Human-Stupidy (Admin) – Page 48 – Human Stupidity: Irrationality, Self Deception

Blank slate (tabula rasa) theory thoroughly debunked (Steven Pinker)

Steven Pinker, one of the greatest minds in linguistics and evolutionary science, thoroughly debunks the blank slate theory that still dominates the standard social science model.

The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature is a best-selling 2002 book by Steven Pinker arguing against tabula rasa models of the social sciences. Pinker argues that human behavior is substantially shaped by evolutionary psychological adaptations. The book was nominated for the 2003 Aventis Prizes and was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. (wikipedia)

This tabula-rasa/blank-slate theory is responsible for most serious mistakes in social theories and public policies of the last century in fields like education, discrimination, gender relations. It also is related to rejection of inheritance based evolutionary theory. All this is very central to Human-Stupidity: how can a ridiculously false theory dogmatically dominate science and public policy for decades.

One simple example of always repeated conventional wisdom:

“Children that are beaten by violent parents become violent adults”. There usually is no test for the alternative hypothesis that this has nothing to do with genetics, but that these children could have genetically inherited violent traits from their parents.

Steven Pinker: Chalking it up to the blank slate

The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature

Innuendos are safer then overt language. Hidden meanings in communication (Steven Pinker)

In this Video, the great Steven Pinker how and why we convey innuendos instead of overt clear language. Why do we use veiled hidden messages behind our words. The topic is clarified with nice enlightening drawings by rsa-animate. Must see!

I leave it to the watcher, what this has to do with our favorite topics like dishonesty, unconsciousness,hypocrisy …

Adolescent girl-fights with injuries: cheer on! Nudity, love and sex: crime and victimization.

Adolescent girl-fights are fashionable. They are done like gladiator fights, for fame, for the watchers, and for public exposure on the internet. Most sites would NOT blot out the faces like MSNBC is doing in the video shown here.

We do not understand why watching adolescents bashing in their heads to get hospitalized is prime time TV. The same girl nude, or, God beware, masturbating would get us all in jail for 10 years. Just by being in your computer cache, that is enough to victimize the girl.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I hope you understand the pure watching of a child porn video victimizes the person depicted (sorry, I did not make this up, this is conventional wisdom). For some strange reason, watching the underage girls bashing in their heads is not victimization. Not even for the live watchers that cheer them on and don’t break up the fight.

A while ago, we had a hostage execution beheading video. When the hostage’s pants came off, it was important to blot out his privates. Much more indecent then cutting off his head.

Leading sex research experts against child porn laws: "Adolescents and young adults are no children"

Experts in Sexology (academic sex research) have always opposed the child porn witch hunt. Especially the part that criminalizes normal adolescent sexuality by hiding it behind manipulative language calling adolescents "children". Now the leading academic sex experts in Germany put their weight against senseless police state anti child porn legislation. It is late to stem the tide.

Adolescents and young adults are no children

Declaration by German speaking sexological associations on the pending EU-Childpornography-Directive

Adolescents & Young Adults are no Children
Declaration by German speaking sexological associations on the
pending EU-Childpornography-Directive

Proposed 2001 by the EU Commission, the European Council in 2004 passed the „Framework Decision on Combating Child Pornography and Sexual Exploitation of children (2004/68/JI). Based on the Lisbon EU Treaty, in force since 1st January 2010, the EU Commission proposed to replace it by a directive with the same title, but toughened in several aspects (COM 2010-94). The 27 justice ministers have already approved. Only the EU parliament can – and should! – object.
The new EU-directive not only provides for the blocking of internet-sites but also obliges all 27 member-states to criminalise erotic depictions of adults. Not only pornography is banned but any kind of sexually connotated pictures, making no exception for arts or science. Movies like “The Tin Drum” or common coming-of-age movies, even the new Harry-Potter movie, could be criminalised. Even mere private possession of such films will be sanctioned and everybody will be obliged to report such “crimes”.

Adolescents and young adults are no children (Jugendliche und junge Erwachsene sind keine Kinder)

Constitutional rights are violated

We are arriving at the point of overcriminalization where everyone can be jailed, if authorities start searching his computer and his video collection for "child pornography".

the Directive will violate fundamental legislative and criminal law principles including the supreme
constitutional principles of commensurateness and proportionality.

Law makers ignore science

Human-Stupidity has repeatedly assailed the disproportrional penalties penalties for sex related crimes. See judge Weinstein and

Woman causes permanent brain damage in infant: 2 years. Kills baby: 4 years. Man possesses photos: priceless (40 years)

2. False Assumptions
It appears symptomatic that in drafting the Directive the EU-Commission explicitly waived
expert knowledge. Their empirical assumptions are accordingly vague and partially wrong.

