For example, I don’t see anything immoral about so-called “child porn” if it is obtained free of charge, since the acquisition does not involve any kind of a transaction that would encourage the production of the material.
He sees nothing immoral about child porn. Nothing immoral about child porn. Let that sink through your head.
You forgot his “if”.
That said, I think it can be safely said that if you got your free child porn from anywhere, somebody profited from it, if only via the glee of being able to distribute the porn. Therefore fuck that.
His argument that video of a 17 year old who wasn’t below the age of consent in her area should be legal perhaps deserves a little more scrutiny. I mean, on the face of it it’s not entirely stupid - no crimes were committed in the making of it after all. Hitching that argument up to the wagon of the sentence you quoted REALLY doesn’t help matters though.
In jtur’s defense, I think he was thinking of porn involving 17-year-olds. I don’t know why he went there, though, or felt the need to say anything about it, since I don’t think that’s what the other people in the thread were talking about.
His raison d’être is to be the contrary voice among us normies.
Chris Cornell, founder of Soundgarden, is dead. That’s bad.
Roger Ailes, founder of FOX News, is dead. That’s good.
jtur88, ordinary average Doper, supports child porn. That’s…bad, right?
My brain is so confused today.
Child porn is non-consensual sex, by definition. Children can’t consent. They can’t consent to what they were forced/influenced to do, and they can’t consent to you watching them. If you or anyone is watching child porn, you’re violating the consent of a child. A real child out there, even if they’re now an adult, who hasn’t given you permission to watch them be violated.
If violating consent isn’t a big deal for you, then you should seriously reevaluate what kind of person you are, and what kind of person you think you should be.
Wait, so if nobody profited from it, there’s no problem? What the FUCK?
That’s just wrong, but there should be a “knowingly” in there somewhere. I say this as a person who saw a Traci Lords video before the big revelation that she was underage at the time of its production.
I had a friend who worked at a Video rental joint at the time and they not only had to pull all her movies, they had to have someone “screen” every porno in the place just to see if she was in any of the previews of, er, coming attractions.
I’ve often said that kiddie porn is the dumpster salami of erotica.
I agree somewhat. He’s a pathetic, lonely old man who has no one to talk to, and wants more than anything to be seen as a wizened old sage who dispenses the wisdom of the ages to the unsophisticated. He deliberately takes the contrarian view in discussions to bolster this image he has of his own unappreciated insight into the human exprerience.
I picture him as a disheveled toothless old relic who smells of rotting flesh.
My statement isn’t far off from his own words.
…and cat pee.
How often do you get a chance to say that?
Quite possibly the worst non-sex job in the porn industry.
This is where jtur’s point breaks down. Pretty much everyone likes attention. Everyone likes it when something they’ve produced or obtained or are able to distribute is appreciated by others. It’s a very basic human driver.
So quite regardless of whether kiddie porn is paid for, merely by downloading it free you are making it attractive for people to produce and distribute.
NM
It’s not just about profit or helping abusers. Even if you’re just looking at it alone, on a photo you found in an abandoned lot, you’re violating the consent of the child who was victimized.
It’s not okay to violate the consent of anyone, especially a child, even if they’ll probably never know that it was you.
I don’t agree with that. It takes the concept too far, into woo territory to me. Acquiring the stuff is wrong, as it makes people want to produce more of it. Putting it out there is wrong because it can get back to the child, and because it makes it harder to trace. And actually making it is absolutely vile and one reason I can’t decide about the death penalty. But the actual viewing part doesn’t do anything.
And, please, for the love of God, don’t take that out of context and think I’m defending child porn or people viewing it. Even thinking about it is disgusting. Thinking that people who view it could even possibly think they actually like children is disgusting.
But, to me, the consent issue is that you are supporting the guy who raped the kid, making yourself part of the act. You’re a rape enabler.
It’s no different than installing a microscopic camera in a little girl’s bedroom. It doesn’t matter if she’ll never find out; it’s wrong to violate her consent no matter what.
And yet in a vast number of jurisdictions, children can consent to having sex (they just can’t consent to taping it), they can consent to getting married, they can consent to taking potentially-lethal jobs (joining the military), and they can consent to being in charge of a heavy, high-powered piece of machinery wherein they can easily die if they make a mistake.
Any of those things can easily have consequences that are every bit as life-changing and as long-lasting as appearing in a porn movie. And yet society is stupid enough to think that porn should be treated differently than the others.