Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
If that's the 'most fucked up idea' you've heard you haven't studied the problem. Having done so myself the most fucked up idea I've heard is trying to ban it. If a replacement can be found that reduces victimization of children, let the pedophile have free legal access to it.
Banning desired things NEVER works no matter what it is. Someone will always then make money providing it as with illegal types of pornography, drugs, etc..
Legal stats show when pedophiles have legal access to simulated child pornography they 'make due' with that instead of either seeking real human-involved porn, or worse, actual real-world children to victimize. We may not like the truth, but pretending it isn't true doesn't help protect children.
Pedophiles are always going to BE pedophiles. They are not curable. The only way that they can be dealt with and maintain safety for children is to lock them up. Your "legal stats" are self reported, which means they are useless in a real world study. The fact is, no pedophile will ever "make do" with fake porn and the reason for that is they know what they are doing is illegal, they just don't care.
They feel that the child loves them as well and that no matter what laws are passed they do not apply to them.
I've posted links to scientific and legal sites with the things I mention. But I get the impression people with their minds made up don't bother looking at them. Be happy to go point by point with anyone who'd like to and give source info for everything I say, mention, or propose.
Too right. Can't fix things if you never talk about them. I'd rather fix things than ignore them and hope they go away magically.
Pedophilia is not "fixable". That's the problem. It is truly sad that an otherwise normal productive person can't ever be allowed around children. They just can't. Pedophiles have a 100% recidivism rate...... It's hard to argue with facts like that.
I didn't introduce the pedo stuff. Would have to go back and see where the thread jumped th shark. Consequently many of my posts aren't about pedophiles or even CSA. Touched on those a bit before but not everything I then say is about those things.
Crime is fixable. But we lack the political will to do so. As to pedophilia, you're confusing two different things, pedophilia, and child sexual abuse as with "pedophiles have a 100% recitivism rate." Being a pedophilia isn't illegal whether it's a paraphila (DSM-IV,) or sexual orientation (DSM-V.) It's no more illegal than being heterosexual or homosexual is. But adults having sexual contacts or interactions with minors below ages of consent ARE breaking laws and thus 'child sexual offenders.' Whether they're pedophiles or not isn't significant legally.
Does Pornography Harm Children Who View It?
Why are children viewing porn?
Because children masturbate from the womb onwards. It's scientifically invalid to calim children aren't sexual. And part of being sexual and sexually gratifying ourselves involves fantasy and masturbation. And since ancient times people have drawn, painted, sculpted, filmed, and otherwise depicted the sexual acts for others' sexual gratification. And because of how we make porn and nudity a secret, dirty, behind closed doors thing, children naturally wanna see what all the fuss about. As in other countries where it isn't as restricted it's much ado about nothing.
Does Pornography Harm Children Who View It?
Why are children viewing porn?
Because children masturbate from the womb onwards. It's scientifically invalid to calim children aren't sexual. And part of being sexual and sexually gratifying ourselves involves fantasy and masturbation. And since ancient times people have drawn, painted, sculpted, filmed, and otherwise depicted the sexual acts for others' sexual gratification. And because of how we make porn and nudity a secret, dirty, behind closed doors thing, children naturally wanna see what all the fuss about. As in other countries where it isn't as restricted it's much ado about nothing.
No, they don't. They discover their genitalia around age 2 and then they forget about them till they reach puberty when hormones take over. Your facts are not factual.
Because children masturbate from the womb onwards. It's scientifically invalid to calim children aren't sexual. And part of being sexual and sexually gratifying ourselves involves fantasy and masturbation. And since ancient times people have drawn, painted, sculpted, filmed, and otherwise depicted the sexual acts for others' sexual gratification. And because of how we make porn and nudity a secret, dirty, behind closed doors thing, children naturally wanna see what all the fuss about. As in other countries where it isn't as restricted it's much ado about nothing.
No, they don't. They discover their genitalia around age 2 and then they forget about them till they reach puberty when hormones take over. Your facts are not factual.
Over 10 million hits for 'fetuses filmed masturbating.' So pick one or more from sites you'll believe and get some carbons for your correction and apology.
Pedophilia is not "fixable". That's the problem. It is truly sad that an otherwise normal productive person can't ever be allowed around children. They just can't. Pedophiles have a 100% recidivism rate...... It's hard to argue with facts like that.
I didn't introduce the pedo stuff. Would have to go back and see where the thread jumped th shark. Consequently many of my posts aren't about pedophiles or even CSA. Touched on those a bit before but not everything I then say is about those things.
Crime is fixable. But we lack the political will to do so. As to pedophilia, you're confusing two different things, pedophilia, and child sexual abuse as with "pedophiles have a 100% recitivism rate." Being a pedophilia isn't illegal whether it's a paraphila (DSM-IV,) or sexual orientation (DSM-V.) It's no more illegal than being heterosexual or homosexual is. But adults having sexual contacts or interactions with minors below ages of consent ARE breaking laws and thus 'child sexual offenders.' Whether they're pedophiles or not isn't significant legally.