The sex obsessed legal persecution is fueled by zealots like religious fundamentalists and dogmatic feminists and is not shared by academic scientist in the field. Even experts are attacked when their findings contradict the pervailing anti-sexual opinion (see Rind Study)

Continue reading “Leading sex research experts against child porn laws: "Adolescents and young adults are no children"”

Child Porn on Australian WTV television (and in video stores and academy award winning movies "The Tin Drum")?

The 1978 film Felicity was promoted by its makers as a movie that "follows the exploits of a sheltered teen as she sheds her inhibitions and surrenders her blossoming body to a world of bold sexual adventure".

The 90-minute film avoided an X rating on its release and was rated R 18+ because censors believed it contained "scenes of intercourse, implied fellatio, lesbian activity and dialogue" discreet enough for restricted viewing.

Sound like a movie that was slightly pornographic then, and now certainly fulfills the criteria for child porn as laid out in the Copine scale and Dost test.

WTV [television] board member John Rapsey said the approval for release in 1978 was evidence the film did not contain material considered child pornography. TV station in ‘child porn’ row

This, of course, is a big mistake. Movies, newspaper, magazines that were main stream in the 70’s nowadays are child porn. In Germany, video stores routinely got raided for having ldft over soft core or hard core videos that formerly were legal. Most people are unaware that the child porn hysteria is relatively new.

In 1978, Britain’s newspapers had nude girls on page 3, Holland legally distributed hard core porn with 16 and even 15 year old girls, Germany’s reputable "Der Spiegel" put a 14 year old nude on their cover, and all over Germany, nudist magazines showed nude boys and girls of any age frolicking at beaches. The only reason that Video store owners don’t get arrested DVD’s of "The blue Lagoon" and "Taxi driver" is that this would cause a scandal and would expose the ridiculousness of the CP (child pornography) witch hunt. These mainstream movie films have underage actors depicting underage characters engaging in sexual activites. Pure child porography.

So I am pretty sure that the complainant was right:

Continue reading “Child Porn on Australian WTV television (and in video stores and academy award winning movies "The Tin Drum")?”

Sexting children Margarite, Isaiah in Lacey, Washington avoid jail

A district attorney ignored child porn laws and punished sexting children sensibly for gross misdemeanor of telephone harassment instead of following the law and seeking felony convictions for child porn with life long sex offender registration. It would be better if sexting laws were changed for good, as suggested by legal scholars.

LACEY, Wash. — One day last winter Margarite posed naked before her bathroom mirror, held up her cellphone and took a picture. Then she sent the full-length frontal photo to Isaiah, her new boyfriend.
A Girl’s Nude Photo, and Altered Lives | New York Times

She produced and distributed child pornography. This is what the law says.

They broke up soon after. A few weeks later, Isaiah forwarded the photo to another eighth-grade girl, once a friend of Margarite’s. Around 11 o’clock at night, that girl slapped a text message on it.

“Ho Alert!” she typed. “If you think this girl is a whore, then text this to all your friends.” Then she clicked open the long list of contacts on her phone and pressed “send.”

Rude, inconsiderate, bad character, worthy of punishment. But grounding a few days for rude and inconsiderate behavior. What is the punishment for adults for re-distributing nude photos without a model release? Not jailing a few years for distributing child pornography! But, remember, it’s the law!

In a world without child porn laws, by regular laws about adult photos, these guys should get a serious slap on the wrist, and Margarite should go unpunished. But, according to our laws, she is a felon. Compare: In the brave new world of ‘sexting,’ females are ‘victims’ of the very crime they commit

But when that sexually explicit image includes a participant — subject, photographer, distributor or recipient — who is under 18, child pornography laws may apply.

“I didn’t know it was against the law,” Isaiah said.

That is because culturally, such a fine distinction eludes most teenagers. Their world is steeped in highly sexualized messages. Extreme pornography is easily available on the Internet. Hit songs and music videos promote stripping and sexting. A Girl’s Nude Photo, and Altered Lives | New York Times

Human-Stupidity keeps pointing out: the consequences of such dumb laws are that we adults have the obligation to teach children the law.

After all, the poor children get punished for infractions they don’t even know about!? And they can not know, they are not normal natural infractions like lying, stealing, hurting people. That means that we have to tell 8 year olds that they go to jail or face other serious legal consequences if they do sexual touching when they are 10 or 12. And we need to explain exactly what type of photos are illegal. And we have to face the children’s questions: "why do I go to jail for photographing myself?" "Oh, I go to jail so I don’t abuse myself? I go to jail for my own protection?" Of course, it does not make sense. (Jailed for possession of video of himself masturbating when he was 12.)

Of course, this way we inoculate sexual thoughts into the 99% of the children who would never have thought any sexual thoughts.

Note that adult sexting is legal! Holding our children up to higher standards then ourselves. Ridiculous!

