“Watching child porn victimizes the child”. The Voodoo science of child pornography laws

  

“However, what he didn’t turn his mind to at the time is that merely having possession and viewing images such as this does victimize and hurt the individual portrayed in the image. He appreciates that now.” Senior gets jail time, probation for having single image of child pornography 

We at Human-Stupidity.com fail to appreciate that. Maybe we are too humanly-stupid to understand. Or maybe we do not fall prey to mystical superstitious thinking that is the driving force of the child porn witch hunt

merely having possession and viewing images such as this does victimize and hurt the individual portrayed in the image.” This is some mystical religious thinking. Like in Voodoo. And note, this was said by a respectable lawyer to appease a judge. And this logic is used over and over, for example by Australian Government web sites. 

Vodoo logic

Child porn Voodoo logic

voodoo-doll-pinYou stick a needle into a Vodoo doll’s arm. The person you curse will be hurt on the arm.
The vodoo doll symbolizes a person, and that person’s will get injured in the same place where you stuck the needle.
Someone possesses a photo of a child, in the form of 0’s and 1’s in a computer file. When s/he looks at the photo, the individual depicted in the photo gets victimized and hurt.
 

Voodoo logic applied to murder and terrorism

exhusband-vodoo-doll While I can appreciate that creating or distributing child porn victimizes children, I cannot agree that looking for, viewing, or collecting child porn actually victimizes anyone. If you were to apply the same reasoning to any other crime, then looking at a photo of any crime would be re-victimizing someone. Using the same reasoning, anyone who looks for, views images or video footage of 9/11 or nazi war crimes, or autopsy photos, etc, would be guilty of having re-victimized people. If the simple act of viewing an image of someone is harmful, then perhaps an approprate punishment would be to simply take a photo of the perpetrator in jail, then set them free, but have some look at the photo that was taken while they were in jail. ”
Dude” commenting at  
Examining the Effects of Child Pornography

VoodooDoll Dude, you are hilarious. Having people look at photos of themselves in jail to re-victimize them with their jail term. Priceless! 

Studying child sex offenders isn’t easy. […] It’s hard because sexual offenses against children are without a doubt the most culturally, emotionally, and politically charged of all offenses, particularly in North America, and researchers (and journalists) who are willing to take a more objective, critical, and/or scientific view of these offenses and offenders, are often attacked for their trouble. Take one of the questions the Swiss study considered: 

Are people who consume child pornography different from those who sexually offend against a child?

So far so good. Open minded article, wants to seriously analyze child porn issues. But wait: now he falls under the voodo spell, too:

Many may feel like this distinction isn’t worth making. Watching child pornography is, in several ways, offending against a child even if the viewer never comes in physical contact with a child. Certainly watching child porn is a re-victimization of the child in the film.    Examining the Effects of Child Pornography 

We were seriously doubting our sanity. Maybe we at Human-Stupidity, like Mr Smith who had one single CP photo, really need our misguided brain repaired. Even if we don’t consume child porn, maybe for purely educational purposes, to remedy our human-stupitiy, we should join Smith’s “probationary term that will require Smith to take part in the province’s sexual offender assessment and treatment program” (Senior gets jail time for single image of CP

Maybe we, at Human-Stupidity.com are the only dumb insane people in this world who don’t understand this infallible logic: “Certainly watching child porn is a re-victimization of the child in the film”.  

But the spell was broken, and our trust into our sanity was re-instated, when we ran across this irreverant and refreshing comment 

“Certainly watching child porn is a re-victimization of the child in the film.” 

Are you mad? 

Looking at ‘indecent’ images of children is no more a ‘Sex Crime’ than looking at an image of a dead person is ‘Homicide’. (“Dr Nigel Leigh Oldfield “commenting on Examining the Effects of Child Pornography

Hence 

one could just legalise ownership [of child porn] and solve the problem in one fell swoop 

Certainly our mind gets victimized by repeated exposure to insane voodo logic 

Certainly watching child porn is a re-victimization of the child in the film”.  

This repeated exposure almost destroyed our trust into our own intelligence. Somehow constant repetition of voodoo logic brainwashes the average person into believing such NONSENSE: “Certainly watching child porn is a re-victimization of the child in the film”.  

Unfortunately, the belief in this nonesense guides entire nations’ and the United Nation’s policy towards the world wide child porn witch hunt

Australian Law Makers’ logic

Analogy #1

Analogy #2

Not a victimless crime: The accessibility of child pornography or child abuse images on the Internet raises the question of the relationship between the viewing of such images and actual child abuse off-line by the offender concerned. It is agreed that the very act of accessing child pornography makes the offender a party to child sexual abuse. As the UK Sentencing Panel observed: ‘Possession of child pornography is not (as some have argued) a victimless offence’. [2.5]  Child Pornography Law (New South Wales, Australia) Not a victimless crime: The accessibility of child abuse images on the internet 
 

  • infant shaking, infant beating, infant throwing caught on nanny-cams
  • children suffering serious injuries in accidents
  • children being knocked out in fighting sports like boxing and Thai boxing

raises the question of the relationship between the viewing of such images and actual child abuse off-line by the offender concerned. It is agreed that the very act of accessing child abuse videos above makes the offender a party to child sexual abuse. As the UK Sentencing Panel observed: ‘Possession of child abuse videos as above is not (as some have argued) a victimless offence’. 