Ahhhh, but you did with your OP. Pornography is used to "sexualize" children so that the pedophile can exploit their innocence. Most (90%) children are repulsed by watching the sex act. It takes a lot of work to sexualize them to where they will put up with the abuse.
The use of pornography is the second step in the pattern of abuses that lead up to full on sexual assault.
Dear [MENTION=46449]Delta4Embassy[/MENTION]:
How can you expect to measure the full effects when so much of this is unconscious indirect influence?
Look at the increase in reports of rapes of drunk people being filmed on cell phone and posted and shared by others!
How do you know that behavior isn't related to oversexualization and DESENSITIZATION?
How are we supposed to trace ALL the influences that went into that behavior?
What about internet cyberbullying, blackmail and stalking? Forcing young people to send or post more and more explicit photos of themselves once the blackmailer has some dirt on them and threatens them if they don't comply?
What about child porn and trafficking? If the effects are to feed addictions by adults, doesn't that have an effect on child victims?
Delta, if you want to do a study,
why not compare the attitudes and health of relationships of children who were brought up with
* teaching sexuality openly but with an emphasis on committed healthy partnerships vs.
* teaching sexuality without teaching kids the DIFFERENCE between ABUSIVE relationships
Then you can do a longterm study, showing the effects of
* sharing pornography with kids that does not show committed relations, and does not teach the difference between that and open sexuality with any partners or multiple partners
* sharing marital erotic or couples pornography, even swinging, where there is still an emphasis on consensual relations, within committed partnerships or marriage.
Delta you should know that for scientific methods to work, there has to be an isolated control group, and also control the VARIABLES so you can compare the two groups.
I think you should know better than to try to interpret results from whatever is reported, without any controls of what is going in and data being collected from what cases/sources.
Anyone can derive anything you want to assume, if you conducted a study this way!
Really, Delta?
You seem smarter and more conscientious than that!
How do you think you can possible contain all the effects of sexualization and pornography?
No.
Google and read any and every .edu site with a paper about it to your heart's content. Been studying the question for decades and the even the Reagan Administration studied the question, came back with "no" and let the matter drop (silently not publishing the results either by the by.)
Just as violent movies and videogames doesn't then translate into real-world acting out of violent fantasies (as evidenced by such content availability in other countries,) pornography doesn't then result in minors acting out what they saw. Will always be able to find a news item suggesting otherwise, but this is not scientificly valid so much as sensationalism and fear-mongering.
"Research shows that healthy sexual development includes natural curiosity about sexuality. Retrospective studies show that accidental exposure to real-life scenes of sexuality does not harm children. Our survey shows that age of first exposure to pornography does not correlate with negative attitudes towards women. Studies with non-explicit representations of sexuality show that young people who seek out sexualised representations tend to be those with a pre-existing interest in sexuality. These studies also suggest that current generations of children are no more sexualised than previous generations, that they are not innocent about sexuality, and that a key negative effect of this knowledge is the requirement for them to feign ignorance in order to satisfy adults expectations of them. Research also suggests important differences between pre- and post-pubescent attitudes towards pornography, and that pornography is not addictive."
Does pornography harm young people? | QUT ePrints
"A vocal segment of the population has serious concerns about the effect of pornography in society and challenges its public use and acceptance. This manuscript reviews the major issues associated with the availability of sexually explicit material. It has been found everywhere scientifically investigated that as pornography has increased in availability, sex crimes have either decreased or not increased."
Pacific Center for Sex and Society - Pornography, Public Acceptance and Sex Related Crime: A Review
"Most of the recent studies in this field have been correlational. That means you ask a sample of young people whether they've seen pornography, or how often, and then ask them what they think of sex or gender role attitudes, for example.
But it is not possible to establish causation from correlational studies, and to say whether pornography is changing or reinforcing attitudes.
"That is the real next step that research needs to take," says Horvath, "to try to identify which came first.""
BBC News - Do we know whether pornography harms people?
Thta's the most important part above, 'it's not possible to establish causation from correlation.' Ethics limit what you can investigate as in you can't expose subjects to particularly violent pornography tosee if it harms them, because what if it does? So you can't scientificly investigate whether porn harms children because to find out you have to expose potentially harmful things to children. Catch-22.
What we can and have discovered if where porn is widely available, sex crimes go down. Where porn is banned and restricted it goes up. When children are raised in nudist enviroments, they don't suffer the same stress over their developing bodies as their clothes-wearing counterparts.
I get people here will opt to make political hay out of this on both sides of the poltical divide while choosing to ignore the research and facts, this is not for them but people more interested in being right than popular.
There's no point linking to the tens of thousands of studies since ultimately there's no reason to believe me, my asseritions, or any particular website. It's up to the ones who disagree to find a source they actually do believe and then come back with that. If it's legit science (vs religious fundamentalism) it might sway such assertions as I have.
Don't usually go point by point with replies so doing so here might be less than optimally formatted but bear with me.
...