The most troubling behavior in this story is that by the non-parental authority figures. Charging 12- and 13-year-olds with dissemination of child pornography? Authorizing principals to search cellphones at will to root out sexts? Someone please explain to me how society was served and justice done by hauling at eighth grader to jail in this instance? What a great way to teach young people to become citizens – show them that the 4th Amendment doesn’t count if the Principal says so.reader’s comment

Very true. This happens all the time. Violating profound constitutional principles to prosecute alleged sex crimes. No due process in rape prosecutions, criminalizing thought crimes in child pornography prosecutions. Draconian punishment under the guise of protecting victims. In this case there was a real victim, but she was partially to blame for her innocent stupid trust.

Continue reading “Sexting children Margarite, Isaiah in Lacey, Washington avoid jail”

What is a Pedophile? Hebephile, Ephebophile, Teleiophile, Infantophile

15 year old Brooke Shields - no pedophilia, rather Ephebophilia, or Teleiophilia.

Hebephile, a newly proposed diagnostic classification in which people display a sexual preference for children at the cusp of puberty, between the ages of, roughly, 11 to 14 years of age. Pedophiles, in contrast, show a sexual preference for clearly prepubescent children. There are also ephebophiles (from ephebos, meaning “one arrived at puberty” in Greek), who are mostly attracted to 15- to 16-year-olds; teleiophiles (from teleios, meaning, “full grown” in Greek), who prefer those 17 years of age or older); and even the very rare gerontophile (from gerontos, meaning “old man” in Greek), someone whose sexual preference is for the elderly. So although child sex offenders are often lumped into the single classification of pedophilia, biologically speaking it’s a rather complicated affair. Some have even proposed an additional subcategory of pedophilia, “infantophilia,” to distinguish those individuals most intensely attracted to children below six years of age.
Based on this classification scheme of erotic age orientations, even the world’s best-known fictitious “pedophile,” Humbert Humbert from Nabokov’s masterpiece, Lolita, would more properly be considered a hebephile. (Likewise the protagonist from Thomas Mann’s Death in Venice, a work that I’ve always viewed as something of the “gay Lolita”).
Why most "pedophiles" aren’t really pedophiles, technically speaking | Scientific American

Photo of 10 year old Brooke Shields might be just artistic photography. But those who feel sexually attracted are pedophiles. The meaning of the word "Pedophile" was manipulatively changed and distorted. Pedophile is a clearly defined scientific term meaning an adult that has attraction to pre-pubertal children.

We are discussing grammar, semantics, and politics of language manipulation here.
We are not defending or condoning pedophile activities.

Correct Terminology

Hebephiles, Ephebophiles, Teleiophile were grouped into the "pedophile" group. So a "worse label’ can be attached to a sexual offender. An "adolescent lover" who had a 17 year old girlfriend is called "child lover" (or rather, in a second step of vilification, child rapist). Sure helps to secure longer jail terms and to get the population angry. This is exactly identical to the manipulation that extended the word "child" from under 12 or under 14, to under 18, admittedly for the purpose of enforcing child protection laws for adolescents.

Additionally, child mutilators and murderers are usually called "pedophiles" in the press. Killing children has nothing to do with "child lovers" or sexual attraction for children.

Brooke Shields re-victimized constantly?

Thus someone gets arrested for possession of Brooke Shields 15 year photos , falsely called a pedophile, and the average Joe thinks he is a baby murderer. Note that the bikini photo of a 15 year-old becomes child pornography in case one collects the photo for sexual arousal (Copine level 4).

According to child porn persecution theory, "children" (under 18) get re-victimized whenever someone looks at their depictions.. We prevented the re-victimization of Brooke Shields through the first 10 year old photo by putting black bars at all private parts. Add to this the famous Brooke Shields movies (Blue Lagoon, …) , one can see that Brooke Shields constantly gets re-victimized thousands of times per day by people who watch these movies with an impure mind.

Infantophiles

Of course, Infant abusers can be labelled with a stronger label then "pedophile". Those attracted to 17 year olds are more ostracised by the incorrect application of the name "pedophile" or child lover, then by "teleiophile", late adolescent lover. To reach the maximum vilification, the word "infantophile" is now, correctly, created. It is undesirable that perverts that mess with infants can hide behind the word "pedophile", which could mean attraction to 9 year olds.

We are discussing grammar, semantics, and politics of language manipulation here. We are not defending or condoning pedophile activities.

There are also law abiding pedophiles who declaredly do not act upon their attraction. These, in spite of being accused merely of thought crimes, are in danger of being hurt by angy pedophile vigilantes.

Other Language manipulation ("rape", "consent")

Human-Stupidity has assailed the manipulative distortion of language is very common in the service of criminalizing adolescent sexuality. The meaning of "rape" and "consent" have been manipulatively changed, just like "pedophile" and "child".