Not a victimless crime: The accessibility of  depictions of terrorism, mayhem and murder on the Internet raises the question of the relationship between the viewing of such images and actual terrorism, mayhem and murder off-line by the offender concerned.  It is agreed that the very act of accessing depictions of terrorism, mayhem and murder makes the offender a party to terrorism, mayhem and murder. As the UK Sentencing Panel observed: ‘Possession of depictions of terrorism, mayhem and murder is not (as some have argued) a victimless offence’. [2.5]   

  

Human-Stupidity.com Analysis

We understand your rage

We understand that some readers will be fuming with anger, reading our “defense of pedophiles, child abuse, and child abusers”. We almost fell prey to the world wide child porn hysteria voodoo logic brainwashing. It is based on 2 fallacies 

  1. confusing the crime with depiction of a crime:
    You watch a movie of a plane flying into the World Trade Center. Therefore you are a terrrorist and revictimizing 3000 people who died
  2. Confusing child pornography and “child pornography”. Confusing “child porn” as defined in the old days (involving a “real child under 12” and “real porn with real penetrative sex” and “modern child porn” which might be as harmless as a 22 year old (that looks “apparently underage” like she might be only 17 years old) non-nude in leotards dancing while gyrating her hips provocatively). Can you understand now we insist that lots of modern so called “child porn” has no victim at all and is not offensive to sex positive people.

  

Can watching a photo or video cause harm to a far away “victim” that is unaware of the watcher?

  

Examples: 

  1. Someone downloads and watches child porn, with 16 year olds, produced legally in Holland 30 years ago. The act of watching a movie in the USA somehow causes a jolt in the now 46 year old person in Holland and victimizes her!? Human-Stupidity.com verdict: Scientifically impossible.
  2. Someone downloads and watches a child porn photo from the 1950íes. The persons depicted already died 20 years ago. Would their mortal soul be victimized, be it in heaven, hell, or purgatory? Maybe their soul keeps constant watch about all copies of their photos? Human-Stupidity.com is too ignorant about religious claims of life after death. Verdict: Scientifically it is impossible for a dead person to get harmed by someone’s copying of a computer file
  3. Someone downloads and watches a copy of a legal American porn movie with Little Lupe who was 19 years old but looked under 18. This is child porn by European and Australian laws. Little Lupe will happily earn a commission from the person’s subscription fee. We fail to understand how Little Lupe would be a victim! She is a consenting adult and made a conscious carreer choice and is profiting from people downloading her films.”Apparently underage” laws were struck down by US courts for violating the civil rights of young looking adults by preventing them from participation in legal porn movies (for “apparently looking underage” though over 18. Verdict: the adult “victim” benefits and profits from downloading. No victimization

Definitional issues: Definitions of child pornography can vary considerably, both in a legal context from one jurisdiction to another, and between legal and non-legal approaches to the subject. One source of ambiguity is that the legal definition of a ‘child’ varies between and within jurisdictions for various purposes. In Australia, child pornography legislation in some jurisdictions defines ‘child’ as a person under, or who appears to be under 16 (NSW, Queensland, South Australia, and Western Australia), in others as a person under, or who appears to be under 18 years of age (Commonwealth, Tasmania, Victoria, the ACT and the Northern Territory). [3.1.2] Child Pornography Law (Australia) 

  • The cover of “Der Spiegel” the most prestigious news magazine of Germany. May 1977. A young adolescent girl nude.  Millions of adults, adolescents, children have seen the photo at news stands in Germany. Today this constitutes child porn. Human-Stupidity added the black bars, hiding breast and genital areas, so the poor girl would not be victimized while we look at the photos. If there were no bars, the now over 50 year old, 5000 miles away, would suddenly feel victimized? Verdict: no scientifically explainable, 5000 miles away, she would even notice we are looking at her photo.

 

The hypothesis is actually scientifically testable. Just have people, in the US, look at her photo at random intervals, and have an observer at the girl “victim’s”verify if she feels victimized at exactly the right time when someone watches the photo.  James Randi has a US$ 1.000.000 bounty offer to anyone that can prove such paranormal phenomena.  

Pictures of grave violence against children are perfectly legal

There are no claims that watching TV surveillance camera videos victimizes babies. Videos of nannies mistreating babies, shaking toddlers in a way they can suffer permanent spinal cord damage can be seen on youtube. 

Watching depictions of child baseball victimizes children

Baseball and softball – Nearly 117,000 children and adolescents ages five to 14 were treated in hospital emergency rooms for baseball-related injuries, and nearly 26,000 children and adolescents ages five to 14 were treated for softball-related injuries. Baseball also has the highest fatality rate among sports for children and adolescents ages five to 14, with three to four persons dying from baseball injuries each year. Sports Injury Statistics (Children’s Hospital  Boston) 

Most other sports are pretty dangerous too. See the Sports Injury Statistics 

If you watch this video, an innocent little child gets re-victimized

Warning: 

  • don’t watch if you don’t want to see a child hurt
  • don’t watch if you think the child will be vicitmized again by your mere act of watching the mishap

. An innocent child gets hurt. Like in an extreme child porn movie. So by watching this again, the child will be victimized again. Correct? 