Emily asked, "How can you expect to measure the full effects when so much of this is unconscious indirect influence?"
Studies carried out around the world include some checking results after decades have elapsed. I rely on these to draw conclusions from. Namely,
Legalizing child pornography is linked to lower rates of child sex abuse
"Diamond and team looked at what actually happened to sex-related crimes in the Czech Republic as it transitioned from having a strict ban on sexually explicit materials to a situation where the material was decriminalized. Pornography was strictly prohibited between 1948 and 1989. The ban was lifted with the country's transition to democracy and, by 1990, the availability and ownership of sexually explicit materials rose dramatically. Even the possession of child pornography was not a criminal offense.
The researchers monitored the number of sex-related crimes from Ministry of Interior records rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, and child sex abuse in particular for 15 years during the ban and 18 years after it was lifted.
Most significantly, they found that the number of reported cases of child sex abuse dropped markedly immediately after the ban on sexually explicit materials was lifted in 1989. In both Denmark and Japan, the situation is similar: Child sex abuse was much lower than it was when availability of child pornography was restricted.
Other results showed that, overall, there was no increase in reported sex-related crimes generally since the legalization of pornography. Interestingly, whereas the number of sex-related crimes fell significantly after 1989, the number of other societal crimes murder, assault, and robbery rose significantly."
...
Emily asked, "Look at the increase in reports of rapes of drunk people being filmed on cell phone and posted and shared by others!
How do you know that behavior isn't related to oversexualization and DESENSITIZATION?
How are we supposed to trace ALL the influences that went into that behavior?"
Law makers don't factor in every conceivable implication or consequence. Be ncie if they tried as you put it here, but when we try and fight crime via the legal system sometimes we have to use whatever we have. If it doesn'tthen address every conceivable outcome like your's asked, the best we can hope to do is do so when they then arrise.
...
Emily asked, "What about internet cyberbullying, blackmail and stalking? Forcing young people to send or post more and more explicit photos of themselves once the blackmailer has some dirt on them and threatens them if they don't comply?"
This problem is comparatively new. So new in fact I haven't even begun to address it (mostly because I have yet to buy a smartphone.) So whether pornography exposure to these kids with such devices and technology is having an impact is impossible for me to say. Though I"d assume it does. But even if it is, you don't forbid or deny or make illegal things because of how it might effect other things and issues. As with the 2nd Amendment. We have that despite pleanty of evidence guns are getting into the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. Just as we may eventually allow minor access to pornography despite some evience there are negative consequences of such access.
...
Emily asked, "What about child porn and trafficking? If the effects are to feed addictions by adults, doesn't that have an effect on child victims?"
Read this several times and I'm not entirely sure what you meant but I'll wing it. I think you were asking wouldn't availability or legalisation of child pornography exaccerbate child sexual abuse like sex slave/human trafficking?
Statistics say no. Because oriignally child pornography was legal in both the US and some European and Asian countries, we have actual statistical evidence for what its effects were. And quite counter-intuitively, when child pornography was made illegal, child sexual abuse went up, not down. That said, actual pornography involving real children is abuse in and of itself. But modern computer animation (CGI/3D versions) can now depict human beings so convincingly that simulated pornography can meet the needs of those unwilling or unablet o fulfill their desires, predilictions, or addicitons for real as with pedophiles and those into things legal but bizarre (baby/pony roleplaying et al.)
...
Emily asked, "Delta, if you want to do a study,
why not compare the attitudes and health of relationships of children who were brought up with
* teaching sexuality openly but with an emphasis on committed healthy partnerships vs.
* teaching sexuality without teaching kids the DIFFERENCE between ABUSIVE relationships
Then you can do a longterm study, showing the effects of
* sharing pornography with kids that does not show committed relations, and does not teach the difference between that and open sexuality with any partners or multiple partners
* sharing marital erotic or couples pornography, even swinging, where there is still an emphasis on consensual relations, within committed partnerships or marriage."
These studies have been conducted numerous times already. Think I just pulled this all out of my hat?
Googling, 'long-term studies on childhood exposure to sexuality' there's 8.8 million. Ready, set, go!
...
Emily asked, "Delta you should know that for scientific methods to work, there has to be an isolated control group, and also control the VARIABLES so you can compare the two groups.
I think you should know better than to try to interpret results from whatever is reported, without any controls of what is going in and data being collected from what cases/sources.
Anyone can derive anything you want to assume, if you conducted a study this way!
Really, Delta?
You seem smarter and more conscientious than that!"
I'm not posting data collected from some supermarket tabloid Em'. If it's not a scientific journal or university or other source I've actually heard of I"m VERY reluctant to use it. Because of how much work has been done of these topics there's no inability on my part to find scholarly and legitimate scientific sources for my claims. And that's where they all come form. Other than that, I grant your premise.
...
Emily concluded with, "How do you think you can possible contain all the effects of sexualization and pornography?"
It's not about containment or forseeing every eventuality. It's about implemented policy scientists and psychologists, and social workers have told us actually work. Not clinging to dogma that's been im place long enough to see that it doesn't.
