welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

2013-06-29: Pedotron Needs Little Girls
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> Sinfest
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ronald



Joined: 17 Sep 2007
Posts: 3069

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just curious, Adyon, do you --

Wait, I need to set some parameters here. When I, below, say "child pornography," I specifically mean pornography that consists ENTIRELY of drawings, photoshopped images, whatever, but NOT of actual photographs of actual children. Something that was produced without in any way shape or form harming any children (or anyone else).

Everybody GOT that? No? Well, I tried, anyway.

Okay, that said, do you think that the "use" of child pornography (of the type I described above) makes non-active pedophiles more or less likely to act on their "urges"? Thanks for your time.

I personally have no idea. I don't spend much time thinking about issues like this, and child pornography (as a separate phenomenon from actual child molestation/abuse, much like this strip considers violent pornography separately from actual rape) is something it's hard to acquire objective facts about, because even an academic interest in the subject can immediately make you a target of suspicion (this very thread is a variation on that sort of thing). You can acquire (via true crime books) photos of the corpse of murder victims more easily than an example of what child pornography even consists of. Not that I have any particular interest in seeing such a thing, any more than I have any particular interest in seeing examples of any number of other forms of pornography, but still, such attitudes contribute to making child pornography seem like more of a nebulous abstract concept than a concrete reality, which doesn't do anybody any good. IMHO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Adyon



Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 1160
Location: Behind my Cintiq

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I honestly don't know. I mean, I could understand how it would technically be used in place of said thing and in some cases even used to morph the interests into something else. Unfortunately, I also know that sometimes the more you let yourself enjoy something, the more you want to experience it yourself.

I can't really say I've looked much into that either. Other than a couple times I had someone try to commission art from me at conventions of that nature (Wasn't actually pornographic requests, but definitely had the overall feeling. Still no where near the most messed up stuff from cons I've had requested.) I have no real history with the matter to speak on it.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tekii



Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 184

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Adyon wrote:
Okay. Never mind. Your reading comprehension here is seeming pretty horrible. Confused

Ha ha. I'm not having "empathy" for someone who HAS done anything. I'm having "empathy" for someone who has those thoughts despite not wanting them OR ever acting on them. And I even SAID I'd keep the punishments the same.

But I'm curious. You think the law shouldn't consider intent when dealing punishment. So do you feel the punishment should be the same for someone who commits murder as someone who commits manslaughter? Just curious. In both cases the person is just as dead.


I get what you're saying. You think one should be punished more then the other because they get off on hurting kids for the sake of hurting someone and that makes you angrier and hate them more then just run of the mill abusive pedophiles. I understand that. (You did say you'd punish one more though in reality they'd be punished the same and you continue to act like they're not the same act and shouldn't be held to the same level though so I'm sorry if I keep reading that you want different punishments for them because that's how you're coming across to me.)

What I'm saying is... I don't care. I don't care about their intent. I don't care if they thought they loved the child. I don't care if they're a pedophile or a sadist or whatever. The second any of them touch a child they're all the same horrible child abuser that deserves to be fully punished according to law. Why? Because the end result is the same. A child who is abused and going to have to live with that. And I can't figure out how intent can even be considered when a child was abused. This isn't something you can do accidentally or unintentionally. You don't just end up violating a kid accidentally, these people position themselves to do it.

And no I'm not judging anyone if they haven't touched a child. I don't care if someone is sexually attracted to children so long as they never touch children. I've only been talking about people who actually have.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tricksterson



Joined: 18 Aug 2012
Posts: 436

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MerchManDan wrote:
ShadowCell wrote:
oh Tat, you devil, you.

i knew someone was going to come in here and, because they hate the sisterhood that bad, they'd find some way to force themselves to side with the pedophile.
tricksterson wrote:
One must wonder if they would have bothered to show up if Pedotron was looking for little boys.

OOOOOOH NICE ESCAPE FROM CHECKMATE, TRICKSTERSON
WHAT NOW SHADOWCELL HUH?


Thing is, I don't hate the Sisterhood, hell, over on the tvtropes thread I get flack for being too easy on them. I think they have worthy ideals and goals, they (and by extension Tats) are just rather hamfisted about applying them. I also put them on a sliding scale:

Violet: "Kill all men!' That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it?