Continue reading “What is a Pedophile? Hebephile, Ephebophile, Teleiophile, Infantophile”

Copine/ Sap Scales, Dost Test: Severity of child porn

The COPINE scale was originally developed for therapeutic psychological purposes. More specifically, it is used to distinguish between child erotica and child pornography. […]

In the late 1990s, the COPINE project ("Combating Paedophile Information Networks in Europe") at the University of Cork, in cooperation with the Paedophile Unit of the London Metropolitan Police, developed a typology to categorize child abuse images for use in both research and law enforcement.^[4] The ten-level typology was based on analysis of images available on websites and internet newsgroups. Other researchers have adopted similar ten-level scales. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COPINE_scale

Is the child victimized by the photographer? or is the photographer victimized by the child porn law?

SAP scale

In 2002, the sentencing advisory panel (SAP) of England and Wales devised the SAP scale, condensing the different levels of child porn from 10 to 5 It dropped the Copine levels 1 to 3 completely. The SAP levels indicate increased seriousness of the crime, and are also considered indications of the dangerousness of the offender (which is problematic). See Sexual deviance: theory, assessment, and treatment.

Dost Test

In order to better determine whether a visual depiction of a minor constitutes a "lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area" under 18 U.S.C. § 2256(2)(A), the court developed six criteria. […]

1) Whether the focal point of the visual depiction is on the child’s genitalia or pubic area.

Harmless photos might become child pornography, when cropped in a way that they emphasize clothed genital areas. Cropping a photo (with emphasis on the genital areas) turns it from a legal mainstream newspaper child swimsuit photo into a heinous child porn photo. It is hard to understand how the child in the photo can be victimized by cropping the photo.

Concerning the lascivious display of clothed genitalia, the Department of Justice described use of the Dost test in child pornography and 2257 documentation regulations in a 2008 rule, writing that the precedent United States v. Knox, 32 F.3d 733 (3d Cir. 1994) did not prohibit ordinary swim team or underwear model photographs, but "although the genitals were clothed in that case, they were covered by thin, opaque clothing with an obvious purpose to draw attention to them, were displayed by models who spread or extended their legs to make the pubic and genital region entirely visible to the viewer, and were displayed by models who danced or gyrated in a way indicative of adult sexual relations." […]

The test was criticized by NYU Law professor Amy Adler as forcing members of the public to look at pictures of children as a pedophile would in order to determine whether they are considered inappropriate. "As everything becomes child pornography in the eyes of the law—clothed children, coy children, children in settings where children are found—perhaps children themselves become pornographic en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dost_test

Everything becomes child pornography.

You will see in the Copine scale analysis below, that any department store adolescent lingerie catalog can become child pornography, when collected by a man that might get excited by the photos.

Human-Stupidity Analysis

The Copine scale (and the derived Sap scale) is a good attempt to rate child pornography on one dimension, by its "seriousness".

It totally fails to consider 2 other important dimensions

age: penetrative sex with a toddler or with a 17 year old have the same rating (Copine 9 out of 10). The first causes serious injuries and is surely unnatural. The second is perfectly legal in Europe where the age of consent is 16, a natural legal act between adolescent lovers, still it is one of the most serious levels of child porn. An adolescent couple can legally have sex, but they cannot photograph themselves doing it. Otherwise they get victimized by themselves (?). Human-Stupidity believes they get victimized by the insane laws.
consent vs. non-consent: consensual S/M spanking play of adolescent minors or kidnapping torture are the same (Copine 10, the highest rating)

The Copine scale

Continue reading “Copine/ Sap Scales, Dost Test: Severity of child porn”

Author: Human-Stupidy (Admin)

Blank slate (tabula rasa) theory thoroughly debunked (Steven Pinker)

Steven Pinker: Chalking it up to the blank slate

See also real important readings

Steven Pinker: Chalking it up to the blank slate

See also real important reading

Steven Pinker: Chalking it up to the blank slate

See also real important reading

Innuendos are safer then overt language. Hidden meanings in communication (Steven Pinker)

Adolescent girl-fights with injuries: cheer on! Nudity, love and sex: crime and victimization.

Leading sex research experts against child porn laws: "Adolescents and young adults are no children"

Adolescents and young adults are no children

Constitutional rights are violated

Law makers ignore science

Child Porn on Australian WTV television (and in video stores and academy award winning movies "The Tin Drum")?

Sexting children Margarite, Isaiah in Lacey, Washington avoid jail

What is a Pedophile? Hebephile, Ephebophile, Teleiophile, Infantophile

Correct Terminology

Brooke Shields re-victimized constantly?

Infantophiles

Other Language manipulation ("rape", "consent")

Copine/ Sap Scales, Dost Test: Severity of child porn

Is the child victimized by the photographer? or is the photographer victimized by the child porn law?

SAP scale

Dost Test

Human-Stupidity Analysis

The Copine scale