Child sexual abuse is a growing problem, and not just ebcause there's more people or more technology enabling the means of doing such abuse. It's because as a society we're valueing the wrong things.
- Why is it acceptable for children to handle firearms with their parents but not enojy sex with their friends?
- Why do we glrify violence calling it patriotic, m,acho, brave and heroic, while condemniung sexuality which is natural, beautiful, rather a lot of fun, and something everyone eventually desires? No ones dreams of being mugged or becomming a victim of violence, but everyone dreams about having good sex. Yet we condemn one, and say how great the other is.
- Why can a teenager drive a car endangering other people at age 16, but in many US states can't be trusted to make an informed decision to have sex until 17 or 18?
This is the stuff I worry about. We're ass-backwards in what upsets us. And for myself I'm not inclined to let the issue lie and not challenge it by discussing such things.
Does Pornography Harm Children Who View It?
Why are children viewing porn?
Because children masturbate from the womb onwards. It's scientifically invalid to calim children aren't sexual. And part of being sexual and sexually gratifying ourselves involves fantasy and masturbation. And since ancient times people have drawn, painted, sculpted, filmed, and otherwise depicted the sexual acts for others' sexual gratification. And because of how we make porn and nudity a secret, dirty, behind closed doors thing, children naturally wanna see what all the fuss about. As in other countries where it isn't as restricted it's much ado about nothing.
Don't usually go point by point with replies so doing so here might be less than optimally formatted but bear with me.
...
Emily asked, "How can you expect to measure the full effects when so much of this is unconscious indirect influence?"
Studies carried out around the world include some checking results after decades have elapsed. I rely on these to draw conclusions from. Namely,
Legalizing child pornography is linked to lower rates of child sex abuse
"Diamond and team looked at what actually happened to sex-related crimes in the Czech Republic as it transitioned from having a strict ban on sexually explicit materials to a situation where the material was decriminalized. Pornography was strictly prohibited between 1948 and 1989. The ban was lifted with the country's transition to democracy and, by 1990, the availability and ownership of sexually explicit materials rose dramatically. Even the possession of child pornography was not a criminal offense.
The researchers monitored the number of sex-related crimes from Ministry of Interior records rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, and child sex abuse in particular for 15 years during the ban and 18 years after it was lifted.
Most significantly, they found that the number of reported cases of child sex abuse dropped markedly immediately after the ban on sexually explicit materials was lifted in 1989. In both Denmark and Japan, the situation is similar: Child sex abuse was much lower than it was when availability of child pornography was restricted.
Other results showed that, overall, there was no increase in reported sex-related crimes generally since the legalization of pornography. Interestingly, whereas the number of sex-related crimes fell significantly after 1989, the number of other societal crimes murder, assault, and robbery rose significantly."
...
Emily asked, "Look at the increase in reports of rapes of drunk people being filmed on cell phone and posted and shared by others!
How do you know that behavior isn't related to oversexualization and DESENSITIZATION?
How are we supposed to trace ALL the influences that went into that behavior?"
Law makers don't factor in every conceivable implication or consequence. Be ncie if they tried as you put it here, but when we try and fight crime via the legal system sometimes we have to use whatever we have. If it doesn'tthen address every conceivable outcome like your's asked, the best we can hope to do is do so when they then arrise.
...
Emily asked, "What about internet cyberbullying, blackmail and stalking? Forcing young people to send or post more and more explicit photos of themselves once the blackmailer has some dirt on them and threatens them if they don't comply?"
This problem is comparatively new. So new in fact I haven't even begun to address it (mostly because I have yet to buy a smartphone.) So whether pornography exposure to these kids with such devices and technology is having an impact is impossible for me to say. Though I"d assume it does. But even if it is, you don't forbid or deny or make illegal things because of how it might effect other things and issues. As with the 2nd Amendment. We have that despite pleanty of evidence guns are getting into the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. Just as we may eventually allow minor access to pornography despite some evience there are negative consequences of such access.
...
Emily asked, "What about child porn and trafficking? If the effects are to feed addictions by adults, doesn't that have an effect on child victims?"
Read this several times and I'm not entirely sure what you meant but I'll wing it. I think you were asking wouldn't availability or legalisation of child pornography exaccerbate child sexual abuse like sex slave/human trafficking?
Statistics say no. Because oriignally child pornography was legal in both the US and some European and Asian countries, we have actual statistical evidence for what its effects were. And quite counter-intuitively, when child pornography was made illegal, child sexual abuse went up, not down. That said, actual pornography involving real children is abuse in and of itself. But modern computer animation (CGI/3D versions) can now depict human beings so convincingly that simulated pornography can meet the needs of those unwilling or unablet o fulfill their desires, predilictions, or addicitons for real as with pedophiles and those into things legal but bizarre (baby/pony roleplaying et al.)
...
Emily asked, "Delta, if you want to do a study,
why not compare the attitudes and health of relationships of children who were brought up with
* teaching sexuality openly but with an emphasis on committed healthy partnerships vs.
