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

    What responsibilities?

    Classic.

    Same old repertoire of a coward faced with “proof yourself right” dillema.

    Anyway.

    Would that be all?

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

      I see you’re in the final stages of clamming up completely. This string of non-responses is an attempt at annoying me until I go away.

      You’ve given up on trying to actually prove me wrong, because you can’t. Or at least don’t know how to properly try.

      Please, figure it out. If not for me, then the next exchange you engage in.

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

        I see

        What I don’t see is any proof that your ideas arn’t anything but pro-pedophila propaganda that is meant to be “someone else’s problem”.

        But, of course, you won’t ever deliver any kind of proof that it’s not.

        So, would that be all?

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

          I keep laughing at this “someone elses problem” point. I can’t refute it without revealing way too much personal info, its such a perfect non-argument.

          You don’t know shit about how close I’ve been to these matters irl, and I can’t tell you.

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

              How about three fronts? I have a lot to say so more bite-sized bits would help get through you non-existent attention span.

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

                  Look at it this way, I didn’t declare an end to our delightful little chat, I declared my victory in the original matter.

                  You stopped forwarding arguments and counter-arguments two comments in, giving me the win by default.

                  All you have left, is acting like the ball is in my court and I’m the one who is refusing to make the next move.