 

 

Oh, the child got hurt by accident, not on purpose? ok. So check purposeful child injury: 

(warning: graphic footage of child abuse) 

  

 
Warning: very graphic, child clubbed to death by gang.

If you watch this the dead child will be victimized again. 

This is not from a pervert site, but nainstream Fox TV USA.

Story link: MyFoxCHICAGO.com 

Minor getting whipped by the Taliban.

If you watch this, you will become a Taliban child beater: “the very act of accessing child [..] abuse videos makes [you] the offender a party to child [..] abuse.

 

The act of watching beating, lynching, and Jihad decapitation movies does not victimize?

Human-Stupidity.com fails to understand, why  possession of child beating and child lynching photos is a victimless crime and not punished in any way. 

  • Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.
  • Years of Jail for “clicking on child porn link”. But lynching videos are legal. 

    Everyone probably has seen a muslim kidnapping victim beheading movie. Each time we see such movies, the beheaded gets victimized again. Is that not the same logic? 

    Thai Boxing 15y/o vs. 16 y/o

    Thai boxing is cruel. No matter how much you train, if you block a roundhouse kick with your shin, both fighters’ shins will get bruised. Knocking out a 15 y/o or 16 y/o is child abuse. Watching this again, you will victimize the kids again. 

    Similar articles about wymyn’s studies, about femimist faulty thinking and logic

    1. When a “Rape” is not a Rape! The Abuse of the word “Rape”. & the Perversion of Language
    2. Feminist arguments against prostitution debunked
    3. Legalizing Child Pornography reduces child sex abuse crimes (Scientific study by Dr. Milton Diamond, U. Hawaii)
    4. Supreme Court oks indefinite detention for possession of photos. But violent robbers get freed.
    5. Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.
    6. Years of Jail for “clicking on child porn link”. But lynching videos are legal.
    Share

    69 thoughts on ““Watching child porn victimizes the child”. The Voodoo science of child pornography laws”

    1. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      Okay that worked.

      Let me big in with some facts:

      I am a guy in his late twenties who has zero relationship, dating, or physical sexual experience with another human being. I am heterosexual but have not ever kissed a girl/woman or seen a female naked in person. My lack of experience is not for religious reasons as I am not religious at all. For simplicity I will say I prefer a natural, but far slower approach in getting to know women. Not even considering a relationship until after causally spending time together and it’s clear we both want to learn more about the other person. Then later after an ordinary (boring for some) baseline has been established is when I might start considering becoming more intimate slowly checking along the way that my partner is at the same comfort level.

      Contrary to all that I managed in two thousand nine (two thousand ten from the United States federal government’s perspective) to unknowingly break federal law. My illegal activity was having a hard drive that contained child porn. The final government calculation was close to 10,000 images and 200+ videos. I didn’t ever keep track of what I had or even gave any thought that my possession of those files was not legal.

      Before going on about those files I need to discuss something else that was on my external drive even though in the end it was not illegal or most of it was not. In the summer of 2008 I was 22 and came across a teenage model who had hundreds of image sets and tens of thousands of images going back to a very young age. From one perspective they represented a decent though not complete overview of her life to date. It took me a while to realize the benefits of having so much data regarding the growth of an individual. Often people are concerned with who someone is or how they became who they are. I am more interested in asking what about people make others pay more or less attention to them.

      The absence of a physical characteristic, personality trait, or ability to understand something is just as important as the presence of those things. For example I don’t have the ability to understand astrophysics because my grasp of standard physics is not where it needs to be. So of course I have little incentive to try engaging in a highly scientific conversation with an astrophysicist because most of it would be like listening to a foreign language. Using the teenage model as a basis for building a foundation to ask questions about who might be interested in someone because of something they have or don’t have at different stages in life I hoped to provide a line of insight into understanding human attraction. More importantly I hoped to establish a framework where others could look at a given set of human characteristics and cross reference those against all everyone interviewed/surveyed to determine who is interested those characteristics.

      Why would anyone want to do this? Think about what geographical and socio-economic facts can be revealed on a global scale. If for example someone is into red heads but the closest concentration of red heads is 100 miles away that would be interesting to know. From a law enforcement perspective let’s say they are trying to catch a murderer with a specific known profile for his or her targets. Enter in all the info about the targets and see where at any scale (local, county, state, county, continental, or global) people with those qualities are. Reverse the search and see who has such an interest in those people that murder might be the goal. Expanding from individuals such a system could reveal what makes a group, company, organization, or government interested in another multi person entity.