* teaching sexuality without teaching kids the DIFFERENCE between ABUSIVE relationships
Then you can do a longterm study, showing the effects of
* sharing pornography with kids that does not show committed relations, and does not teach the difference between that and open sexuality with any partners or multiple partners
* sharing marital erotic or couples pornography, even swinging, where there is still an emphasis on consensual relations, within committed partnerships or marriage."
These studies have been conducted numerous times already. Think I just pulled this all out of my hat?
Googling, 'long-term studies on childhood exposure to sexuality' there's 8.8 million. Ready, set, go!
...
Emily asked, "Delta you should know that for scientific methods to work, there has to be an isolated control group, and also control the VARIABLES so you can compare the two groups.
I think you should know better than to try to interpret results from whatever is reported, without any controls of what is going in and data being collected from what cases/sources.
Anyone can derive anything you want to assume, if you conducted a study this way!
Really, Delta?
You seem smarter and more conscientious than that!"
I'm not posting data collected from some supermarket tabloid Em'. If it's not a scientific journal or university or other source I've actually heard of I"m VERY reluctant to use it. Because of how much work has been done of these topics there's no inability on my part to find scholarly and legitimate scientific sources for my claims. And that's where they all come form. Other than that, I grant your premise.
...
Emily concluded with, "How do you think you can possible contain all the effects of sexualization and pornography?"
It's not about containment or forseeing every eventuality. It's about implemented policy scientists and psychologists, and social workers have told us actually work. Not clinging to dogma that's been im place long enough to see that it doesn't.
Child sexual abuse is a growing problem, and not just ebcause there's more people or more technology enabling the means of doing such abuse. It's because as a society we're valueing the wrong things.
- Why is it acceptable for children to handle firearms with their parents but not enojy sex with their friends?
- Why do we glrify violence calling it patriotic, m,acho, brave and heroic, while condemniung sexuality which is natural, beautiful, rather a lot of fun, and something everyone eventually desires? No ones dreams of being mugged or becomming a victim of violence, but everyone dreams about having good sex. Yet we condemn one, and say how great the other is.
- Why can a teenager drive a car endangering other people at age 16, but in many US states can't be trusted to make an informed decision to have sex until 17 or 18?
This is the stuff I worry about. We're ass-backwards in what upsets us. And for myself I'm not inclined to let the issue lie and not challenge it by discussing such things.
You are really committed to this little agenda of yours aren't you?
Why is this so important to you?
Does Pornography Harm Children Who View It?
Why are children viewing porn?
Because children masturbate from the womb onwards. It's scientifically invalid to calim children aren't sexual. And part of being sexual and sexually gratifying ourselves involves fantasy and masturbation. And since ancient times people have drawn, painted, sculpted, filmed, and otherwise depicted the sexual acts for others' sexual gratification. And because of how we make porn and nudity a secret, dirty, behind closed doors thing, children naturally wanna see what all the fuss about. As in other countries where it isn't as restricted it's much ado about nothing.
^ Beyond creepy! Thank you Alfred Kinsey
Don't usually go point by point with replies so doing so here might be less than optimally formatted but bear with me.
...
Emily asked, "How can you expect to measure the full effects when so much of this is unconscious indirect influence?"
Studies carried out around the world include some checking results after decades have elapsed. I rely on these to draw conclusions from. Namely,
Legalizing child pornography is linked to lower rates of child sex abuse
"Diamond and team looked at what actually happened to sex-related crimes in the Czech Republic as it transitioned from having a strict ban on sexually explicit materials to a situation where the material was decriminalized. Pornography was strictly prohibited between 1948 and 1989. The ban was lifted with the country's transition to democracy and, by 1990, the availability and ownership of sexually explicit materials rose dramatically. Even the possession of child pornography was not a criminal offense.
The researchers monitored the number of sex-related crimes from Ministry of Interior records rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, and child sex abuse in particular for 15 years during the ban and 18 years after it was lifted.
Most significantly, they found that the number of reported cases of child sex abuse dropped markedly immediately after the ban on sexually explicit materials was lifted in 1989. In both Denmark and Japan, the situation is similar: Child sex abuse was much lower than it was when availability of child pornography was restricted.
Other results showed that, overall, there was no increase in reported sex-related crimes generally since the legalization of pornography. Interestingly, whereas the number of sex-related crimes fell significantly after 1989, the number of other societal crimes murder, assault, and robbery rose significantly."
...
Emily asked, "Look at the increase in reports of rapes of drunk people being filmed on cell phone and posted and shared by others!
How do you know that behavior isn't related to oversexualization and DESENSITIZATION?
How are we supposed to trace ALL the influences that went into that behavior?"
Law makers don't factor in every conceivable implication or consequence. Be ncie if they tried as you put it here, but when we try and fight crime via the legal system sometimes we have to use whatever we have. If it doesn'tthen address every conceivable outcome like your's asked, the best we can hope to do is do so when they then arrise.
...
