# 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:** 4
**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, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/61 "2015-09-08T00:51:09Z")
Miss edit window. Also. correlation does not equal causation. Is this almost useless ‘study’ your idea of powerful evidence? ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2015, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/62 "2015-09-08T04:59:29Z")
> [@Hershele\_Ostropoler](#): > > I read this and the name Frank Hague floats across my consciousness for some reason. Why? Wasn’t he the mayor of Jersey City? My grandfather knew him. ---
**Author:** ![Fubaya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@Fubaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fubaya)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2015, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/63 "2015-09-08T15:02:00Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > 1. Anything that is completely animated should be legal. If there is no actual child involved, then no foul. > > 2. The use of very small or young-looking adults to simulate child porn should be legal. (This may already be legal; I don’t know.) But it should be allowed to be sold as “simulated child porn.” Is… I’m almost afraid to ask… Is animated child fucking and porn actors pretending to be children something that normal adults enjoy in a completely sane and non creepy way? I’m at a loss here, is this something that we really need to be made legal? I’m sure the laws could be tweaked, I know nothing about them and have no opinion on them, I just can’t fathom why these things, especially animated kids having sex, is something we should support. ---
**Author:** ![grude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47774/32.png) [@grude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grude)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2015, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/64 "2015-09-08T15:06:22Z")
At the risk of being burned at the stake, for I am a parent of a five year old. I see nothing wrong at all with natural nude photos of young kids being available, like those art books that create controversy. If some pedo jerks it to naked kids not in sexual situations and that helps them avoid predating on kids in real life, more power to them! I think a distinction should be made between child porn which is media of kids involved in sex acts, and just pics of nude kids at the beach or something. The latter is not harmful. You may now burn me. ---
**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, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/65 "2015-09-08T15:14:41Z")
> [@grude](#): > > At the risk of being burned at the stake, for I am a parent of a five year old. > > I see nothing wrong at all with natural nude photos of young kids being available, like those art books that create controversy. If some pedo jerks it to naked kids not in sexual situations and that helps them avoid predating on kids in real life, more power to them! > > I think a distinction should be made between child porn which is media of kids involved in sex acts, and just pics of nude kids at the beach or something. The latter is not harmful. > > You may now burn me. I think your distinction between sexual and non-sexual pics is a good one. And parents (back in the day now) getting arrested for getting pics developed was probably wrong. I still strongly disagree with the assertion that allowing pedophiles to view simulated child porn will 1)satisfy their cravings and 2)keep kids safe. Its really impossible to know and again I say in this instance its better to err on the side of keeping children safe. ---
**Author:** ![CoastalMaineiac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e8c25b/32.png) [@CoastalMaineiac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoastalMaineiac)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2015, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/66 "2015-09-08T19:47:51Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > 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. I would say that a society that punishes thought crime, bringing harm to people who have themselves harmed no-one, is itself far more evil than the evil it thinks it is fighting. Simulated images are not capable of being the victim of a crime. ---
**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 8, 2015, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/67 "2015-09-08T20:05:51Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > I still strongly disagree with the assertion that allowing pedophiles to view simulated child porn will 1)satisfy their cravings and 2)keep kids safe. Its really impossible to know and again I say in this instance its better to err on the side of keeping children safe. Would you agree that the current situation of being unable to scientifically study that assertion is a bad thing? **IF** that assertion is correct, then society’s very attempt to prevent harm is inadvertently doing harm instead. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2015, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/68 "2015-09-08T20:33:32Z")
> [@Fubaya](#): > > Is… I’m almost afraid to ask… Is animated child fucking and porn actors pretending to be children something that normal adults enjoy in a completely sane and non creepy way? . . . Sometimes, yes. Why should it be illegal? There isn’t any victim. Who would be protected by a ban? ---
