# Reforming child porn laws **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 3, 2015, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791 "2015-09-03T05:40:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2015, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/41 "2015-09-05T22:54:22Z")
Also, the government has an interest in preventing minors from taking sexually explicit pics of themselves because they occasionally leak and end up on despicable websites fueling the child porn industry. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/42 "2015-09-06T01:57:18Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > Also, the government has an interest in preventing minors from taking sexually explicit pics of themselves because they occasionally leak and end up on despicable websites fueling the child porn industry. Which however may not require minors who stupidly sexted dirty selfies to one another to be threatened with charges of production and distribution of child porn as usually understood. This, to be fair, may be used more as a “scare tactic” to get the minors’ total and unquestioning compliance, than to lock them up if they can’t cough up an adult mastermind… or at least I hope so. But it needs adjusting. Then again the decentralized US criminal justice system tends to be quite elastic regarding the minimum age at which to treat a legal minor as an adult criminal and how easy is it to get the court to authorize so, but that’s a whole other deal. ---
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/43 "2015-09-06T02:32:07Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > We already used logic when we outlawed child pornography and decided as a society to hammer short eyes. And just because some liberal judges hols an opinion that you happen to like doesn’t make them right. > > About this theory, BTW. Any cite from anyone credible? > [@Bridget\_Burke](#): > > Please supply some documentation. It took me a little while to get back to this. > [@](#): > > “If you look at the majority of people who are arrested for child pornography, the majority of them have never touched a child,” said Bradford. “They may fall into this category of people who are sexually deviant, where erotica or pornography provides an outlet where they don’t victimize anybody.” > > “If they have, on the Internet, exposure to graphic sexual material where they can self-gratify themselves, the theory would be that they therefore would not go out and seek a child or would not expose themselves to the public, or don’t commit the deviant sexual acts,” he said. [http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2012/01\_02/2012\_01\_04\_Smith\_ExpertWitness.htm](http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2012/01_02/2012_01_04_Smith_ExpertWitness.htm) > [@](#): > > Paedophiles could be given ‘virtual child pornography’ in order to reduce instances of child abuse and the market for child porn, two sexologists say in Monday’s Trouw. > **['Virtual child porn could reduce child abuse' - DutchNews.nl](https://www.dutchnews.nl/2012/10/virtual_child_porn_could_reduc/)** > > Paedophiles could be given ‘virtual child pornography’ in order to reduce instances of child abuse and the market for child porn, two sexologists say in Monday’s Trouw. Erik van Beek and Rik van Lunsen, who treat men with paedophile tendancies, say... > [@](#): > > ## Alternatively, others argue that pornography is an expression of fantasies that can actually inhibit sexual activity, and act as a positive displacement for sexual aggression. Pornography offers a readily available means of satisfying sexual arousal (masturbation), they say, which serves as a substitute for dangerous, harmful, and illegal activities. > > In the United States there has been a consistent decline in rape over the last 2 decades, and in those countries that allowed for the possession of child pornography, child sex abuse has declined. > **[Porn: Good for us?](https://www.the-scientist.com/porn-good-for-us-43469)** > > Scientific examination of the subject has found that as the use of porn increases, the rate of sex crimes goes down. And if anybody is interested, here is a long, scholarly article on porn in general and how it affects people. [http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/2005to2009/2009-pornography-acceptance-crime.html](http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/2005to2009/2009-pornography-acceptance-crime.html) ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/44 "2015-09-06T12:06:08Z")
So, if the Interested Party has access to really good simulations of what he wants to do to children, he’s likely to just masturbate his desires away. Then the real children in his vicinity (or his family) will be safer. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/45 "2015-09-06T17:19:54Z")