Emily asked, "What about internet cyberbullying, blackmail and stalking? Forcing young people to send or post more and more explicit photos of themselves once the blackmailer has some dirt on them and threatens them if they don't comply?"
This problem is comparatively new. So new in fact I haven't even begun to address it (mostly because I have yet to buy a smartphone.) So whether pornography exposure to these kids with such devices and technology is having an impact is impossible for me to say. Though I"d assume it does. But even if it is, you don't forbid or deny or make illegal things because of how it might effect other things and issues. As with the 2nd Amendment. We have that despite pleanty of evidence guns are getting into the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. Just as we may eventually allow minor access to pornography despite some evience there are negative consequences of such access.
...
Emily asked, "What about child porn and trafficking? If the effects are to feed addictions by adults, doesn't that have an effect on child victims?"
Read this several times and I'm not entirely sure what you meant but I'll wing it. I think you were asking wouldn't availability or legalisation of child pornography exaccerbate child sexual abuse like sex slave/human trafficking?
Statistics say no. Because oriignally child pornography was legal in both the US and some European and Asian countries, we have actual statistical evidence for what its effects were. And quite counter-intuitively, when child pornography was made illegal, child sexual abuse went up, not down. That said, actual pornography involving real children is abuse in and of itself. But modern computer animation (CGI/3D versions) can now depict human beings so convincingly that simulated pornography can meet the needs of those unwilling or unablet o fulfill their desires, predilictions, or addicitons for real as with pedophiles and those into things legal but bizarre (baby/pony roleplaying et al.)
...
Emily asked, "Delta, if you want to do a study,
why not compare the attitudes and health of relationships of children who were brought up with
* teaching sexuality openly but with an emphasis on committed healthy partnerships vs.
* teaching sexuality without teaching kids the DIFFERENCE between ABUSIVE relationships
Then you can do a longterm study, showing the effects of
* sharing pornography with kids that does not show committed relations, and does not teach the difference between that and open sexuality with any partners or multiple partners
* sharing marital erotic or couples pornography, even swinging, where there is still an emphasis on consensual relations, within committed partnerships or marriage."
These studies have been conducted numerous times already. Think I just pulled this all out of my hat?
Googling, 'long-term studies on childhood exposure to sexuality' there's 8.8 million. Ready, set, go!
...
Emily asked, "Delta you should know that for scientific methods to work, there has to be an isolated control group, and also control the VARIABLES so you can compare the two groups.
I think you should know better than to try to interpret results from whatever is reported, without any controls of what is going in and data being collected from what cases/sources.
Anyone can derive anything you want to assume, if you conducted a study this way!
Really, Delta?
You seem smarter and more conscientious than that!"
I'm not posting data collected from some supermarket tabloid Em'. If it's not a scientific journal or university or other source I've actually heard of I"m VERY reluctant to use it. Because of how much work has been done of these topics there's no inability on my part to find scholarly and legitimate scientific sources for my claims. And that's where they all come form. Other than that, I grant your premise.
...
Emily concluded with, "How do you think you can possible contain all the effects of sexualization and pornography?"
It's not about containment or forseeing every eventuality. It's about implemented policy scientists and psychologists, and social workers have told us actually work. Not clinging to dogma that's been im place long enough to see that it doesn't.
Child sexual abuse is a growing problem, and not just ebcause there's more people or more technology enabling the means of doing such abuse. It's because as a society we're valueing the wrong things.
- Why is it acceptable for children to handle firearms with their parents but not enojy sex with their friends?
- Why do we glrify violence calling it patriotic, m,acho, brave and heroic, while condemniung sexuality which is natural, beautiful, rather a lot of fun, and something everyone eventually desires? No ones dreams of being mugged or becomming a victim of violence, but everyone dreams about having good sex. Yet we condemn one, and say how great the other is.
- Why can a teenager drive a car endangering other people at age 16, but in many US states can't be trusted to make an informed decision to have sex until 17 or 18?
This is the stuff I worry about. We're ass-backwards in what upsets us. And for myself I'm not inclined to let the issue lie and not challenge it by discussing such things.
You are really committed to this little agenda of yours aren't you?
Why is this so important to you?
Because violence is bad. Sex is good. So long as the powers that be continue linking both together as when discussing issues and saying "There's too much sex and violence on tv..." To which my assertion is there's too much violence on tv, but not nearly enough sex.
It's been proven in scientific study after study that societies which exemplify violence suffer great rates of violent crime while suppressing sexuality. And societies which exemplify sexuality suffer less violent crime. Give the US's problem with violence one can't help but notice the total reversal we here glorifying one while suppressing the other.
I'm actively involved in efforts to reverse this trend.
Because children masturbate from the womb onwards. It's scientifically invalid to calim children aren't sexual. And part of being sexual and sexually gratifying ourselves involves fantasy and masturbation. And since ancient times people have drawn, painted, sculpted, filmed, and otherwise depicted the sexual acts for others' sexual gratification. And because of how we make porn and nudity a secret, dirty, behind closed doors thing, children naturally wanna see what all the fuss about. As in other countries where it isn't as restricted it's much ado about nothing.