**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, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/69 "2015-09-08T21:22:31Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > Would you agree that the current situation of being unable to scientifically study that assertion is a bad thing? > > **IF** that assertion is correct, then society’s very attempt to prevent harm is inadvertently doing harm instead. Yes and no. Its really difficult to study and sort of criminal because all we have to go on are their own words; and they lie and deceive. How are we doing eliminating serial killers? If society is doing harm by harming the consumers of real or simulated child porn then I can live with it. We also dont allow S&M and penetration or bestiality. Somehow this kind of topic brings out defenders. We should know who are these folks who like this material so we can protect our kids. ---
**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, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/70 "2015-09-08T21:23:37Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Sometimes, yes. When? ---
**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, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/71 "2015-09-08T23:21:18Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > **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? > [@madsircool](#): > > 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. This seems like too good a point to let it just drift away unremarked. And it’s not just in universities; in the many nations that have wide access to porn (via the Internet), shouldn’t there be virtually NO rapes occurring? If access to porn keeps the users from raping, why would rapes still happen in all the Western and other nations, in which pornographic images are only a click away? ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2015, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/72 "2015-09-08T23:30:01Z")
Because as we all know, reduction is equal to elimination. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2015, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/73 "2015-09-09T00:27:20Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > When? What exactly are you asking? Do you seriously deny that any mature adult ever, so much as once, looked at a painting of a naked little girl and enjoyed it? Yes, it is completely possible, and happens often enough to not be weird. What’s your point here? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2015, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/74 "2015-09-09T00:47:43Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > And it’s not just in universities; in the many nations that have wide access to porn (via the Internet), shouldn’t there be virtually NO rapes occurring? Is chemotherapy an effective treatment for cancer? Yes. Does this mean that in countries with access to chemotherapy, nobody ever dies of cancer? Of course not. Assuming that the negative link between porn and incidence of rape exists in the first place, it would be _hugely_ surprising if it completely wiped out all rape. In terms of actual, physical medicine that people ingest to fix mechanical problems with their bodies, there are no treatments that are 100% effective for 100% of all people. Expecting a higher standard from something as fuzzy as the sociological effects of exposure to a particular kind of entertainment is simply not reasonable. ---
**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 9, 2015, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/75 "2015-09-09T00:52:42Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > Because as we all know, reduction is equal to elimination. You should look up the meaning of the word “virtually.” The argument has been advanced that ‘viewing child porn has the effect of reducing the impulse to molest children’ and a reasonable-sounding analogy to adult-oriented porn has been hypothesized. If adult porn has the effect of reducing the drive to have sex with adults–as it’s been argued that child porn has the effect of reducing the drive to have sex with children–then we should see more celibacy and less rape. You have to work very hard at massaging the statistics to be able to say ‘there’s less rape.’ From a 2014 study: > [@](#): > > … miscoding of such crimes is masking the high incidence of rape in the United States. We don’t have an overestimation of rape; we have a gross underestimation. A thorough analysis of federal data published earlier this year by Corey Rayburn Yung, associate professor at the University of Kansas School of Law, concludes that between 1995 and 2012, police departments across the country systematically undercounted and underreported sexual assaults. The study itself is behind a paywall (as is all too much academic research). But much of it is reported here: [http://www.thenation.com/article/how-did-fbi-miss-over-1-million-rapes/](http://www.thenation.com/article/how-did-fbi-miss-over-1-million-rapes/) It would appear that advocates of freer access to child-porn (simulated or real) are unwise to rely on the ‘availability of porn reduces sex crime’ argument. They should look for a different argument. ---
**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 9, 2015, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/76 "2015-09-09T01:15:39Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Is chemotherapy an effective treatment for cancer? Yes. Does this mean that in countries with access to chemotherapy, nobody ever dies of cancer? Of course not. Assuming that the negative link between porn and incidence of rape exists in the first place, it would be _hugely_ surprising if it completely wiped out all rape. In terms of actual, physical medicine that people ingest to fix mechanical problems with their bodies, there are no treatments that are 100% effective for 100% of all people. Expecting a higher standard from something as fuzzy as the sociological effects of exposure to a particular kind of entertainment is simply not reasonable. Again, note that I said “_virtually_ no rapes.” Not “no rapes.” So it’s irrelevant to tell me that 100% effectiveness is rarely possible; that’s something I’m aware of and didn’t dispute (as I agree with that observation). ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2015, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/77 "2015-09-09T03:23:09Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > Again, note that I said “_virtually_ no rapes.” Not “no rapes.” > > So it’s irrelevant to tell me that 100% effectiveness is rarely possible; that’s something I’m aware of and didn’t dispute (as I agree with that observation). That does not fundamentally affect my criticism of your post. When I said it was unreasonable to expect something to be 100% effective, I did not intend to imply that expecting it to be 99% effective was perfectly rational. > [@Sherrerd](#): > > You have to work very hard at massaging the statistics to be able to say ‘there’s less rape.’ From a 2014 study: > > The study itself is behind a paywall (as is all too much academic research). But much of it is reported here: [http://www.thenation.com/article/how-did-fbi-miss-over-1-million-rapes/](http://www.thenation.com/article/how-did-fbi-miss-over-1-million-rapes/) That depends. Did the study mentioned in the article you linked to break out the problems with reporting of sexual assault on a state-by-state basis? The study mentioned in the article **Evil Captor** linked to did just that. It looked at the rate of reported sexual assaults on a state-by-state basis, and compared it to the rate at which residents of each state were able to access the internet, and they found a direct, across the board correlation between internet access and a reduction in the number of reported cases of sexual assault. If the problems found in the study you’re talking about apply more-or-less equally to all states, then **Evil Captor** ’s study remain unrefuted: even if all states are under-reporting the number of sexual assault cases, if they’re under-reporting them equally, then the change in reported assaults remains valid: while the actual total number is incorrect, the change in number between states is still significant. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2015, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/78 "2015-09-09T06:30:56Z")
1. Anything that is completely animated should be legal. If there is no actual child involved, then no foul. I can’t argue with that 1. The use of very small or young-looking adults to simulate child porn should be legal. (This may already be legal; I don’t know.) But it should be allowed to be sold as “simulated child porn.” Also can’t argue - provided a) appropriate proof of age is avaialable b) “Simulated Child Porn” squicks me out - so a euphemism of some sort would be appropriate 2. The production and possession of porn should be tied to the local age of consent. If a 16-year-old girl is considered by society to be old enough to have sex (something that has a good chance of having life-altering consequences), then she should be considered old enough to be photographed naked. Disagree here. Here in Singapore the age of consent is 16. The age of consent for Prostitution is 18. I feel that’s appropriate. Porn should be put in the same boat as prostitution. Both have “more consequences” than routine sex. 3. As things currently stand, somebody who is accidentally sent a single child porn image is in very serious trouble. There should be some sort of useful affirmative defense allowed. Perhaps something like sending a text back to the sender, “I didn’t ask for this picture.” I’d like to think that the justice system in any country is already smart enough to differentiate the person who actively tried to stop receiving child porn and treat that person appropriately. There is always prosecutorial discretion, appeals, what a jury finds - I’d need to see proof that this is a real problem before you start looking for solutions. 4. Reform the sex offender registry laws, so that only actual predators are required to register. And reform the conditions of release. The current conditions are unrealistic in many cases. Despite the argument that is regularly trotted out about urinators being put on Sex Offender Registries, and it’s one I’ve heard many many times here - I’ve still yet to see solid, documentary evidence of the size of this problem. That people that are doing this in a genuinely non sexual way are having to register. As to the idea about “why would people want to see child porn” that was raised Not pedophilia exactly - but one fantasy that crosses my mind from time to time is highschool classroom sex - and I’m fairly sure I wouldn’t be alone here. What age is “highschool classroom” is up for interpretation - but when you look for this online, the male actor is invariably a 6’ moustachioed guy that looks to have repeated 6th grade 14 or 15 times. I could well imagine a decent market for things like high school gym sex, band camp sex, sex ed lessons that turned literal…none of which requires a child, just someone young enough to pass for how I remember myself at that stage of life ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2015, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/79 "2015-09-09T06:34:39Z")
As another side note … and remembering this is Singapore Recently we had a case here where more than 50 men were prosecuted for hiring an underage prostitute. The girl was a few weeks short of her 18th birthday. She had advertised herself as 18 on a porn site And confirmed this verbally to the men. They were all found guilty - as they didn’t take any additional steps to verify her age. Bearing in mind one thing - here in Singapore ALL 18 year olds have a national identity card that you are supposed to carry with you, so age verification would be simple. The only one that was found innocent was the guy they couldn’t prove had sex. (he hired her, and met her, but she couldn’t recall if sex actually happened) ---
**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 9, 2015, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/80 "2015-09-09T07:27:04Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > What exactly are you asking? Do you seriously deny that any mature adult ever, so much as once, looked at a painting of a naked little girl and enjoyed it? > > Yes, it is completely possible, and happens often enough to not be weird. > > What’s your point here? > [@Fubaya](#): > > Is… I’m almost afraid to ask… Is animated child fucking and porn actors pretending to be children something that normal adults enjoy in a completely sane and non creepy way? I’m at a loss here, is this something that we really need to be made legal? I’m sure the laws could be tweaked, I know nothing about them and have no opinion on them, I just can’t fathom why these things, especially animated kids having sex, is something we should support. > [@Trinopus](#): > > Sometimes, yes. > > Why should it be illegal? There isn’t any victim. Who would be protected by a ban? You werent responding to artistic depictions; but to depictions of simulated pedophilic content. You think watching and being stimulated by this content isnt ‘weird’ ? That people who watch and enjoy would want to try the real thing? Why do you think there is a sex tourism industry in places like Thailand? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791.md?page=5)