“Illustrated” child porn is legal. Drawings, paintings, etc., not done from a real-life model.
Also, text-porn is legal.
Would you advise a gay person to do that if they lived a country where gay sex was illegal?
Well, they used to try the same thing to “cure” homosexuality, and it never really worked too well.
But therapy and counseling to advise how to live life without gratification of the urges – that could help, at least. Just having someone to talk to is often helpful.
It seems there were once times when someone was branded a witch they were seen as unrecoverable so they were tortured until they accepted salvation for their soul then executed and burned.
In subsequent centuries similar protocols have been used for some sinners and misfits, black slaves who looked a white women, Jews, queers, and it would seem, pedophiles.
Societies and the laws have always designated some group to burn, literally or metaphorically. I’ve some ideas but they might get me stoned, with stones.
With gay sex you can find a consenting adult to participate with, so there isn’t a need to redirect your impulses. Until prepubescent children are given the ability to consent to sexual acts with adults (an unlikely situation), a pedophile is going to have to figure out some other way to get satisfaction.
Did you look at the link provided by JRDelirious? Here it is again.
I suppose I could have some sympathy for someone who has never acted on their sexual attraction to children and wants to do something about it. Maybe there could be an island for them to spend their lives on. For those who did act on their desires I think we could offer them incarceration for the rest of their lives, or execution.
This seems like a distinction without a difference.
The island would be a nicer prison.
Just as was done for witches, various sinners and misfits, black slaves who looked a white women, Jews, (and Bill Cosby).
Are men ever prescribed birth control pills? I ask because loss of libido is sometimes a big side effect.
They are not witches. They are people who have a strong desire to harm children. There is something wrong with their brains. No matter what explanation there is for why their brains work that way, no matter how they perceive it, it amounts to the same thing, they want to rape a child.
It gets complicated
Yes, BUT…
Illustrated/text porn are “legal” as long as they are not found obscene. Just as is regular porn.
But as we know, the judgement of obscenity is one reached* after *publication and it involves a set of criteria known as the Miller test – prurient appeal, no valid socially redeeming content, patently offensive, violates community standards, etc.
If they ARE found obscene under the Miller test, then the materials become unprotected speech and are subject to prohibitions or penalties. For many years, commercial mainstream porn producers had a rule that you could not have both hard bondage and hardcore sex in the same tape, and would say it was “against the law”. Well, it’s not that there was any actual law. It was that juries in some locations would find that this was obscene so the labels avoided the risk.
The authorities, of course, do not make an effort to sweep the general pornsphere for *anything *that may offend *any *community *anywhere *because that would *&^%$# crash the criminal justice system. So they focus on specific niches. And text, well, who reads any more, right? Ignored as a rule.
Of course this creates a bit of a legal tautology where a text story you could publish in Penthouse Letters about a threeway of a college coach and two coeds may not only not be found obscene but even be considered kind of funny by a jury in East Suburb, State of Flyover… but change the age of the girls from 19 to 9, and those exact same jurors may unanimously decide to decree it obscene exclusively because of that very factor so they can nail the sort of sicko who’d even *think *of something like that. SO it becomes that an obscene story in which the characters are imaginary children is illegal, but what makes it obscene is that the characters are imaginary children. Oy.
If “obscenity” can be shut down by the FBI, then how can 4Chan still exist?
(“4Chan is where the devil makes potty.”)
There was a fascinating document posted to wikileaks called confessions of a paid child pornographer or something like that.
It went way in depth, in a none obscene way into the real market for child “porn”.
Short version there are parents getting their kids to model nude in Eastern Europe, they get paid and the customers send gifts and stuff to the girls. No sex occurs, no contact with adults.
The author claimed the “hardcore” stuff like adults raping children is consumed by a minority, is looked down on by even many people consuming nude pics and vids, and is exclusively produced by pedophiles themselves not for money but for trading and bragging rights on online forums and chat rooms where they gather.
What are they supposed to do? They’re supposed to just live with it and however hard done by they may feel refrain from fucking little kids up the arse or molesting them in any other way. They may curse their stars, shake an angry fist at the unpitying heavens for making them thus. And if they cannot resist their urges they may “buy a rope That future times may tell They did at least bestow one penny well”.
And by the way it is quite invidious to even mention homosexuality in the same paragraph as pedophilia. There are still many out there who would equate the two as abominations against God’s order. The fact is of course with the one we are talking of the acts of consenting adults, with the other, by the very nature of the crime, one of the participants would be a minor, incapable of consent. They are nothing akin, however people may compare their pasts.
Frankly if pedophiles cannot restrain their urges then they must suffer the consequences. Their desires involve the infliction of harm on others, those others being the most defenseless members of our society.
Are we alone to be deprived of sexual satisfaction, comes the plaintive cry. Do we not deserve as other oppressed minorities a sympathetic ear? No, you don’t. They were genuinely oppressed. You just slunk in the shadows. Watching. Waiting.
Fuck you.
I truly don’t understand this attitude. If pedophiles cannot restrain their urges, then they must suffer the consequences… but you know who else suffers the consequences? Their victims.
It seems incredibly obvious to me that the highest priority should be protecting children and not punishing pedophiles. If making things a bit easier for pedophiles makes them (or some of them, anyway) less likely to harm children, then how could anyone be against this?
EDIT: I say I “truly don’t understand this attitude”, but perhaps I do… the urge for retribution and punishment seems to very commonly be more powerful for some people than the urge to protect, defend, and actually prevent the harm.
Is 4Chan even hosted in the USA, or owned or operated by US-based natural or legal persons?
ISTM the Georgia-based prosecutors and court that took on McCoy (a Minnesota resident at the time IIRC) went after low-lying fruit, some individual working out of his house, under his real name, whose stories could be FTP’ed from his own site and who could not afford a big defense effort, just for the heck of ratcheting up their stats.
Here’s an interesting thought experiment along these lines:
Imagine that Star Trek-style holodecks are invented, and they are as intimately realistic as real life. Would you program them such that some illegal acts (like, say, sex with children) couldn’t be emulated? What if it was proven that pedophiles with access to holodecks with no limits on their programming committed 99% less abuse of children? In such a case, would you support or oppose a plan to make such holodecks available to all sex offenders?
What can we do to protect children from pedophiles other than locking them up?
Why should we believe that making things easier for pedophiles will make them less likely to harm children?