Xanthe and Curly: Both Hard liners yes, but Xanthe is at least theorretically open to the idea of male allies and Curly has several Pet the Dog moments involving Squigs, including saving his ass from the Overseer. And while I'm at it when is the black girl/woman going to get a name like her Aryan looking co-leader, huh?

Tess: Not much of an opinion on her as yet as she mainly seems to be tech support.

Mercy and Nana: So far Mercy is the only member of the Sisterhood to show genuine compassion. Other than Nana of course who is, while still managing to be a Badass Grandma is without a doubt the nicest of the Sisterhood, if indeed she's a member and not just a mentor of some kind. Even people who foam athe mouth when the Sisterhood comes up like Nana and consider Mercy the Token Good Teammate (Have I thrown out enough tropes you think?)
_________________
I aim to misbehave
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Yinello



Joined: 10 May 2012
Posts: 2642
Location: Behind you

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Strawberrycocoa wrote:

Re: defending pedophiles, I can get that they may have a condition, but ACTING on it is a decision, and self control is everyone's responsibility. Failing that self control when you KNOW you are hurting someone else is inexcusable.


Pretty much all of this.

Being attracted to adults doesn't mean you automatically rape them. If someone is attracted to kids I'm all for getting them help or finding ways to develop help for them. But once they pass the treshold of seeking out kids, they should be punished without delay.
_________________
Help. Help, my eyes are stuck from rolling so hard. Help.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yinello



Joined: 10 May 2012
Posts: 2642
Location: Behind you

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ronald wrote:

Wait, I need to set some parameters here. When I, below, say "child pornography," I specifically mean pornography that consists ENTIRELY of drawings, photoshopped images, whatever, but NOT of actual photographs of actual children. Something that was produced without in any way shape or form harming any children (or anyone else).

Everybody GOT that? No? Well, I tried, anyway.

Okay, that said, do you think that the "use" of child pornography (of the type I described above) makes non-active pedophiles more or less likely to act on their "urges"? Thanks for your time.


To answer you question, not less likely. Pedophilia is a paraphilia - which means child porn (as you describe it) will only serve to arouse them. Just like how sexy lingerie is used to entice people into sex, child porn will only help pedophiles to want to have sex with kids.

Yes even the drawings because the brain has trouble differentiating a fictional face from a realistic face.

And because someone will bring it up - drawn child porn doesn't turn someone into a pedophile. It simply triggers the urge of someone who already is attracted to kids. Just like how violent games don't make someone violent but can trigger aggression with people who often have anger issues.
_________________
Help. Help, my eyes are stuck from rolling so hard. Help.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ronald



Joined: 17 Sep 2007
Posts: 3069

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yinello wrote:
To answer you question, not less likely. Pedophilia is a paraphilia - which means child porn (as you describe it) will only serve to arouse them. Just like how sexy lingerie is used to entice people into sex, child porn will only help pedophiles to want to have sex with kids.


Okay, not trying to be a smart-aleck or anything here, but does that mean you think that porn depicting violence against women will "provoke" men into committing violence against women? Because I'm not sure I see much distinction.

Admittedly, non-pedophilic men who are aroused by violent fantasies have the option of seeking out women who are also aroused by such fantasies (there apparently are some women and some men who are aroused by fantasies of being the victims of violence; I don't quite understand either perspective but, hey, everybody's got their deal, and as long as it's consensual and between adults...).

Whereas pedophiles obviously can't seek out children because, well, even if one could find children who wanted to, well, to do what pedophiles want them to do (I'm not saying that there's so much as one single child in the entire world like that, but if), it would still be illegal.

So I can see how there's that distinction, anyway.

===

While I'm chatting with people who know more about the topic than I do, I've occasionally wondered exactly how pedophiles think that it would work to have a long-term "romantic" relationship (see the nice big quotation marks, huh? see 'em? huh?) with a child when childhood is by definition not a long-term phenomenon. Sooner or later, every child stops being a child, and then what? Any pre-existing line of thought on that? Again, this isn't the sort of thing it's very easy to find out about, even entirely out of curiosity.

