Well, it also causes more than that. As Ran Gavrieli puts, it just for starters, “porn brought so much anger and violence into my private fantasies.”
Honestly Officer! I know they look young, but they’re actually 375 million years old!
3 Likes
It’s a good thing that I returned my brother’s book on the art of “Fantasia”, some of the early drafts of the female centaurs were barely in their teens.
Although, out of the literally hundreds of art books I’ve collected over the decades, some of the older ones not only have drawings, but photographs of male and female bodies from pre adolescents to seniors. Some of those books are from foreign countries, so maybe they’re just not as sophisticated and insightful as the rest of us, right? I won’t even get started on my manga collection.
Then my pens, pencils, and squishy erasers have been used to produced the occasionally questionable image, but I’m sure that more people will be upset by my admitting I not only have a copy of “Lolita”, but also that old Brooke Shields movie (I’m a big Susan Sarandon fan, I swear).
No matter what the circumstances, there’s always someone willing to interpret my thoughts based on what little information might influence their own feelings about everyone else in the world who clearly doesn’t agree with them, so are probably wrong.
2 Likes
Statistics say that between 3 and 9 percent of the population are pedophiles.
This sounds absolutely insane. I would love to read the source of this number.
That means that Fast Times at Ridgemont High, which included depictions of a “high school” girl having sex and getting pregnant, is child porn under Canadian law. Clearly it is one of those selictivly enforced everybody-is-a-criminal laws.
I think “lower than 5%” is probably most accurate. Even if it’s less than 1%, all the evidence suggests that only a small minority of pedophiles act on their desires.
Thanks for the link.
I would agree that, if the incidence rate is low, then it would not make any sense to require treatment. I do think that fact remains on dispute, especially since a lot of cases go unreported.
I can’t watch this at work, but sounds like he’s choosing to watch the “wrong” kind of porn.
2 Likes
Can I repeat the story of “The Aristocrats” as long as I don’t use any visuals, or should I stay away from humor altogether just to be safe?
Maybe use the date it was drawn?
Or the age of the artist?
Or no age at all, because not real
If you felt compelled to comment without even watching the video, it sounds like you’re choosing awfully quick to defend “porn.” It would be great if, after watching his fifteen minute explanation, you could direct us all to “porn” of some sort that he’s not actually talking about.
Well, suppose there is a substantial population of pedophiles out there who don’t have a huge amount of trouble dealing with it and live in our society where admitting any sexual interest in anyone under 18 is extremely taboo. How much do you think you would have heard about those people?
You’ve been reading studies I haven’t.
Yeah, that would get the “art” exception. An exception which could probably otherwise be called the “whim” exception.
Yeah, but that’s one person and the porn they chose to watch. Porn is made by the same culture that makes the rest of the stuff, and that culture has a lot of violence and misogyny in it. Porn reflects that. There is an unbelievable quantity and variety of porn in existence, and certainly a lot less than all of it includes violence of any kind.
Maybe what would be “safe” would depend on context, including audience?
Yeah, but as I said, that point is just for starters. He makes other ones in the video, which is worth a watch, maybe even before commenting on it.
No, I meant what I wrote.
Are you parody posting or something? You mentioned the name of logical fallacy right in your statement. We already compulse people to take actions in the name of public health and we haven’t slipped down that slope yet. Seeing someone who is clearly mentally ill and inducing them to get help for it is a reasonable course of action. They are a hazard to themselves and people around them.
+1 for whim!
You don’t speak for everyone. You speak for yourself.
No. I just dislike thought police of all kinds.
We did. See how many countries considered things from plain homosexuality to political dissent to be something worthy of various “treatments”.
Only if they really pose a danger. Which, even in this specific cartoon-porn-flavor demographics, is rather a small to negligible fraction. Besides, some aberrations are defined depending on the “host” culture - why should the same thing be permitted in Japan and a ground for investigation and (presumably forced) treatment and all sorts of repercussions in, say, UK?
Citation needed.
You can say the same about all kinds of people, from those who play with homemade fireworks (quick, ban the oxidizers!) to DIY electricians (fire/shock risks!) to those who drink alcohol even in small amounts (prohibition!) to… just use your fantasy. Odd cartoon porn collectors are somewhere at the bottom level of the risks, way below a humble mosquito.
2 Likes
Sure, it’s not exactly the same thing, but it’s still an inducement that we accept as reasonable. Sounds like you wouldn’t mind it being more strongly enforced, either. I argue that at the very least virtual child pornography consumption is a sign of mental illness. I believe that it is in the interest of the individual afflicted with that illness and society at large to treat that illness. I don’t necessarily believe that criminal charges are the best way to get to the goal of treatment, but the legal obstacles to forced treatment without that are high indeed. I think it’s probably best to keep those protections largely in place, but compromises should be made.
The most practical compromise I can think of is to criminalize depictions of physically undeveloped persons in sexual acts with aggressive and mandated pre-trial diversions if the charged accepts treatment.
Psychotherapy.
Doubtful.
I really doubt this person you’ve imagined exists. And you’re ignoring the psychic trauma of having those urges and living in a society in which they are anathema.
What, does everyone here try to get people to point out slippery-slope thinking and try to argue the opponent is using arguement from fallacy?
1 Like
I thought we were having a civil discussion/debate. I’m sorry you feel you’re wasting your time by replying to me.
Pedophiles are victims of their mental illness.
Freedom is normally traded for order. We trade the freedom to drive as fast as we want ignoring traffic signals so we can have safe and orderly transportation. Trading the right to look at drawings of toddlers get sodomized so we can help pedophiles and maybe prevent the sexual abuse of children is an emininently reasonable thing to do.
1 Like