> [@Bridget\_Burke](#): > > So, if the Interested Party has access to really good simulations of what he wants to do to children, he’s likely to just masturbate his desires away. Then the real children in his vicinity (or his family) will be safer. So men, for example, who have access to good female porn will end up masturbating their interest in having sex away? :dubious: Or, at least in some, make the desire even stronger. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/46 "2015-09-06T19:07:56Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > So men, for example, who have access to good female porn will end up masturbating their interest in having sex away? :dubious: > > Or, at least in some, make the desire even stronger. Well, madsircool, having consensual sex with adult females is not in fact illegal. However, there is some [very powerful evidence that access to porn reduces the incidence of rape of adult women.](http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/everyday_economics/2006/10/how_the_web_prevents_rape.html) Now, if access to adult porn reduces the incidence of rape of adult women, why would not access to simulated child porn reduce the incidence of rape of children? ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/47 "2015-09-06T20:40:36Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > It took me a little while to get back to this. And you have done nothing more than post the opinions of a couple of people. I didn’t see anything credible that proved their opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/48 "2015-09-06T21:03:13Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > And you have done nothing more than post the opinions of a couple of people. I didn’t see anything credible that proved their opinion. “Proof” is a pretty high standard for something of this nature, don’t you think? Does any of it at least count as evidence? ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/49 "2015-09-06T21:19:19Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > “Proof” is a pretty high standard for something of this nature, don’t you think? Does any of it at least count as evidence? No. I don’t see any long term studies that even come close to being credible evidence. The opinions of a couple of people who’s “expertise” is debatable in itself hardly comes close. But then again, does anyone even care? Is there really a large outcry from the majority for the type of reforms the OP is asking for? Some of it smacks of something expected from NAMBLA. And that’s just creepy. ---
**Author:** ![polar\_bear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ec9cab/32.png) [@polar\_bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/polar_bear)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/50 "2015-09-06T21:20:58Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > And you have done nothing more than post the opinions of a couple of people. I didn’t see anything credible that proved their opinion. You asked documentation for the existence of theories, when they were given you claim no proof was given… this is what they call moving the goalposts. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/51 "2015-09-06T21:28:57Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > No. I don’t see any long term studies that even come close to being credible evidence. > The opinions of a couple of people who’s “expertise” is debatable in itself hardly comes close. > > But then again, does anyone even care? Is there really a large outcry from the majority for the type of reforms the OP is asking for? Some of it smacks of something expected from NAMBLA. And that’s just creepy. What _this_ smacks of is well-poisoning. You were given exactly what you asked for, then you both moved the goalposts and labeled what _you_ asked for as “something expected from NAMBLA”. Is there any reason why anyone should want to fulfill any more requests from you if this is how they are to be treated? ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2015, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/52 "2015-09-06T22:35:27Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > What _this_ smacks of is well-poisoning. You were given exactly what you asked for, then you both moved the goalposts and labeled what _you_ asked for as “something expected from NAMBLA”. Is there any reason why anyone should want to fulfill any more requests from you if this is how they are to be treated? It’s not intentional. I was simply qualifying my observation which shapes my arguement against the OP’s. This is an issue that has been settled by society long ago and the OP insinuates there is unfairness in it. There is no advantage to society in general to reform child pornography laws, and the OP’s cites are pretty thin. Asking if there is an outcry from the majority in favor of the OP’s list is a perfectly legitimate question. ---
**Author:** ![Crazy\_Canuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crazy_canuck/32/5282_2.png) [@Crazy\_Canuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crazy_Canuck)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2015, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/53 "2015-09-07T03:36:18Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > This is an issue that has been settled by society long ago and the OP insinuates there is unfairness in it. There is no advantage to society in general to reform child pornography laws, and the OP’s cites are pretty thin. Your argument from tradition is misleading and factually wrong. The earliest law in the US regarding child porn dates was the Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1977, [as per wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography#History). I know you’d like to think that this is an issue resolved by the ages, but you are wrong. And there may very well be an advantage to society in general to reform child pornography laws, if they do reduce the risk of actual minors being assaulted. Are you arguing that if there was proof that allowing pedophiles access to simulated child porn significantly reduced their chances of offending, you would