# 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:** 6
**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 10, 2015, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/101 "2015-09-10T06:02:44Z")
> [@Hershele\_Ostropoler](#): > > I agree in principle but is there a way to exempt a 16-year-old sending n00dz to her 16-year-old boyfriend (in a jurisdiction in which it’s legal for them to have actual sex) that can avoid exempting actual producers of actual (that is, what we would intuitively classify as) CP? That’s partly what I was thinking of when I proposed linking porn to the local age of consent. I suppose we could extend the Romeo and Juliet exceptions that we already have in place to porn, without making blanket changes in the allowable age. I still think it’s stupid to say that a 16 year old can have sex, but can’t take a naked picture of herself. Another possibility–define simple naked pictures as NOT being porn. That way, the sexting teens would be protected, but cases of actual abuse could still be prosecuted. ---
**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 10, 2015, 11:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/102 "2015-09-10T11:26:50Z")
I think taking and sendind nudes is stupid at any age. Other person gets mad other person leaks them. Google nude and there are tons of em. ---
**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 10, 2015, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/103 "2015-09-10T11:30:18Z")
> [@IDtenT\_Error](#): > > [my bold the second] > > In other words, it’s better to _feel_ like you’re doing something positive, than to actually accomplish your goal? If you don’t know it actually protects children, you’re fine with something that may have just the opposite effect, as long as it _feels_ like it _should_ work? That’s what you’re advocating, here. BS. Its on you to prove simulated kiddie porn has any positive effect. ---
**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 10, 2015, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/104 "2015-09-10T16:32:36Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > Only if you can assume that _rates of reporting (and underreporting) hold steady_ not only across time (since the argument in question depends on a comparison of ‘pre-Internet’ rates to present-day rates), but across localities. > > And I don’t see how you can simply _assume_ all of that. And yet, it would take a truly astounding coincidence for this data on rape stats, which you maintain are so inaccurate as to be essentially no better than random noise, to _just happen_ to not only line up perfectly with the rates states brought their citizens on line, but to do so _at the same mathematical rate_ in all 50 states. In every state, across the board, a 10% increase in internet access correlated to a 7.3% reduction in reported sexual assaults. I don’t think that can simply be hand waved away by saying the rape stats are inaccurate. ---
**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 10, 2015, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/105 "2015-09-10T17:30:39Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > And yet, it would take a truly astounding coincidence for this data on rape stats, which you maintain are so inaccurate as to be essentially no better than random noise, to _just happen_ to not only line up perfectly with the rates states brought their citizens on line, but to do so _at the same mathematical rate_ in all 50 states. In every state, across the board, a 10% increase in internet access correlated to a 7.3% reduction in reported sexual assaults. I don’t think that can simply be hand waved away by saying the rape stats are inaccurate. Yet another straw man. (To add to the list of “100%”, “99%”, and the false claim that I’d posted that rates are the same thing as numbers.) But aside from that: many would find the very fact of close agreement of “statistics” from a wide variety of locales to be unusual, in and of itself. (An aside: if you look at my posting history you’ll see a pattern of frequent absences of two or three days at a time; another is about to begin. I’ll be happy to answer any points addressed to me when I return.) ---
**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 10, 2015, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/106 "2015-09-10T17:37:25Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > Yet another straw man. How so? In what way does that not accurately reflect the position you’ve been arguing here? ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2015, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/107 "2015-09-10T17:50:36Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Actually, I was thinking more broadly. If a guy at a college party has sex with a girl who told him she was 18 when in fact she was underage, I don’t think the law should automatically assume that he did or should know. He should be able to mount a defense saying that she told him she was 18 and therefore the accidental underage sex is not illegal. My reason for moving it out of porn and into normal people’s bedroom is because I think this happens a lot more in those situations than in a Traci Lords type where an actress lies to producers. > > I understand that it may be very hard to prosecute people who have sex with underage kids if this law passes. I don’t care, because I think we’ve experimented enough with erring on the side of guilt and its about time we shifted things back the other way. It SHOULD be difficult for the government to throw people in jail. The burden should not be on you to prove you were deceived. If many more people get away with it, I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing People do use this as a defense and I believe have been acquitted of statutory rape in such cases where it was clearly reasonable to believe the girl was 18 or older. ---
**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 11, 2015, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/108 "2015-09-11T00:35:38Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > BS. Its on you to prove simulated kiddie porn has any positive effect. We have EXCELLENT correlative evidence that porn reduces rape, but you aren’t willing to accept it. I don’t think you would accept any evidence at all. ---
**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 11, 2015, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/109 "2015-09-11T02:01:37Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > We have EXCELLENT correlative evidence that porn reduces rape, but you aren’t willing to accept it. I don’t think you would accept any evidence at all. The evidence isn’t excellent. Its not even evidence. Its coincidental and not worthy to use as a foundation for policy. Criminals generally don’t allow themselves to be studied. In places like NYC and San Francisco porn has readily been available for decades. Did these cities have less rape than cities that banned porn? Are rapists and pedophiles so comparible that studies on rapists can be if use on the later? ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2015, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/110 "2015-09-11T02:36:20Z")
I don’t know of evidence that porn reduces rape…but there certainly is no evidence that it increases it, and that’s all that we need for the basis of a liberal public policy. In principle, anyway, things in a free country are legal until a clear reason has been shown to ban them. “It’s icky” isn’t sufficient… (Or…shouldn’t be. The unpleasant truth is that democracies operate largely under majority rule, and, for instance, the killing of horses for meat has been made illegal in California, solely on the basis of people thinking it’s icky. There is zero real public policy reasoning behind it, just emotions.) Speaking of emotions, I was just surfing 4Chan and they had some VERY creepy “child porn” involving photos of very realistic (anatomically accurate) child dolls. Creepy…but I’ve not seen any convincing reason these photos should not be legal. (The dolls, too. It creeps me out…but I refuse to base my political views on such emotions.) ---
**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 11, 2015, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/111 "2015-09-11T02:52:03Z")
My issue with EC policy idea is that it might actually lead to an increase in pedophillic behavior. We just don’t know. There is no compelling evidence that allowing pedophiles access to this material will benefit society. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2015, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/112 "2015-09-11T04:56:58Z")
But, again, no proof of harm either. Prove to the board of censorship that your new novel won’t harm society; until then, we won’t let you publish it… This isn’t how a free country is supposed to work. ---
**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 11, 2015, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/113 "2015-09-11T05:13:06Z")
Banning images of children or simulated children engaged in activity that is illegal and made only for the purpose of pedophiles jerking off is quite a bit different than banning literature. We ban bestiality but who does it harm? Bondage porn cant show intercourse. If this type of material is made widely available I predict that it will face the same fate as the Hitman book and the family of a victim of pedophilia who consumed the material will sue the distributors and force them out of business. ---
**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 11, 2015, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/114 "2015-09-11T05:48:33Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > The evidence isn’t excellent. Its not even evidence. Its coincidental and not worthy to use as a foundation for policy. Do you understand what “correlation” means? Because the correlation between increased Internet access and reductions in the rate of reported sexual assault isn’t really questionable. Why that correlation exists, and whether there’s a _causative_ link isn’t certain, but even if it’s entirely coincidental, the correlation is still there. > [@](#): > > Criminals generally don’t allow themselves to be studied. In places like NYC and San Francisco porn has readily been available for decades. Did these cities have less rape than cities that banned porn? Are rapists and pedophiles so comparible that studies on rapists can be if use on the later? Well, for one, pedophiles (assuming they’re not celibate) _are_ rapists. Secondly, there are thousands of studies out there about criminals and criminal behavior, so your assertion that “criminals don’t allow themselves to be studied,” doesn’t really make a lot of sense. Thirdly, the study in question doesn’t rely on studies of criminals in the first place. It relies on crime reports. This is something you really should have picked up on by now, given that it’s been the central point of contention over the cite thus far in this thread. Lastly, the study states that sexual assault reports go down with the increased availability of Internet access, not specifically porn - the porn link comes from the observation that sexual assault stats are the only ones showing that correlation, and not robbery, homicide, or other violent crimes. ---
**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 11, 2015, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/115 "2015-09-11T06:01:33Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Do you understand what “correlation” means? Because the correlation between increased Internet access and reductions in the rate of reported sexual assault isn’t really questionable. Why that correlation exists, and whether there’s a _causative_ link isn’t certain, but even if it’s entirely coincidental, the correlation is still there. > > Well, for one, pedophiles (assuming they’re not celibate) _are_ rapists. Secondly, there are thousands of studies out there about criminals and criminal behavior, so your assertion that “criminals don’t allow themselves to be studied,” doesn’t really make a lot of sense. Thirdly, the study in question doesn’t rely on studies of criminals in the first place. It relies on crime reports. This is something you really should have picked up on by now, given that it’s been the central point of contention over the cite thus far in this thread. Lastly, the study states that sexual assault reports go down with the increased availability of Internet access, not specifically porn - the porn link comes from the observation that sexual assault stats are the only ones showing that correlation, and not robbery, homicide, or other violent crimes. You make some good points. I should have picked up on the internet access part. My objection to this study is that its just too general to mean anything. We can substitute anything that has increased in usage like cell phones. Also, this study [Rape Is Way Down Over the Past Two Decades — But So Is All Violent Crime – Mother Jones](http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/12/rape-way-down-over-past-two-decades-%E2%80%94-so-all-violent-crime) tells us that reported rape is down because we started to measure it at the peak of an generation wide explosion in crime. And " the decline in the reported rape rate has lagged the overall drop in reported violent crime." Im not sure that all pedophiles are rapists. Do watchers of child porn count as pedophiles? ---
