possessing it. You need to make distributers and potential buyers afraid to deal in it. Also, this guy was planning on translating and distributing it.

Eh, I agree we should make them fear having it but I disagree with making them fear arrest just for having the stuff, like I said, stick em on a list of first contacts for the police to only open and use in molestation cases and be done with it.

See my belief for what makes child porn so heinous is that it is prolificating a horrendous act, the demand for child porn creates production and production is basically taking images of molesting children, by posessing CP you are creating demand so you might as well be saying "I want children to be molested". As for drawn stuff, well, to make it you dont need kids, it's imagination made by a pen or a piece of software, as distasteful as that production is it doesnt directly hurt someone. Also the idea that a piece of fiction can make someone do something heinous kinda doesnt hold up to me as people have made the same trash argument for video games making people killers.

Drawn CP is distasteful but it shouldnt be illegal because it doesn't hurt anyone.

I was thinking of buddhist monks etc not "conversions' of homosexuals. What standard would you hold yourself to if you had pedophilic desires?

Before or after I killed myself?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Eh, I agree we should make them fear having it but I disagree with making them fear arrest just for having the stuff, like I said, stick em on a list of first contacts for the police to only open and use in molestation cases and be done with it.

See my belief for what makes child porn so heinous is that it is prolificating a horrendous act, the demand for child porn creates production and production is basically taking images of molesting children, by posessing CP you are creating demand so you might as well be saying "I want children to be molested". As for drawn stuff, well, to make it you dont need kids, it's imagination made by a pen or a piece of software, as distasteful as that production is it doesnt directly hurt someone. Also the idea that a piece of fiction can make someone do something heinous kinda doesnt hold up to me as people have made the same trash argument for video games making people killers.

Drawn CP is distasteful but it shouldnt be illegal because it doesn't hurt anyone.

Before or after I killed myself?

I think you hit the nail on the head - production involves abuse.

Having said that, the issue of attraction and why it is wrong is a lot more complex.

Asthetically - what we are talking about is an attraction to someone who exhibits child-like traits, small size, fine hair and soft skin, for a woman underdeveloped breasts and narrow hips, for a man a small penis and little muscle development.

Well, hang on a sec - lots of young women can appear child like, I've known women who are small breasted and one who despite being very physically developed had the face of a 12 year old at 21 and was lucky enough to have the the skin of a newborn.

As to men - seen an Eastern RPG recently? The boys in that look like 12 year olds with (nominally) adult bodies.

So this can't really be about asthetics, and building on what Hax said - I believe there was a case of a guy entering Canada who had pictures of his 20-year old girlfried on his laptop. She was deemed to look no older than 16, he was arrested.

On the other hand - the emotional/mental side of paedophilia is about a profoundly asymetrical relationship where the adult derives sexual satisfaction a child, usually one they are loco in parentis.

So I suppose with these cartoons the question is what they are presenting - a fantasy of sexually abusing children, or sexually aware women who happen to have teenage bodies and claim to be 13.

For anyone who thinks the latter should be illegal - you would have to arrest every girl who has ever worn a Catholic School Girl outfit to a party, or for her boyfriend.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I think you hit the nail on the head - production involves abuse.

Having said that, the issue of attraction and why it is wrong is a lot more complex.

Asthetically - what we are talking about is an attraction to someone who exhibits child-like traits, small size, fine hair and soft skin, for a woman underdeveloped breasts and narrow hips, for a man a small penis and little muscle development.

Well, hang on a sec - lots of young women can appear child like, I've known women who are small breasted and one who despite being very physically developed had the face of a 12 year old at 21 and was lucky enough to have the the skin of a newborn.

As to men - seen an Eastern RPG recently? The boys in that look like 12 year olds with (nominally) adult bodies.

So this can't really be about asthetics, and building on what Hax said - I believe there was a case of a guy entering Canada who had pictures of his 20-year old girlfried on his laptop. She was deemed to look no older than 16, he was arrested.

On the other hand - the emotional/mental side of paedophilia is about a profoundly asymetrical relationship where the adult derives sexual satisfaction a child, usually one they are loco in parentis.

So I suppose with these cartoons the question is what they are presenting - a fantasy of sexually abusing children, or sexually aware women who happen to have teenage bodies and claim to be 13.

For anyone who thinks the latter should be illegal - you would have to arrest every girl who has ever worn a Catholic School Girl outfit to a party, or for her boyfriend.

Girls who dress up in school girl outfits don't act 13 anymore than girls who dress up like angels act like angels.

I'm skeptical of the idea that there are regular people who like a truly childish look, and not just youthful which we are overly obsessed with. Small breasted doesn't make a woman look childish.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Girls who dress up in school girl outfits don't act 13 anymore than girls who dress up like angels act like angels.

I'm skeptical of the idea that there are regular people who like a truly childish look, and not just youthful which we are overly obsessed with. Small breasted doesn't make a woman look childish.

The point is, how they act defines whether or not they are legitimate objects of desire - not how they look.

This is why cartoons like this can be a grey area.

There's also a difference between statutory rape and child molestation/paedophilia.

I'm 25 - let's assume I'm not me, that I go to clubs and sleep with girls on a regular basis. If one morning I wake up to discover the girl in question was not 18, as I thought through the drunken haze, but actually 14, does that make me a paedophile?

If I still find her sexually attractive the next morning - am I a paedo then?

Let's say she did some awsome things last night and I'm considering sleeping with her again?

Does it become paedophilia simply because I can't have an adult relationship with her?

Who actually took advantage of who here?

[Tellos Athenaios]

I don't get how you can describe a precedent that might lead to some questionably-underage porn being banned as "dangerous".

I don't get how you can describe a precedent that might lead to some terrorist attacks being prevented as dangerous. Could've been used to introduce Patriot Act, TSA, war in Iraq, that one. Or just about any witch hunt.

The more salient point is that "banning" something just because it looks like something else which is already banned is a very bad idea. (Incidentally there's no such thing as questionably-underage porn, no person is "questionably-underage" by definition; and underage porn is better known as child porn which is already banned pretty much everywhere). That way you end up like the British ("extreme porn") or the Australians ("small breasts") or Japanese ("penises"), and none of that works.

I don't buy that, as many children who were themselves abused, hate those who abused them, and know that it is wrong. They also then live in society long enough to know that it is wrong, but still sometimes become child-molesters themselves.

Course it depends on the age and so on, but shame and self-blame is often enough a more overwhelming emotion even in adults who are abused. Victims are extremely reluctant to come forth and testify against the perpetrator. To make matters worse abuse can instill the notion that this is in fact "normal" behaviour.

People are quick to "learn". Bullied people are more likely to become bullies, an entire American government talked themselves into "believing" that "enhanced techniques" were not torture.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Except in this case I think it would make them have more urges for drawings of children, have you looked at the style of art they are using? They look nothing like regular human beings.

Yes, but that seems pretty dubious to me. I don't see how someone can literally have an urge for a drawing in reality.

Yeah, and they use it against homosexuals, most of the time it results in broken people and/or suicide.

I was thinking of buddhist monks etc not "conversions' of homosexuals. What standard would you hold yourself to if you had pedophilic desires?

[Fragony]

Ouch, big dillema, going to watch this. Gut says that there is nothing wrong with this, I really don't know