      If it was that straight forward events would have unraveled differently and with far less legal shenanigans to follow. Instead the data was more difficult to collect than originally thought and more mysterious. This model was not some random amateur who knew a photography enthusiast. It was a photographer who had a small studio and a girl who was happy to pose for pictures or be photographed doing everyday activities. The United States government claimed these photos were child erotica. I never saw anything erotic about the images and was not particularly interested in the model for her looks, she was average looking and sure she could be called cute. However cute does not necessarily translate into a greater level of interest or physical attraction, at least for me. What makes her images and at least one video of her controversial is at some point she was shown topless and fully naked. It added another plevel of data to analyze as well because without clothing additional physical features need to be taken into account. Almost simultaneously another oddity was brought up, some photo sets without any apparent reason were missing a few images or so the claim went. Being diligent and having too much time I wanted to get to the bottom of these supposed inconsistencies. By September 2008 I had acquired close to 70,000 images for free (I found out later the model and a few others with the photographer had monthly subscription sites), but I was not ever going to pay for this content. I also had five or six videos. I eventually found out that some image sets were missing anywhere from one to hundreds of images. One image set in particular was missing over 300 images. I kept finding slightly different versions of that one set and in the most complete version the final image was numbered 420 something. The least complete and officially available version according to the models’ previous website documentation had this set containing only 120 images. I never was able to answer the question of why someone would go through the trouble of creating images and watermarking them, but not officially releasing them. It made absolutely zero sense and still makes no sense. Some of the 300+ missing images showed the model lounging around in various states of undress, swimming in a private indoor pool nude, and eating an ice cream sundae without a bathing suit top on. Actually among her numbered image sets this one set #100 was one of two sets that contained nudity with the other being set 27 or something close to that number. At the time sets were in the mid to upper 200s. Sets 101 to 126 were crossover sets between the old site and the new one currently in operation at the time. The difference between the new and old versions of sets 101-126 were that the new versions contained a few less photos in some of those sets.

      Everything got more messy when I found out that throughout the years special limited release sets had been put out. These often were older and more candid than the studio or posed sets. They had nude images and it was nearly impossible to determine which photos belonged with which sets because I had no clue where in the timeline they came from or how many images there were supposed to be. Also most of these came in fragments so there was no telling how diverse a set might be and if they were a cross between completely candid material and posed images. Then as a final wrench in everything I found out about holiday, bonus, and special event sexual sets or videos. In other words I couldn’t start proposing any questions about the data unless it was as complete as possible.

      Right there I ran unknowingly into trouble. Let’s just say there is another article/analysis on this website that talks about what I found. After saying too much when federal agents questioned me in August 2010 in executing a search warrant I was even more careful in late 2011 when arrested and released on bail. Fast forward to early 2012 to me having a conversation with my privately hired attorney regarding my case. I mentioned what I thought was the name of the place I found most of the links to the illegal content identified by the government and we both agreed that it would be best for me to remain distant from that nightmare.

      I will say the analysis provided by human stupidity was mostly correct and what nobody officially mentioned was the presence of a fair quantity of legal images and videos. I can say that as someone who had first hand knowledge of the basic layout/system in place. Beyond activities at tier two and below I had no idea what was going on. Let’s just say the person in charge was an asshole and I wasn’t going to put myself through lots of bullshit to gain access to something he supposedly had. My non participation eventually got the message across and I was gone.

      I don’t remember exactly what I downloaded in 2009 vs what I saw. Nor do I specifically know which nearly 10,000 images or 200+ videos the government tagged as child porn. That being said my plea agreement lists a few examples and from those I can extrapolate what much of the illegal stuff was. Back in the early 2000s there was a European nude art modeling company that was busted as a suspected front for a child sex ring. Few or no charges were successfully brought against employees of the company mainly in part because many of the models (some preteens and many teens) all girls and their parents refused to press charges because in their minds/eyes nothing nefarious happened. I didn’t find this out until after downloading many image sets and videos produced by the company. I had downloaded most off a peer to peer network (yep pretty stupid), but not how the government in the good old USA busted me. Anyway as far as I knew once again nothing illegal or something to worry about. WRONG, of everything on the drive images from that company were cited as examples of CP and as a result the videos were likely seen as CP too. That likely covered most of the illegal content. Other possibilities are some of the 100 or so nude/topless photos of the model I mentioned before even though I never got confrontation one way or another on if anything in was pornographic and not just erotic as they labeled everything else.

      I do know my drive contained no images or videos of any girl or woman being penetrated by a penis. Watching men and women interact sexually is not anything I have ever been into. So it makes sense that I would not seek out and avoid looking at sex between men and other groups as much as I could. There might have been one instance of a mother and her daughter doing something, but I don’t know if I downloaded it. One or two videos may have contained oral being performed. Though if there was contact between participants it was usually people of a close age group or one person touching themselves. Finally most masturbation was in webcam videos where I have no proof what age a teen might have been when she decided to record the video herself or not think enough about what getting naked live on webcam in a chat with dozens of people in it could mean.

      Oh and on top of everything else according to my lawyer and the computer expert we hired the drive also had over 3000 adult videos. I didn’t count those ever either, but once I loaded about half or what I thought was,half into a media player and their duration alone was almost a month worth at watching 24/7. Yeah I had a lot of porn if I wanted to watch anything. All of it was either a woman alone, two or more women together, or videos where there was little or no sexual activity (certain fetish content for example can cross from being porn to erotica or a less well defined category).

      The result of my case was 24 months incarceration and five years supervised release. Plus as a lucky resident of a state requiring lifetime registration, I get to deal with that too. No victims were ever named, heck I never paid much attention to the names of anyone in videos or photos I had because what would be the point. I never wanted to find anyone and in some cases stuff was decades old.

