This is more of a 2 part question. Should child porn that does not include a real child be illegal? If so, who is being harmed by it?

The other question is; does giving a pedophile access to “imitation” children give them an outlet for their desire, so they won’t try to engage with real children, or does it just reinforce their desire, thus helping them to rationalize their behavior and lead to them being more encouraged to harm real children?

I’ve heard psychologists discuss both sides, but I don’t think we have any real life studies to go off of because the technology is so new.

I’m just curious what the other thought out there are from people who are more liberty minded.

  • Maharashtra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Please do not talk to me about science’s powerlessness to help “the poor”. For starters, it’s far from powerless. And I’d like to remind you that it’s not 1980, but 2023 year. Sex change therapies, hormone blockers, antidepressants and more aids to change not only one’s mental, but also physical self are available.

    Providing one wants to search for them.

    With that out of mind…

    Listen now, and listen well, dude… The likes of you enjoy to take pity on “broken, twisted, wretched, weak” and think it’s humane to accept them into society. But you lot never entertain the idea of living door to door with the ones you’d want to defend. In your heads it all sounds nice, and logical, and honorable. But you want it to become other people’s burden, other people’s responsibility, other people’s struggle.

    You say “I, me, mine, myself” as examples of how things are or might be, but you don’t put yourself in the scenarios that your ideas lead to. You won’t put the money where your mouth is, you won’t stain your hands with dirty job, you won’t strain your back with the weight that your ideas bring with them. You want for others to get the job done. You want to dictate to others what to do, what to think, how to act.

    Want to make a point? Want to prove a thing? Go, befriend a convicted pedophile. Go, invite a guy known of masturbating to pictures of children like Madeleine to your home, to talk, play and touch your child. You may also want to tell everything you wrote to the people who suffered because of pedophiles.

    Then we talk.

    • MentalEdge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right. Because if I knew someone who was one, they’d openly admit that to me. For all you know, I am one. But no. That’s not how this works. If you’re a paedophile with a clear head in modern society, you’d take that fact to the grave. Only if you didn’t trust yourself to never touch a child, is there any reason to out yourself and expose your life to the downsides of being known, in order to get help. But if you’re 100% sure you’ll never act, like you and I can be about never raping someone, why admit to it? With how hated you’d instantly become, there are only downsides.

      And why the fuck would I befriend someone convicted? That’s like saying that to be ok with people who would like to have sex (everyone), I need to be ok with befriending and having around actual known rapists (criminals). People who want to have sex, are not automatically people who can’t stop themselves from taking it.

      As for the option of eliminating one’s libido, thats a really good one. But which part of my comment made you think I believe science can’t help? I said it can’t be cured, I said the therapies we have, work. If eliminating one’s libido helps a person live their life, they should opt for it, paedophile or not. But choosing not to harm others isn’t difficult, unless there’s a lot more wrong with you than your sex drive being directed at children. You and me have no trouble respecting adults of whatever gender were attracted to, why should being a paedophile mean you’re any different?

      You accuse me of not thinking this through… I laugh at you. Your last three paragraphs only work if you assume the condition automatically also makes a person evil and immoral. Yes, those people exist, and they should be locked away and never allowed into society. (again, WTF, a convicted pedo??? WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU?)

      But the condition itself, that one is attracted to children, has nothing to do with a person’s capacity for moral action. One’s mind, does not need to obey one’s biology. You can choose to not eat, even when hungry, because you can understand that eating more than is healthy, is bad. A normal person would stay virgin all their life, if they didn’t find a willing partner, because not raping isn’t difficult.

      Should we shun people who have done evil? ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY! I don’t know which part of my comment made you think I believe otherwise. As for telling people who have suffered because of child rapists, that not all pedos are also rapists… Duh, but that’s also like telling a woman who was raped by a man, that not all men are rapists. She likely wont want to hear it, and should be helped through the trauma in whatever way is best for her. It would also be true. If you left a kid alone with a pedo who has the same moral compass as you and me, you’d never know they were a pedo, because they wouldn’t rape the kid.

      This likely won’t get through to you, because you can’t separate the desires from the person. You can’t imagine someone desiring to do evil, not also being evil. That you can be hungry, without wanting to eat.

      • Maharashtra@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right. Because if I knew someone who was one, they’d openly admit that to me. (…)

        Prisons are full of these.

        Send a letter. Interact with one. Invite him over to your house once he gets released.

        Go on. Walk the walk.

        Prove that you’re more than a cowardly wannabe-dictator who enjoys listening to his own voice more than to common reason.

        Do it.

        • MentalEdge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You didn’t read my comment. I want nothing to do with fucking criminals. Stop suggesting otherwise, you lunatic.

          Stop trying to put words in my mouth. It’s not gonna work, especially if you won’t even read and understand what I am actually trying to say.

          Responding like this, anyone who reads our exchange is gonna look at your responses, and determine you’re the crazy one, because what you are saying makes no fucking sense in response to me if you actually read and understand what I’m saying. Is that what you want?

          • Maharashtra@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            You didn’t read my comment.

            You didn’t read mine. No wonder, given how self-absorbed you are…

            I want nothing to do with fucking criminals.

            Ah, so everything’s fine and dandy with ya, if they aren’t caught and sentenced? Brilliant strategy, milord!

            Now, I give you simple challenge: prove that you’re willing to set an example and coexist with those loathsome deviants you want for the society to embrace.

            If you can’t, if you don’t want to - admit that your ideas aren’t that good.

            • MentalEdge@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I did read yours. What makes you think otherwise?

              If someone who wants to kill, never does it, they shouldn’t be put in prison. They shouldn’t even be hated or feared.

              Someone who gets away with it, should be in prison. Someone who did kill, should be hated and feared.

              I will admit only one thing, that you refuse to understand what I’m actually trying to say.

              I wouldn’t need to prove shit, if you had the capacity to think clearly enough to understand, or even fucking read.

              • Maharashtra@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                I did read yours. What makes you think otherwise?

                The fact that you constantly avoid the challenge of proving your convictions true and correct.

                The other explanation is that you’re simply scared of it, or trolling, but I preferred to think you were simply too preoccupied with writing yet another comment. I don’t anymore.

                I wouldn’t need to prove shit

                Uh-huh. You absolutely has to do, since “burden of proof…” and all that.

                But you won’t. Because you realize how weak, irresponsible and “let this be other people’s problem” your train of logic is.

                Fgures.

                • MentalEdge@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Except what you’re asking me to prove I believe, isn’t actually what I believe, because you refuse to even think about what I am actually saying.

                  You’ve made assumptions, and because those assumptions are so heinously evil, you won’t even consider what I have to say.

                  Because you’re acting based on assumptions, you keep missing when trying to dismantle my argument, because its not my argument you’re attacking, but your imagined idea of what I’m saying.

                  So here we are, going in circles, me trying to get through to you, you accusing me of avoiding the point, because I keep trying to force you to see my actual point, instead of the imagined one that you’ve fixated on.

                  • Maharashtra@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    If you were honest about your philosophy, you’d seek some way to prove it - and yourself - to be solid, logical and, well, honest.

                    But you’re not. You’re looking for explanations, excuses, ways to divert the discussion, distractions, and finally insults. Like an undereducated AIs guided by inflexible software.

                    There’s no way in hell that you’re going to ever take the responsibility for your choices and suggestions. Because all you have in store is a bunch of idiotic ideas that are supposed to be "other poeople’s burden.

                    Would that be all?