**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 11, 2015, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/116 "2015-09-11T13:46:22Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > We ban bestiality but who does it harm? We ban the ACT of bestiality. There is no statute forbidding the graphical depiction of bestiality (nor providing that live action bestiality porn is per se a crime greater than plain obscenity, AFAIK). > [@](#): > > Bondage porn cant show intercourse. And the same applies in this case – with live action bondage porn, IIRC what you have is caselaw precedent of it having been found obscene but no written statute banning it. But you MAY publish a graphic novel of bondage and intercourse or bestiality. ---
**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 11, 2015, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/117 "2015-09-11T13:47:04Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > Banning images of children or simulated children engaged in activity that is illegal and made only for the purpose of pedophiles jerking off is quite a bit different than banning literature. Tell that to all the pedos who’ve jerked off to Nabakov’s “Lolita.” > [@](#): > > We ban bestiality but who does it harm? The production of bestiality porn involves nonconsensual sex with animals. That’s why we ban it, that’s why no one here is advocating actual child porn be legalized. Porn whose creation necessitates nonconsensual sex is criminal in and of itself. I don’t think there are a lot of people who have a problem with simulated bestiality … if there was, furries would be in serious jeopardy. It’s like people are reasonable or something. > [@](#): > > Bondage porn cant show intercourse. Well, actually, it can. Do a Google image search for “sexual bondage” with the filters off and see what evidence you can find. That was only true in the US from the late 1980s to the early 2000s. Not that it’s central to your argument. > [@](#): > > If this type of material is made widely available I predict that it will face the same fate as the Hitman book and the family of a victim of pedophilia who consumed the material will sue the distributors and force them out of business. If it’s legal, I don’t see how you can manage it. I am thinking we might try it on a state by state basis and see if the incidents of reported child molestations go down. Oh, that’s right … it’s your contention that if there are unreported child molestations, the incidence of reported child molestations means nothing. I’ll bet you also think that political surveys are meaningless … after all, if there are unsurveyed voters, the numbers provided by voters who have been surveyed mean nothing. ---
**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 11, 2015, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/118 "2015-09-11T15:25:29Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > If it’s legal, I don’t see how you can manage it. I am thinking we might try it on a state by state basis and see if the incidents of reported child molestations go down. Oh, that’s right … it’s your contention that if there are unreported child molestations, the incidence of reported child molestations means nothing. I’ll bet you also think that political surveys are meaningless … after all, if there are unsurveyed voters, the numbers provided by voters who have been surveyed mean nothing. Your ‘study’ doesnt mention anything about child molestation and actually other violent crime fell faster that sexual assault. Also, as mentioned above, the starting line for the study you linked to was at the end of a generation long boom in the crime rate. It skewers the conclusions. [Rape Is Way Down Over the Past Two Decades — But So Is All Violent Crime – Mother Jones](http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/12/rape-way-down-over-past-two-decades-%E2%80%94-so-all-violent-crime) Political surveys are fairly meaningless…ask Israel or the UK. > **[British Election’s Other Losers: Pollsters (Published 2015)](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/09/world/europe/uk-british-election-polling.html)** > > Before the election, nearly every poll showed the race as a near-tie, but Prime Minister David Cameron and his Conservative Party instead delivered a convincing victory. > **[Israel election: why were the exit polls wrong?](https://www.theguardian.com/world/datablog/2015/mar/18/israel-election-why-were-the-exit-polls-wrong)** > > It was not a good night for Israel’s pollsters, but with so many factors in play the job of forecasting is both complicated and formidable ---
**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 11, 2015, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/119 "2015-09-11T17:58:07Z")
[quote=“madsircool, post:118, topic:729791”] Your ‘study’ doesnt mention anything about child molestation and actually other violent crime fell faster that sexual assault. Also, as mentioned above, the starting line for the study you linked to was at the end of a generation long boom in the crime rate. It skewers the conclusions. [Rape Is Way Down Over the Past Two Decades — But So Is All Violent Crime – Mother Jones](http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/12/rape-way-down-over-past-two-decades-%E2%80%94-so-all-violent-crime) [quote] But the study took that into account. Kendall tested the increased internet access against the effect of 18 different crimes to see if just such a skewing effect were occurring, and he didn’t find any correlation at all in 16 of those 18 types of crime. So there was no skewing effect from a general reduction in crime, as you propose. > [@](#): > > Political surveys are fairly meaningless…ask Israel or the UK. > > [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/09/world/europe/uk-british-election-polling.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/09/world/europe/uk-british-election-polling.html) > [Israel election: why were the exit polls wrong? | Israel | The Guardian](http://www.theguardian.com/world/datablog/2015/mar/18/israel-election-why-were-the-exit-polls-wrong) I prefer to ask Nate Silver, who had a[94 percent success rate in predicting the winners in the 2014 elections](http://www.salon.com/2014/11/05/how_did_nate_silvers_forecasts_stack_up_against_midterm_results/)based on polling data. Maybe the folks in Israel and the UK are doing it wrong. ---
**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 11, 2015, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791/120 "2015-09-11T18:09:29Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Maybe the folks in Israel and the UK are doing it wrong. Well, their women think so. 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reforming-child-porn-laws/729791.md?page=7)