still be against it? (To the best of my knowledge there are no studies proving anything either way, due to major ethical and practical concerns on how one would actually research this.) I think that the whole issue just squicks the hell out of you, and you’re reacting to that instead of the real issues. And despite your repeated assertion that this is a non-issue, you’re wrong about that too. It’s just an issue that few have the balls to address, because of the exact crap that Tom modded you on. Loaded questions, insinuations, then legal threats … the usual bullshit. Instead of thinking about something icky, it’s so much easier to call everyone who does a probable deviant and dismiss everything they say. ---
**Author:** ![glowacks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/glowacks/32/5548_2.png) [@glowacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glowacks)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2015, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/54 "2015-09-07T05:27:48Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > No. I don’t see any long term studies that even come close to being credible evidence. I haven’t seen you quote any studies that say that people who view child pornography are more likely to commit acts of sexual violence against children. Why should we take your argument without proof? If you want to say “tradition holds”, then prove that it’s traditional. You’re just claiming things you think to be universally true because that’s what you think. I started a thread in another forum about pedophiles for the same sort of reason; there is a lot of unmitigated hate towards them, even when they haven’t done anything to hurt a child. People assume that because they have deviant sexual urges that they will automatically act on those urges. People deserve to be able to reasonably live the life that they were dealt, and we shouldn’t make things unreasonably hard on certain people because of biology that gives them the risk that they might do something we don’t like. The reason that I support liberalization of child pornography is based on treating pedophiles like human beings, not as mass murderers. Someone who plays Call of Duty all day and “kills” people constantly is seen as perfectly normal, but someone who wants to see simulated children engage in sexual activity is an extreme deviant even if they have no desire to hurt an actual child. A correlated reason behind this stance is that I am somewhere on the autism spectrum, and feel as though society has been formed in a way that is ridiculously unfair to someone with my biology. Whenever I see any other group seemingly discriminated against simply because they are not normal, I will stand up for their rights. It is incredible to me just how mean people are to others that are different from them in any way, even if that difference has no actual bearing on their lives. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2015, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/55 "2015-09-07T18:37:23Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > It’s not intentional. I was simply qualifying my observation which shapes my arguement against the OP’s. But that’s a problem. You keep bringing up language that associates any argument about that legal structure with being a pedophile advocate/apologist. The observation that as of now such changes are non-starters as the majority perceives no advantage to society, or the statement of your belief that the issue was already resolved for all ages “when we outlawed child pornography and decided as a society to hammer short eyes”, would have sufficed but you cannnot resist dropping “that’s what I’d expect from NAMBLA and it’s creepy” and “What’s going on with you”. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2015, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/56 "2015-09-07T22:18:46Z")
> [@glowacks](#): > > Someone who plays Call of Duty all day and “kills” people constantly is seen as perfectly normal, If this were true then there would be no research studies on the effects of such games on player’s propensity to act out violently (however mild the violence). In fact, there are thousands of such studies. But the studies suffer from the same limitation already mentioned in this thread: the ethical concerns inherent in human experimentation. Therefore, the designs tend to be correlational rather than experimental–and as such, can easily be pooh-poohed by the multi-billion dollar game industry, and by all those who love their games. An interesting finding, however: > [@](#): > > “We did a comprehensive review of every experimental study, reviewing 381 effects from studies involving 130,000 people, and results show that playing violent video games increases aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, and physiological arousal,” says Brad Bushman, a psychologist at Ohio State University who is one of the best-known proponents of the idea that first-person shooters influence real-world violence. > To Bushman, video games aren’t likely to be the sole source of violence, but an amplifier. [What Science Knows About Video Games and Violence | NOVA | PBS](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/body/what-science-knows-about-video-games-and-violence/) I mention this at length to illustrate that it’s probably not safe to simply _assume_ that viewing child pornography–simulated or real–will reduce actual abuse of children. We don’t know. As with the effect of games, studies will be dismissed by those who have an interest in using the product in question (violent first-person shooter games on the one hand, and child pornography on the other hand). It might be worth contemplating the way adult pornography seems to affect users. Ask yourself: [ul] [li]On average, does one image satisfy a user forever, or does the user seek additional images?