      In closing I was caught because of a hacked website I didn’t remember visiting that had temporarily hosted child porn. Interpol somehow grabbed all the ip addresses that visited the site in the time it hosted cp and handed those off to the appropriate authorities. At least that’s the story I was fed, who knows it could have been a sting operation. I broke a federal law I admit that, but did I have to be subjected to all the other crap to teach me I made a mistake? Guess what child pornography is not the problem it’s a symptom to something that has existed since the dawn of human history. I don’t advocate or support ANY form of abuse, mistreatment, and exploitation, but I will not jump to conclusions or state something because that is a popular socially acceptable thing to do. We won’t ever resolve these things if we can’t rationally explore all their aspects. Hell if we can’t form a united global perspective on the most basic elements of human nature how do we expect to ever be able to prepare on a large scale to continue surviving between star systems or while colonizing other worlds in this solar system and distant solar systems?

    2. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      Last time I tried leaving a comment it did not work. I do have a unique story to tell, but this is more of a test post.

      1. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        now you have several posts approved and thus your next posts should be approved automatically.

        Feel free to look for the category “child Porn” to find more to comment on.

        You might also be interested to read about PUA (pick up artists) and Game (see my article about Elliot Rodger for a few links). I myself do not write about PUA.

        I am planning to write an article about the 40 year old male virgin that does not inspire pity nor wishes to help the “loser” overcome his loneliness and suffering.

        If you are lonely and socially inept, resort to porn, and end up with child porn prosecution, that is extremely sad and a prime example about the absurdity and cruelty of child porn laws.

        I wish more child porn law victims like you reported here. Because this actually shows true innocent victims of these laws. I get a lot of flak for totally and almost opposing these legal witch hunts and wanting to totally abolish child porn laws (for violent child abuse during the production of seriously sick child porn, we already have laws on the book)

        You can find hundreds of posts in my categories child porn and teenage sexuality.

        There are many absurd examples about ridiculous child porn prosecutions I wrote about.

        But as long as we can have torture, mutilation, killing videos made in Hollywood or actually real gore, I can not see a reason to mete out draconian punishment for any cp possession.

    3. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      Just found this website and am glad to see people having a rational discussion about child pornography. Unfortunately my life was changed in 2010 because of choices I made in 2009. Though due to the sluggishness of the United States federal government my official prosecution did not begin until 2012.

      Initially my indictment contained two charges; receipt and possession of child pornography. Oddly (meaning contrary to what someone would expect a federal government to do) if I agreed to the plea agreement the prosecution would move to dismiss the more serious charge of receipt which carried a mandatory five year minimum in federal prison. My defense attorney recommended I take the plea and considering I paid her 20,000 dollars with an understanding if I wanted to go to trial it would cost 10 to 15 thousand more, taking the plea was my best option. For anyone not aware sex offenses cases in the United States are fairly pricey for defendants if they want a decent lawyer. One guy I encountered during the pretrial process had already spent 100,000 on his defense. So all things considered my legal fees were cheap. The result of my case was 24 months imprisonment and five years supervised release. Plus because of the state in which I live life time registration.

      Backing up I want to provide insight into the mysterious content known as child pornography. Though before doing so I must warn everyone that I am choosing my language carefully as not to describe anything in such a way that it could be a violation of any law. Merely describing child porn is in many places a crime. So it’s no surprise that falsehoods are spread regarding it because nobody really has any legal authorization to verify any claims made. Sound and well done/presented research on CP is basically impossible to do without potentially incurring legal trouble because any direct unofficially authorized access to this content is treated as a serious offense in many countries. I would love to see what would happen if a research group wrote a government asking for permission to receive and possess child pornography. Actually I don’t know if anyone has ever tried asking for permission before.

      One last thing I am a virgin with no relationship, dating, or physical intimate experience with another person. I am currently in my late twenties and didn’t know that I was doing anything illegal at age 22/23 in 2009 until federal agents nearly busted my door in 2010 when they showed up in swat gear and a helicopter patrolling the neighborhood to execute their search warrant.

      Okay so in the end the federal government calculated that I had nearly 10,000 images and over 200 videos against the law in my possession on an external hard drive. To be honest I also had according to my lawyer over 3000 adult videos and about 60,000 images of child erotica. At the time I did not know what child erotica was and still don’t fully grasp the concept as anything other than bulletin. Anyway it’s legal in the United States, but it was used by the government to claim I had an interest in children. Which thanks to a 3000 dollar mental health evaluation by an expert on sexual misconduct was disproved, but the judge was not convinced that the tests used cleared me from having pedophile attractions. Well that judge can go eff himself and shove a more recent test down his throat showing as far as socially acceptable attractions I fall towards mostly being attracted to female adults and with a slight attraction to pubescent female youths which is normal for a heterosexual adult male.

      Child pornography is many things, but most importantly it is primarily not actual pornography. Such a label aides in sexualizing those depicted and results in greater harm by fostering the notion of exploitation, abuse, and yes victimization. What most people don’t realize is that governments are admitting that child and adolescent sexuality is real by labeling content featuring them in various states of undress as pornographic. Also troubling is describing preteens and teens being shown exploring their bodies as sexual. Sure if a prepubescent girl is massaging her external genitals (vulva) or God forbid has discovered she can put a bit of her finger into her vagina and moving it around makes her feel good, a more informed individual would see that as masturbation. But would it serve any beneficial purpose in explaining this to her and thus opening up a can of worms on sexual topics, I wager that could be more harmful to proper sexual development than most are willing to admit.