(There's also something I occasionally wonder about makers of child porn films, but I won't be presumptuous enough to steer the thread there.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ronald



Joined: 17 Sep 2007
Posts: 3069

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

On another note, where are the misogynistic posts claiming that women molest children as often as men do, or some other such gibberish? I'd have thought we'd have some of those by now. Shrug.

BTW, anyone who doesn't want to talk about pedophilia, REMEMBER, we can always talk about aliens instead. I put 'em all right there for easy perusal. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Adyon



Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 1160
Location: Behind my Cintiq

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tekii wrote:
I get what you're saying. You think one should be punished more then the other because they get off on hurting kids for the sake of hurting someone and that makes you angrier and hate them more then just run of the mill abusive pedophiles. I understand that. (You did say you'd punish one more though in reality they'd be punished the same and you continue to act like they're not the same act and shouldn't be held to the same level though so I'm sorry if I keep reading that you want different punishments for them because that's how you're coming across to me.)

Actually what I said was I would continue to punish them the same in reality. That is, with things how they are in our world and how things work, I would not have different punishments. It's true I hate the other intent more, but I go by what works for laws. If I were making the laws, I'd keep them equal.

Tekii wrote:
What I'm saying is... I don't care. I don't care about their intent. I don't care if they thought they loved the child. I don't care if they're a pedophile or a sadist or whatever. The second any of them touch a child they're all the same horrible child abuser that deserves to be fully punished according to law. Why? Because the end result is the same. A child who is abused and going to have to live with that. And I can't figure out how intent can even be considered when a child was abused. This isn't something you can do accidentally or unintentionally. You don't just end up violating a kid accidentally, these people position themselves to do it.

Actually, I didn't want to go into this, and I've avoided saying it, but that's not entirely true. A child who is abused differently will suffer different effects. Some more severe than others based on how they were abused. It's all horrible and messed up, but some abuse cuts even deeper and all of it in different ways. This I actually know personally from working with children and have seen the different type of effects. And while it's all horrible, some kids come out so much more scarred than others.

And unfortunately, there's even a side-effect seen in a few individuals that just makes the whole issue so much more messed up, where they THEMSELVES grow up to become child molesters. It's how some people choose to deal with what happened to them. Oh god...and I don't even begin to know what to start doing with that. That, I just had to just throw out there as a random fact that troubles me about the whole situation and what I hate child molesters. The way it occasionally creates a cycle where people deal with being abused by abusing someone when they're older. How do we create a society free of all of that? That's some messed up shit.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tekii



Joined: 27 May 2012
Posts: 184

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I never said everyone reacts to abuse the same. Every person will react, cope, and hopefully heal from what happened in their own way. I'm saying it doesn't matter who does it or why because it all results in the child being abused and anyone who does so should be fully punished for it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dennis J. Squidbunny



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3714
Location: AUSTRALIA YOU FAKIR

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Adyon wrote:

A child who is abused differently will suffer different effects. Some more severe than others based on how they were abused. It's all horrible and messed up, but some abuse cuts even deeper and all of it in different ways. This I actually know personally from working with children and have seen the different type of effects. And while it's all horrible, some kids come out so much more scarred than others.


In what capacity were you working with them? As a psychologist or psychoanalyst, or a care worker, or...?

Your language is still extremely apologetic. I think its completely noble to want to give support to people who harbour these feelings and never act on them and it is also extremely important to do so. But I also think when it comes to CHILD ABUSE we should not be engaging in shades of grey. Did you molest a child? Yes? You are going to jail. There should be no 'did you try really hard not to molest a child?' or 'did you do it for POWAH?'.

I am so completely in agreement with Tekii. Yes, people react to abuse differently, but surely that has as much to do with the 'type' of abuse as it does the person who is abused, the abuser and their relationship to the person, what happened surrounding that, etc. etc.

None of these factors should in any way effect the fact that the abuser should go to jail.

