My Plan for Paedophiles

[space boy]

Those people may never actually go out and rape a child but masturbating to child porn is definitely crossing the line.

[Tuomas]

As far as I know, though, it actually is a crime to have child porn on your computer or as videos. At lest in most countries. At least if someone finds out.

[Vince Twelve]

The problem is that buying such videos or pictures creates a market for such thing, leading to more children being sexually abused.  Child porn is created for profit just like adult porn.  Purchasing these things is definitely a crime, and definitely horrible.

[lo_res_man]

I don't think this was really got into but now is probably the time to bring it up again, now that we are talking about videos and such What about hentai. Let me be blunt, I can get quite turned on by hentai, in some cases even more so then real pics, I guess its a fetish for me. However there is quite a bit of sick twisted hentai that depicts characters that by no means could be even remotely considered over 18. What of that? Some of that may be drawn 'from life' and could be considered wrong, due to some child somewhere been the inspiration for the madness. But what of stuff drawn directly from the imagination, with no "real" source? Yes they are sickos, but should it be a crime?

[Stupot]

Hentai can be cool, but I shut it down if the characters look too young, it makes me feel very uncomfortable and doesn't turn me on.  I don't own any hentai myself, but if I was to go into a shop and browse for some I would make sure the characters looked old enough because then I'd be able to enjoy it properly.

Not Hentai, but still Japanese...
I walked into a shop into Tokyo because outside the sign simply said "Books Games, Videos"... Nothing else.  But when I walked in I was confronted by a shop full of porno mags and videos.   Being the red-blooded heterosexual male that I am, I wandered around and had a browse.  Then I walked down one aisle and saw a little girl on the cover, couldn't have been any older than 9 or 10.   Then I realised I'd stumbled into a whole section of the shop with this stuff and quickly hurried away, and indeed out of the shop.

Now I can only assume, because I didn't open the magazine, that the girls in the pictures aren't naked, just in swimsuits and stuff, because surely even in Japan it must be illegal to have naked children.   But who buys this stuff anyway?  And you can't defend it because whats it doing in a shop full of porn?... there is only one thing men use that magazine for and it ain't nice.

So, even though the magazines are legally sold, and even though the girls probably aren't completely naked, and even though they probably (hopefully) aren't doing anything other than standing there posing, I still think it's sick, and the people who buy this stuff need serious help before they're obsession gets the better of them.

[lo_res_man]

I agree its sick and twisted, and they do need help. But what about patient-doctor confidentiality? Many say looking at pics and wanking is crossing the line , does that mean the good doctor should go to the cops? But that would be most likely the point when they would go to the doctor, when they can no longer deny it turns them on. Its kind of hard to deny that you feel this way when you got guy-goo on your hand. Of course people are experts at lying to themselves but if they are going to get help this would be the time.
As well we should acknowledge that with the mostly justified attitudes of today, I can see how it would be very difficult for these people to admit to anyone else there is a problem let alone themselves.

[InCreator]

I personally think that no other human could criticize someone's else's turn-ons. Even not law.

If there wasn't porn, thousands of passive rapists, paedophiles, etc-you-name-it would be ACTIVE ones.
World if full of sick people. Most of them simply don't cross the line.

But who do --
-- should be punished as harshly as humanly possible.

[Stupot]

I don't think it's responsible to say that we should wait for these people to commit the crime before we do something... fair enough, you can't punish individuals before they've commited a crime, but it's a good idea to try to identify the ones who are likely to commit crimes before they do it... and this means encouraging them to own up about their obsessions and try to dull them, or even reverse them.

[space boy]

I personally think that no other human could criticize someone's else's turn-ons. Even not law.

If there wasn't porn, thousands of passive rapists, paedophiles, etc-you-name-it would be ACTIVE ones.
World if full of sick people. Most of them simply don't cross the line.

But who do --
-- should be punished as harshly as humanly possible.