      Consent is a tricky issue even among of age participants so I will only say that I never dared look at anything that appeared non consenusal. I am not saying I don’t believe evidence of true exploitation, molestation, and rape don’t exist only that I never personally saw anything I could rationally say we’re examples of those things. Though with a history as a video editor (no I did not work on porn, my name has appeared on television as an editor and assistant editor) I know all too well how video, audio, and photo editing can easily distort what really happened. So where CP is concerned the best approach to understanding what wrongs if any were done is to speak with those involved directly after engaging in the acts they just partook in. This is in most cases impossible because most “child pornography” has been circulating for years. The reason for confirming wrong done directly after an event is that as more time passes perceptions change and memory warps. Though point blank asking someone especially a child if they are hurt or feel uncomfortable as a result of what just happened might infer in the child’s mind that something bad did occur. Rather simply asking how they feel and/or what they are thinking will provide an accurate answer.

      If anything an underage teenager on webcam masturbating is more pornographic than most other things called child pornography. Though legally children teenagers of normal development and functioning are as informed about sex as adults. Depending upon how adventurous and curious someone is, in certain cases a teen might be more knowledgeable about sex because they are more engaged in it. So for the really progressive people out there let’s call this content adolescent pornography. In reality that is exactly what it is. Should it be legal? I won’t make that call because no standard exists for testing whether or not those involved actually gave consent. Now there is a gray area here because of the possible onset of earlier development prior to age 13. With more instances of preteen girls getting their first menstrual period in elementary or primary school some of them are very well developed by 12 or 13. I don’t have answer on how to address pubescent preteens and them being more sexually aware/curious because of an earlier onset of puberty. Though it must be fully researched and added into the larger picture.

      Most of I remember possessing were simple nude images and videos. Naturally some of the content showed girls under age 12. Which was one of four or five ridiculous enhancements applied in my case. I mean from a mathematical standpoint and I am bad at math (thanks learning disability), of course there will be more content featuring those under 12. Think about the selection pool (used for lack better terminology), 0-12 and 13 up to day before 18. Which group is larger? The 0 to 12 group of course. The odds are stacked against the 13 to nearly 18 group because there are fewer of them in the world than 0 to 12 year olds. A line generally towed is that certain nudity is more sexual than other nudity because of how someone is posed and how detailed the depiction is. From whose perspective is it more sexual? And what sort of asinine logic is this? Either someone is naked or they aren’t and they are clearly doing something sexual or they are not. In photos this is particularly problematic because a photo is the frozen snapshot of one moment in time. Anyone who has the slightest bit of sense knows a snapshot can be extremely deceptive. Though what about a set or series of images? Still get the same problem in not knowing what time actually passed between two images or which directions were given between them. Despite appearing to be in close sequential order there might be significant gaps. I bring up time passage because apparent intent is different from true intent. Just because a woman has a vibrator on her clitoris or a dildo inserted into her vagina does not mean she is really masturbating in an image. Adult porn sets up apparent sexual situations for photoshoots, but there’s no way any real activity will take place in the photos. Video is a far more effective tool for showing movement and it would be a waste of human resources (the performers) to go all out in images. In other words good luck proving any true sexual activity in photos. When talking about nudity and sexual activity people often associate them as two halves of a whole. Both can and do exist independently of each other and in part the over sexualized nature of social culture in many countries has blurred the line. Breasts are a good example. How sexist is it for societies to declare an exposed female chest after a certain developmental point as a body part that ought to be covered? Yet males are not restricted in having the same requirements. As an aside I am not advocating a topless revolution and don’t view female breasts with the same level of sexual significance or interest as other men do. No this is about equality. Speaking of which the biased view of nudity or more specifically graphic nudity being always sexual falls apart by looking to main stream movies. In recent years closeups of the penis and testicles have appeared in comedies as comedic devices. Clearly those were not sure sexual situations and yes they were scripted, but that proves people can conceptually view sexual or reproductive organs non sexually. I can’t think of the last time I saw the vulva make a similar appearance and well forget about seeing into the vaginal canal. Granted we are talking about adult graphic nudity being non sexual and nobody better claim it’s impossible for graphic nudity showing those under the age of consent to not be sexual. Do so and start digging your own grave because the train of logic used leads to concluding adults must be less sexual if they can appear in more non sexual situations than children and adolescents. Which would probably be the craziest batshit thing to say regarding sexuality. Got it! Medical and education videos can show non sexual graphic nudity featuring the vagina.

      Now I did not keep track of what I had. So even with nearly ten thousand illegal images and over two hundred videos not a single one triggered a response from anyone depicted in them. Meaning I did not victimize anyone by viewing the content I had. As I found out through conversation with my attorney in many cases dealing with child pornography the federal government notifies an identified victim that someone has once again received or possessed something depicting them. How’s that for fucked up? Maybe I am too stupid to understand the concept of moving on and getting over past bad events in life, but this seems like the last thing anyone would want. Hey here’s another reminder that you went through something terrible and don’t worry we caught the person who who saw your ordeal ten years afterwards. Best news you are within your right as a victim to seek restitution. More often than not these notices go to the always on call lawyer for the victim. Thankfully in some places the “victim” can opt out of being notified and truly move on.