^ Beyond creepy! Thank you Alfred Kinsey
Wasn't holding the camera or anything
This is recently discovered since guess cameras or imaging techniques like so-called 4d imaging could 'see' inside a mother's womb. Babies in-vitro have been documented as spending inordinant amounts of times with their hands fondling their genitals in behaviours some have said is masturbation.
Because children masturbate from the womb onwards. It's scientifically invalid to calim children aren't sexual. And part of being sexual and sexually gratifying ourselves involves fantasy and masturbation. And since ancient times people have drawn, painted, sculpted, filmed, and otherwise depicted the sexual acts for others' sexual gratification. And because of how we make porn and nudity a secret, dirty, behind closed doors thing, children naturally wanna see what all the fuss about. As in other countries where it isn't as restricted it's much ado about nothing.
No, they don't. They discover their genitalia around age 2 and then they forget about them till they reach puberty when hormones take over. Your facts are not factual.
Over 10 million hits for 'fetuses filmed masturbating.' So pick one or more from sites you'll believe and get some carbons for your correction and apology.
I didn't introduce the pedo stuff. Would have to go back and see where the thread jumped th shark. Consequently many of my posts aren't about pedophiles or even CSA. Touched on those a bit before but not everything I then say is about those things.
Crime is fixable. But we lack the political will to do so. As to pedophilia, you're confusing two different things, pedophilia, and child sexual abuse as with "pedophiles have a 100% recitivism rate." Being a pedophilia isn't illegal whether it's a paraphila (DSM-IV,) or sexual orientation (DSM-V.) It's no more illegal than being heterosexual or homosexual is. But adults having sexual contacts or interactions with minors below ages of consent ARE breaking laws and thus 'child sexual offenders.' Whether they're pedophiles or not isn't significant legally.
Ahhhh, but you did with your OP. Pornography is used to "sexualize" children so that the pedophile can exploit their innocence. Most (90%) children are repulsed by watching the sex act. It takes a lot of work to sexualize them to where they will put up with the abuse.
The use of pornography is the second step in the pattern of abuses that lead up to full on sexual assault.
It's one of numerous techniques child sexual abusers use to seduce their victims. But linking childhood exposure to pornography with the then victimizing of children by csa'ers is an incorrect associaiton.
Would not graphical images used in a school-setting during a sex ed class be classified 'pornographic' outside of a classroom setting? Yet we all call that sex-ed, not victimization of children being shown pornography.
Don't usually go point by point with replies so doing so here might be less than optimally formatted but bear with me.
...
Emily asked, "How can you expect to measure the full effects when so much of this is unconscious indirect influence?"
Studies carried out around the world include some checking results after decades have elapsed. I rely on these to draw conclusions from. Namely,
Legalizing child pornography is linked to lower rates of child sex abuse
"Diamond and team looked at what actually happened to sex-related crimes in the Czech Republic as it transitioned from having a strict ban on sexually explicit materials to a situation where the material was decriminalized. Pornography was strictly prohibited between 1948 and 1989. The ban was lifted with the country's transition to democracy and, by 1990, the availability and ownership of sexually explicit materials rose dramatically. Even the possession of child pornography was not a criminal offense.
The researchers monitored the number of sex-related crimes from Ministry of Interior records – rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, and child sex abuse in particular – for 15 years during the ban and 18 years after it was lifted.
Most significantly, they found that the number of reported cases of child sex abuse dropped markedly immediately after the ban on sexually explicit materials was lifted in 1989. In both Denmark and Japan, the situation is similar: Child sex abuse was much lower than it was when availability of child pornography was restricted.
Other results showed that, overall, there was no increase in reported sex-related crimes generally since the legalization of pornography. Interestingly, whereas the number of sex-related crimes fell significantly after 1989, the number of other societal crimes – murder, assault, and robbery – rose significantly."
...
Emily asked, "Look at the increase in reports of rapes of drunk people being filmed on cell phone and posted and shared by others!
How do you know that behavior isn't related to oversexualization and DESENSITIZATION?
How are we supposed to trace ALL the influences that went into that behavior?"
Law makers don't factor in every conceivable implication or consequence. Be ncie if they tried as you put it here, but when we try and fight crime via the legal system sometimes we have to use whatever we have. If it doesn'tthen address every conceivable outcome like your's asked, the best we can hope to do is do so when they then arrise.
...
Emily asked, "What about internet cyberbullying, blackmail and stalking? Forcing young people to send or post more and more explicit photos of themselves once the blackmailer has some dirt on them and threatens them if they don't comply?"
This problem is comparatively new. So new in fact I haven't even begun to address it (mostly because I have yet to buy a smartphone.) So whether pornography exposure to these kids with such devices and technology is having an impact is impossible for me to say. Though I"d assume it does. But even if it is, you don't forbid or deny or make illegal things because of how it might effect other things and issues. As with the 2nd Amendment. We have that despite pleanty of evidence guns are getting into the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. Just as we may eventually allow minor access to pornography despite some evience there are negative consequences of such access.