Like vince said, people who buy child porn create a market for it. Owning child porn is illegal for a good reason.
I don't know if the absence of porn in general would increase the number of sex crimes(any statistics?) but that's no excuse for producing and owning child porn.

[Hudders]

I don't think it's responsible to say that we should wait for these people to commit the crime before we do something... fair enough, you can't punish individuals before they've commited a crime, but it's a good idea to try to identify the ones who are likely to commit crimes before they do it... and this means encouraging them to own up about their obsessions and try to dull them, or even reverse them.

Like Homosexuality in the '50s.

As you said, you can't punish people for things they haven't done. There's also no reason to assume that a convicted felon is any more likely to go out and commit a crime than someone who has never been convicted. With these two facts in mind, there isn't any other solution to the problem other than continuing to discourage the behaviour and punishing people for it when they're caught. Doing anything else would be an affront to civil liberties.

Then I walked down one aisle and saw a little girl on the cover, couldn't have been any older than 9 or 10.   Then I realised I'd stumbled into a whole section of the shop with this stuff and quickly hurried away, and indeed out of the shop.

Now I can only assume, because I didn't open the magazine, that the girls in the pictures aren't naked, just in swimsuits and stuff, because surely even in Japan it must be illegal to have naked children.   But who buys this stuff anyway?  And you can't defend it because whats it doing in a shop full of porn?... there is only one thing men use that magazine for and it ain't nice.

Could it be one of those magazines where photos of adult models are digitally manipulated to give the impression that you are looking at pictures of children? I remember there being a story about that on the news a while back. If it is the case, I think it's a much better, (although perhaps not healthier), alternative to abusing real children.

[Stupot]

Could it be one of those magazines where photos of adult models are digitally manipulated to give the impression that you are looking at pictures of children? I remember there being a story about that on the news a while back. If it is the case, I think it's a much better, (although perhaps not healthier), alternative to abusing real children.

Yeh, it's a better alternative as the children aren't being exploited, but it's still feeding the reader's obession which is a bad idea.   People can be addicted to porn, and I'm sure some people are addicted to pictures of children (or pictures of adults digitally enhanced to look like children).

Addictions have a tendancy to evolve.  Heroin addicts will rarely claim heroin to be their first drug.  the started of on pot, which is relatively harmless, then maybe took some shrooms, then got involved in coke and before long they're on the smack.

I'm sure its the same for child molesters and rapists.  They will rarely tell you that they just got up one day and raped a child.  They probably started off looking at these kinds of magazines, then started taking their own photos of kids in the park, then decided they want more than just to watch, so they start touching, and then if theyve been getting away with it so far they might try something worse.

I'm not saying this is the predestined course for everyone who looks at these magazines, but what I'm saying is that these magazines should be taken of the shelves inorder to prevent people from becoming addicted and going that way.

Any course of action that will stop even one person from turning into a child killer (even if it means causing an inconvenience to the "innocent paedophiles") can surely be considered the right course of action.

[lo_res_man]

Any course of action that will stop even one person from turning into a child killer (even if it means causing an inconvenience to the "innocent paedophiles") can surely be considered the right course of action.

That just gave me the shivers. Any course of action you say? Well there is one certen way to stop the problem, execute anyone who shows the slightest chance of becoming a  pediophile. that is the logical conclusion from that statement.
Like Homosexuality under the Nazis

[Stupot]

I'm not talking about executing potential paedophiles, I'm talkking bout taking magazines with  children in off of the shelves of porno shops.

You've done it again, taken one sentence from my entire post and taken it totally out of context.  You keep doing this even though you know full well the point I'm making.  You don't have to agree with everything I say, but at least look at my posts in their entirety.

And why has everybody started comparing paedophilia to homosexuality.  The two are completely different.

Homosexuality is a simple sexual preference.

Paedophilia is a '-philia'... by definition, a '-philia' is an unhealthy and irrational obsession. (Wiktionary say's "a psychological disorder characterized by an irrational favorable disposition towards something").

By definition, Paedophilia is a psychological disorder characterized by an irrational favorable disposition towards children.   