      Lastly the time has come to share stuff about cp that can only be gained by having watched it.

      1. While I did not view any videos or images of men having sex underage girls it’s possible there was one example of a girl and a woman. Not being interested in watching men and women have sex (I know kinda uncommon) means logically I would not seek out content of any male and female interacting sexually.

      2. Incest porn and child porn are not always the same. Nor is incest always between males and females. The notion that most child molestation and rape happens as a result of someone the child knows does not translate well to child pornography, at least not among the content I saw or downloaded. I could count on one hand the number of times it was clear that the person on screen had a close relationship with the person holding the camera. The only possible example of incest was the previously mentioned girl and woman. Who might have been mother and daughter, but the video was old and of poor quality so I could not say for sure.

      3. A child can experience sexual pleasure. Let’s just say in some videos including a few webcam captures I ran across the girl’s in each video would not be doing what they were to themselves if they were getting nothing out of it. Does this mean we should allow videos of children or teens doing these things all over the internet? No it does not, however criminalizing their behavior is not a valid approach either. Also in no way does this mean we should encourage self body exploration. Let whatever is going happen and don’t screw with the natural course of discovery.

      4. Turns out menstruation is taboo in child porn too. Sorry if anyone is uncomfortable talking about menstrual periods grow up. What is more controversial than a girl’s very first menstrual period? How about seeing what it is really like for its entire length. Not talking about the girl being interviewed, actually getting closeup up and seeing the whole thing in all it’s bloody detail. As well as a dialogue throughout with the girl expressing her thoughts and feelings. Granted I would not expect 24/7 closeup coverage, but a number of hours each day would suffice. I did not ever run into anything close to what I described above and maybe that’s a problem. See the heart of female sexuality revolves around the menstrual cycle and not being open about the menstrual cycle creates all manner of bad consequences I.E. a largely uninformed male population. When roughly half the human species is in the dark about a vital part of human reproduction there’s a major problem. I might have seen a short clip where a young teenager was methodically inserting an appropriate object (it’s designed for the way she was using it) into herself. A few minutes in she began bleeding a little bit. One of two things happened; she was doing this for the first time and finally got the object in far enough to break her hymen or her period unexpectedly started. The video was too short to determine which was true. Anyone wanting to see all the bloody details of menstrual periods can find images and videos of women being bold enough to reveal what they go through. It’s not as nasty or horrible as made out to be. If anyone is super lucky and has a girlfriend or wife asking really nicely for educational purposes might get them to slowly be more open about it.

      5. Only one video I ever saw that was not a webcam was clearly made with the intent to arouse. Text at the beginning said in completely plain language what the producers goal was. I felt like they were daring anyone watching to not become aroused. Like most straight men I absolutely love watching two women pleasure each other. This video contained five segments featuring a total of six to eight girls. Most were teens with one or two being younger. In a playful manner they interacted being careful not to advance beyond foreplay. I will admit it was incredible watching them play and while none of them were super attractive the teens were cute for their stage of development. Contrary to popular belief sometimes being average is more than enough to bring about a response.

      I am one person and am no more perfect or flawed than anyone else. Unlike most I questioned the world around me and stumbled upon darker mysteries which led to finding what I did. Was my personal search for true unbiased understanding morally wrong? No I don’t believe it was and sadly I realized how complicated my questions were, but never got to answer them. Though that’s why I posted this here to add to the conversation so maybe one day society can rationally resolve the root problem of letting objectionable things happen and then dealing with them after the fact. I broke a federal statute in the United States and lost my right to pretend to not know what is going on.

      1. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        @alex, I wish more victims of child porn laws were to speak up. I could give a space to them here. Thanks for your long reply. Keep posting and commenting. I might publish your long comment as a post here and comment on it.

        You mention you did not know you were committing a crime by having mostly nude non violent pictures of post-pubertal adolescents. It is quite possible that not everyone is fully informed about our absurd adolescent “child” “porn”, and adolescent sexuality laws.

        Additionally, these laws are biased against the less intelligent, less studious, and less informed. Highly educated, well read, people would at least KNOW about the laws they violate.

    4. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      Agreed with admin, good article. My points:

      About child porn market:
      Of course “market” is market if there are financial transactions. I.e. it can be supported only with money otherwise it is not a market. And buying child porn (or at least new child porn) should be illegal. But do not overestimate the problem: most of child porn is produced not because of money but as a “home video”. And “child porn” that is produced for money often is not porn at all. E.g. notorious Azov Films that was busted in Canada not long ago and that caused scandal in Germany was about nudism, not porn, not sex. But LEA call it child porn anyway. Or dressed (not naked) girls like CandyDolls produced and legal in Japan would be called child porn in many countries because of provocative poses. But i don’t think that there are any victims there. And btw in US relative LEA departments who fight with this “inhuman” child porn have huge budgets, bigger than those who fight with terrorism. While usual taxpayers have no legal ability to check what “porn” they are fighting with and what is child porn at all because simple viewing/possession is highly punishable.
      So, when people say about child porn “market” they do not know what they are talking about. In practice as i said there is no huge commercial market, and people are mostly talking about freely spreading content on the internet. Well, i agree, that by reducing the amount of consumers of this free content you can reduce the amount of spreading content itself because they create demand and means to spread this content further. The same way if you eliminate all pedophiles you will almost eliminate really pornographic child porn because those pedophiles create demand by the simple fact of their existence. Or the same way if you eliminate all blacks you will reduce crime rates by 80% because (*need to check this) this amount of crimes is committed by blacks. But here is the problem: you cannot eliminate people before they committed a crime. And creating demand itself is not a crime. You can argue that child porn is such a huge deal that tries to reduce it worth eliminating problematic people before they committed real crime which is in this case increasing child porn amount on the internet. But is it the child porn itself that is a real danger or people forgot about primary goal to reduce the number of real child molestations.
      First, reducing child porn amount does not prevent molestations. Dudes in that porn would have sex with kids anyway even if you fully eliminate internet. Because they are doing it not because of money but because they like it and porn itself is just a collateral product, “home video”.
      Second, many of them are being caught thanks to those videos. For example i remember a case when a woman molesting her daughter was found just a few days after the video she made appeared on public. So even if fighters with child porn achieved their goal and eliminated all child porn, the kids being actively molested or who will be molested in the future would not even be known to be molested. In this case eliminating child porn is just making yourself blind and saying: i do not see the problem hence it does not exist.
      Third, do not mess things. Nowadays hysteria about child porn misses the real goal which is protecting real kids. Child porn itself is not bad or good, it is just information. And the question is how it affects real kids in the end. As it is said in the article there is research that availability of porn lowers the rate of sexual crimes. Also i’ve seen a research with conclusion that people who consume child porn molest kids about as rare as other people and much less than ex-offenders. I.e. if a man watches child porn and is not an ex-offender then there is no evidence that he will molest child. Now suppose child porn fighters take him and put in jail for 10 years and put in sex offender registry for life. Will this man become safer for the society or vice versa, he will become more dangerous for the society including kids? I am saying that child porn has become a devil criminal thing in itself while the real problem – molesting kids became even less significant comparing to child porn. It is not good. If you want to protect real kids you should ask how reasonable is it to give child porn possessors such huge terms and ruin their whole life making them more desperate and dangerous for the society. Maybe it is better to make them pay fines or give small sentences, i.e. give them warning that they are on the wrong way. Or do not touch them at all, if it is true that possession of child porn actually leads to lower sexual crime rate, this hypothesis should be further investigated.
      Finally, child porn consumers (non commercial) do not increase the amount of shared content just by consuming itself. They will increase the amount only via distributing the content. You can say that they will distribute it further sooner or later but it is a punishment before real crime happened. The fact of distribution should be proved. And if you are saying that child porn itself is such a dangerous thing that people’s life can be ruined just because of downloading pics from the internet then you are fighting with windmills since even if by such rude actions you’ll lower the amount of child porn on the internet you’ll never make it zero. You just have to admit that it is just an information and it is much more important to focus on real kids and stop this mad witch hunt. I am sure in 50 years people will be really surprised that their ancestors focused so much on collateral effect and ruined people’s life, actually making society worse.

      About Voodoo magic:
      Of course it does not exist. I understand that people depicted in child porn can be frustrated knowing that somebody jerks to it, but nothing can be done here: something put into internet will be there forever. They can demand jailing people who distribute it but jailing people who possess it makes more harm than good. If i was raped and the video leaked to the internet i would not demand people who downloaded it to be jailed, only those who distribute it. Because no matter how many people you jail somebody also has a copy. If magical technology existed that allowed erase all copies of the video i would use it but there is no such technology. If i knew that there is the last copy left i’d just demanded to erase it, not jail the possessor of it. LEA try to jail them just because they want to make others to fear to download it and so get rid of it, but we know that even if you jail 95% of those who possess it there is still 5% who possess it and probably distribute further, so jailing possessors just does not make sense and makes more harm to the society.
      Actually there is one mechanism that can explain the Voodoo magic. LEA in US are obligated to inform the victim if they find a dude who owns child porn with this victim and the victim is known. But they can find him (search his computer) because of the law that is motivated by this same re-victimization argument. I.e. they can find and jail the dude because as they say possession itself re-victimizes the victim, then they go to the victim and actually re-victimize the victim. They do not make life better neither for the victim nor for the possessors. Only fighters for morals are happy here. And LEA since they get bigger budgets to “fight” with re-victimization while actually performing this re-victimization with each new perv they caught. It is madness.

      To conclude all this subject about child porn which is just a collateral effect of real kids molestations (and for a man outside of current child porn or child sexuality stigma is not more shocking than vids with beheaded women), all this subject is hugely, enormously exaggerated today which in turn leads to suffering of real people, both victims and non-criminal “quite” pervs. Collateral damage is huge: self-shooting minors, young people in Rome and Juliet cases, people being criminalized, jailing to tens of years and left without career perspectives just because they downloaded pics from the internet.
      I do not see any single strong argument why possession should be punished, especially punished so harshly. The only real motivation is that most of the people are really pissed off with the simple fact of child porn existence and seek any reason to punish those pervs who perturb their feeling of the rightness. So all the witch hunt is based on morals, not on real harm, while the damage of inculcation morals this way is unproportionally huger comparing to the real damage those child porn possessors bring. I am sad to witness all this madness myself.

    Leave a Reply. We appreciate a discussion: if you disagree, your comment still is welcome.