...
Emily asked, "What about child porn and trafficking? If the effects are to feed addictions by adults, doesn't that have an effect on child victims?"
Read this several times and I'm not entirely sure what you meant but I'll wing it. I think you were asking wouldn't availability or legalisation of child pornography exaccerbate child sexual abuse like sex slave/human trafficking?
Statistics say no. Because oriignally child pornography was legal in both the US and some European and Asian countries, we have actual statistical evidence for what its effects were. And quite counter-intuitively, when child pornography was made illegal, child sexual abuse went up, not down. That said, actual pornography involving real children is abuse in and of itself. But modern computer animation (CGI/3D versions) can now depict human beings so convincingly that simulated pornography can meet the needs of those unwilling or unablet o fulfill their desires, predilictions, or addicitons for real as with pedophiles and those into things legal but bizarre (baby/pony roleplaying et al.)
...
Emily asked, "Delta, if you want to do a study,
why not compare the attitudes and health of relationships of children who were brought up with
* teaching sexuality openly but with an emphasis on committed healthy partnerships vs.
* teaching sexuality without teaching kids the DIFFERENCE between ABUSIVE relationships
Then you can do a longterm study, showing the effects of
* sharing pornography with kids that does not show committed relations, and does not teach the difference between that and open sexuality with any partners or multiple partners
* sharing marital erotic or couples pornography, even swinging, where there is still an emphasis on consensual relations, within committed partnerships or marriage."
These studies have been conducted numerous times already. Think I just pulled this all out of my hat?
Googling, 'long-term studies on childhood exposure to sexuality' there's 8.8 million. Ready, set, go!
...
Emily asked, "Delta you should know that for scientific methods to work, there has to be an isolated control group, and also control the VARIABLES so you can compare the two groups.
I think you should know better than to try to interpret results from whatever is reported, without any controls of what is going in and data being collected from what cases/sources.
Anyone can derive anything you want to assume, if you conducted a study this way!
Really, Delta?
You seem smarter and more conscientious than that!"
I'm not posting data collected from some supermarket tabloid Em'. If it's not a scientific journal or university or other source I've actually heard of I"m VERY reluctant to use it. Because of how much work has been done of these topics there's no inability on my part to find scholarly and legitimate scientific sources for my claims. And that's where they all come form. Other than that, I grant your premise.
...
Emily concluded with, "How do you think you can possible contain all the effects of sexualization and pornography?"
It's not about containment or forseeing every eventuality. It's about implemented policy scientists and psychologists, and social workers have told us actually work. Not clinging to dogma that's been im place long enough to see that it doesn't.
Child sexual abuse is a growing problem, and not just ebcause there's more people or more technology enabling the means of doing such abuse. It's because as a society we're valueing the wrong things.
- Why is it acceptable for children to handle firearms with their parents but not enojy sex with their friends?
- Why do we glrify violence calling it patriotic, m,acho, brave and heroic, while condemniung sexuality which is natural, beautiful, rather a lot of fun, and something everyone eventually desires? No ones dreams of being mugged or becomming a victim of violence, but everyone dreams about having good sex. Yet we condemn one, and say how great the other is.
- Why can a teenager drive a car endangering other people at age 16, but in many US states can't be trusted to make an informed decision to have sex until 17 or 18?
This is the stuff I worry about. We're ass-backwards in what upsets us. And for myself I'm not inclined to let the issue lie and not challenge it by discussing such things.
You are really committed to this little agenda of yours aren't you?
Why is this so important to you?
Because violence is bad. Sex is good. So long as the powers that be continue linking both together as when discussing issues and saying "There's too much sex and violence on tv..." To which my assertion is there's too much violence on tv, but not nearly enough sex.
It's been proven in scientific study after study that societies which exemplify violence suffer great rates of violent crime while suppressing sexuality. And societies which exemplify sexuality suffer less violent crime. Give the US's problem with violence one can't help but notice the total reversal we here glorifying one while suppressing the other.
I'm actively involved in efforts to reverse this trend.
Because children masturbate from the womb onwards. It's scientifically invalid to calim children aren't sexual. And part of being sexual and sexually gratifying ourselves involves fantasy and masturbation. And since ancient times people have drawn, painted, sculpted, filmed, and otherwise depicted the sexual acts for others' sexual gratification. And because of how we make porn and nudity a secret, dirty, behind closed doors thing, children naturally wanna see what all the fuss about. As in other countries where it isn't as restricted it's much ado about nothing.
^ Beyond creepy! Thank you Alfred Kinsey
Wasn't holding the camera or anything
This is recently discovered since guess cameras or imaging techniques like so-called 4d imaging could 'see' inside a mother's womb. Babies in-vitro have been documented as spending inordinant amounts of times with their hands fondling their genitals in behaviours some have said is masturbation.
Videos?
My thinking is the thinking of scientists, attorneys, law enforcement, professors, and policy makers.
Who's your thinking shared by?