How can that be compared to homosexuality, and how can I be compared to a Nazi because I want to see this "psychological disorder" eliminated?

[space boy]

Yay, someone brought up nazis! The topic is complete!

[EldKatt]

Yeh, it's a better alternative as the children aren't being exploited, but it's still feeding the reader's obession which is a bad idea.   People can be addicted to porn, and I'm sure some people are addicted to pictures of children (or pictures of adults digitally enhanced to look like children).

And precisely the same thing can of course be said about pornographic literature. And then we're entering truly dangerous territory. If you ask me, I think we should burn the paper before anybody even thinks of writing books. Go, salamander!

[TerranRich]

I don't think it's responsible to say that we should wait for these people to commit the crime before we do something... fair enough, you can't punish individuals before they've commited a crime, but it's a good idea to try to identify the ones who are likely to commit crimes before they do it... and this means encouraging them to own up about their obsessions and try to dull them, or even reverse them.

Look up "thoughtcrime" and the novel "1984".

Like InCreator said, one's own thoughts and desires and fantasies are one's own business. If I want to fantasize about raping women (which many men do), that's my own deal. Hell, my wife and I roleplay with rape and binding, etc. Does that mean I'm going to go out and rape a woman, even because of my inner thoughts? No, not necessarily. I could have fantasies about doing it with men, but does that make me gay? No, because I haven't done it for real, and probably never will.

Fantasy and reality are separate, even in this case.

[Tuomas]

I could have fantasies about doing it with men, but does that make me gay? No, because I haven't done it for real, and probably never will.

Fantasy and reality are separate, even in this case.

You might be a bi though. Say you do have fantasies about men, and you could actually do it unless you weren't, like most of them, afraid of confronting that feeling. Then we have those who are willing to experience it, possibly because their sexlife feels boring or empty. Or that they can't find a woman. Oops, now I went offtopic. We had a discussion a few days ago. And it's easy to be young, you can still think of 14-year-olds as pretty in my age, even though there's a 6 year difference. and I think it helps if you grow up with someone your age, you'll get used to it. Could be, that if you first "fall in love" at 12, and then never find anything, you'll be stuck at 12-year-olds. Who the hell knows this stuff? Not me, I'm just an irritating wannabe-politician who can't even make a game.

[Stupot]

I'm not talking about thoughtcrime.  I'm talking about nipping potential child molesters in the bud.

If someone wants to fantasize about kids, go for it, but the day they start feeling the urge to touch one for real i urge them to go and see someone about it.  It could save a child's life.

[fuck me we just had a earthquake]

[TerranRich]

Ahhh, Stupot, now you're making sense. My friend has never had the URGE to touch a child...he looks and that's it. That's what I'm talking about...sure, once you start having urges to actually DO something, yes, you should be looked at...but you should not be forced to do so.

If it's only fantasy and thoughts, but no urges or wishes to actually do something, then it's fine.

And Tuomas:

Well, they way I see it, you're gay/bi if you have the ability to fall in love with, and be romantic with, men. I can't. The thought of kissing another guy is kinda gross. However, on the odd occasion, I've had fantasies about doing sexual things with men. Doesn't make me gay/bi. From what I understand, tons of straight men have had those thoughts at least once.

My wife, however, is bisexual. She's had relationships with girls, sexual as well as romantic. She's had relationships with guys, too. Personally, if you can be turned on by kissing a member of the same sex, then you are bi. You're gay if you can't do that with the opposite sex.

But sorry, that was WAY off topic.

[EldKatt]

I'm not talking about thoughtcrime.  I'm talking about nipping potential child molesters in the bud.

If someone wants to fantasize about kids, go for it, but the day they start feeling the urge to touch one for real i urge them to go and see someone about it.  It could save a child's life.

For practical purposes, what's the difference, really? Assuming we want to really make use of your ideas in the practical running of a society, how do we, from the outside as it were, see the difference between a fantasy and an urge?