[/li][li]Does the level of extremeness of the images a user enjoys stay the same throughout his lifetime? Or do users typically seek more extreme images as the old images come to seem ‘tame’?[/li][li]Does use of a pornographic image satisfy the typical user completely–that is, do most users of pornography live celibate lives? Or does the typical user generally seek, at some point, to have ‘real world’ experiences with real people?[/li][/ul] Presumably the brains of pedophiles are not _completely_ different from the brains of non-pedophiles. It seems reasonable, as a working hypothesis, to consider that the way non-pedophiles experience pornography might not be utterly different from the way pedophiles experience pornography. ---
**Author:** ![OldOlds](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/a3d4f5/32.png) [@OldOlds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldOlds)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2015, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/57 "2015-09-08T00:03:19Z")
I worked with a guy who insisted (this was more or less pre-internet, around 1997 or so) that he was on the registry because he got busted for having consensual sex with his girlfriend in a car. We always used to wonder if this was BS or not- any possibility it was true? And if so, then I agree that the process needs reform. Ruining someone’s life for something that maybe 1/2 the population has done can’t make sense. ---
**Author:** ![Hershele\_Ostropoler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e47c2d/32.png) [@Hershele\_Ostropoler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hershele_Ostropoler)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2015, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/58 "2015-09-08T00:35:15Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > But then again, does anyone even care? Is there really a large outcry from the majority for the type of reforms the OP is asking for? Some of it smacks of something expected from NAMBLA. And that’s just creepy. I read this and the name Frank Hague floats across my consciousness for some reason. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2015, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/59 "2015-09-08T00:42:49Z")
> [@OldOlds](#): > > I worked with a guy who insisted (this was more or less pre-internet, around 1997 or so) that **he was on the registry because he got busted for having consensual sex with his girlfriend in a car.** > > We always used to wonder if this was BS or not- any possibility it was true? And if so, then I agree that the process needs reform. Ruining someone’s life for something that maybe 1/2 the population has done can’t make sense. It would depend both on how old his girlfriend was, and on the age gap between them. I don’t know the whole history but there have been changes in the laws, over the years (and of course they differ by state). In some cases reforms have come about because people started to see, for example, 18-year-old guys getting put on registries because of consensual sex with their 16-year-old girlfriends, and it became obvious that treating that the same way we’d treat a 40-year-old with a 13-year-old didn’t make sense. I’m all for that type of reform, and for common sense about examples such as a 16-year-old girl being put on the registry for posting photos of herself. If some sort of consequences are deemed appropriate to discourage teens from posting nude pics, fine, but being put on the offender registry doesn’t seem to be reasonable. I’m leery of calls to make ‘simulated’ child porn legal, though. I know that many in this thread will howl, but: making it legal _normalizes_ it. It says ‘this is basically okay, and society has no objection to adults making use of children’s bodies [simulated or not] to get off.’ I disagree with the view that normalizing the use of kids for getting off is harmless or beneficial. I’m open to any reputable research that says otherwise, but I’m not willing to assume off the bat that it’s harmless or beneficial. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2015, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/60 "2015-09-08T00:43:05Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Well, madsircool, having consensual sex with adult females is not in fact illegal. However, there is some [very powerful evidence that access to porn reduces the incidence of rape of adult women.](http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/everyday_economics/2006/10/how_the_web_prevents_rape.html) > > Now, if access to adult porn reduces the incidence of rape of adult women, why would not access to simulated child porn reduce the incidence of rape of children? Well Evil Captor then we should see very little rape in universities, right? After all, todays youth have unprecedented access to porn of every size and shape. Also, these studies are really useless because there is no objective way to verify what rapists tell researchers is true. Its better to err on the side of protecting victims. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791.md?page=4)