Now, you have a tendency to come back and say THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT LEARN TO READ and then repeat, what I think, is the same thing again. So its either my reading comprehension or your expression, but you come across as attempting to defend people who molest children 'just a bit' which I know is not the case, but feel you should be aware thats how your posts are coming across.
_________________
"Eight hundred pounds of nitro, his boots are thunder as he plays."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stripeypants



Joined: 24 Feb 2013
Posts: 3155
Location: Land of the Grumpuses

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think advocating that pedophiles should be understood as having a medical problem that needs treating requires diminishing the experience of victims of child abuse.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dennis J. Squidbunny



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3714
Location: AUSTRALIA YOU FAKIR

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And I do not object to that, I object to casual language and the idea that a rapists intent should inform their punishment.
_________________
"Eight hundred pounds of nitro, his boots are thunder as he plays."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mercian



Joined: 27 Feb 2013
Posts: 86

PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 1:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Adyon wrote:
Actually, I didn't want to go into this, and I've avoided saying it, but that's not entirely true. A child who is abused differently will suffer different effects. Some more severe than others based on how they were abused. It's all horrible and messed up, but some abuse cuts even deeper and all of it in different ways. This I actually know personally from working with children and have seen the different type of effects. And while it's all horrible, some kids come out so much more scarred than others.


I don't know. I've also worked (in a social services capacity) with young people who've been abused during their childhood, some of whom are the children of parents who also suffered historical abuse. I don't think you can start to quantify or compare the impact of abuse on one child with another. It's not something you can measure physically - you can do as many evaluations and assessments as you like, but it's all anecdotal in the end.

Sometimes the child herself isn't consciously aware of the ways in which her abuse has affected her, and it goes beyond the direct impact of the abuse on the child. I've seen cases of attachment disorder run through three generations of girls and women who all suffered familial abuse, and a year's work and various forms of counselling only just began to help them put together how that abuse had coloured their ability to connect to other people.

The effects might display in different ways, but it can't be relative - you can't say 'well, that child survived abuse and grew up to be outwardly happy and well-adjusted, so they weren't as badly harmed as this child, who now shows clear symptoms of PTSD', because - unless the helper is psychic - they can't know for sure how that child is really coping. If there's a sliding scale to harm, isn't that diminishing what the 'less harmed' child has been through?

Anyhow - apologies to anyone who's actually been in this situation, if throwing my two-penn'orth of learnings into the thread has caused upset. Please feel free to hit the big red 'shut-the-hell-up' button located in the side of my head.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Rune



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 1043

PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 1:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mercian wrote:
Adyon wrote:
Actually, I didn't want to go into this, and I've avoided saying it, but that's not entirely true. A child who is abused differently will suffer different effects. Some more severe than others based on how they were abused. It's all horrible and messed up, but some abuse cuts even deeper and all of it in different ways. This I actually know personally from working with children and have seen the different type of effects. And while it's all horrible, some kids come out so much more scarred than others.


I don't know. I've also worked (in a social services capacity) with young people who've been abused during their childhood, some of whom are the children of parents who also suffered historical abuse. I don't think you can start to quantify or compare the impact of abuse on one child with another. It's not something you can measure physically - you can do as many evaluations and assessments as you like, but it's all anecdotal in the end.

Sometimes the child herself isn't consciously aware of the ways in which her abuse has affected her, and it goes beyond the direct impact of the abuse on the child. I've seen cases of attachment disorder run through three generations of girls and women who all suffered familial abuse, and a year's work and various forms of counselling only just began to help them put together how that abuse had coloured their ability to connect to other people.

The effects might display in different ways, but it can't be relative - you can't say 'well, that child survived abuse and grew up to be outwardly happy and well-adjusted, so they weren't as badly harmed as this child, who now shows clear symptoms of PTSD', because - unless the helper is psychic - they can't know for sure how that child is really coping. If there's a sliding scale to harm, isn't that diminishing what the 'less harmed' child has been through?

Anyhow - apologies to anyone who's actually been in this situation, if throwing my two-penn'orth of learnings into the thread has caused upset. Please feel free to hit the big red 'shut-the-hell-up' button located in the side of my head.


The timing and quality of help the victim received in the aftermath is another important variable that would keep you from discerning "degree." Too many variables.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> Sinfest All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 5 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group