Slashdot Mirror
Germans Pursuing Kiddie Porn In Second Life
Several readers sent in links to the BBC, which has picked up news of a German investigation into child pornography in Second Life. A German TV station captured images of two avatars, an apparent adult and an apparent child, involved in sexual activity. The station also said they had infiltrated a ring trading real-world child porn in SL. SL creator Linden Labs is cooperating fully with the investigation, they write on their official blog: "Our investigations revealed the users behind these avatars to be a 54-year-old man and a 27-year-old woman. Both were immediately banned from Second Life." The German prosecutor's office hasn't responded to Linden's offer of help in identifying the real-world traders.
Welcome to the era of thought crime
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
The fact that you can pretty reliably guess that people who simulate child porn are probably also interested in the real thing, but that tens of thousands of people who go on shooting sprees in Counter-Strike don't even own guns should highlight some of the difference between the two.
If you want to look at something that is related to digital child porn, don't look at Counter Strike look at that Columbine FPS. How well did that go over?
If you can tell the difference between Halo, GRAW and Counter Strike vs. a game based on the Columbine shootings, than I think you ought to be to realize which category we should put simulated child porn in.
Although I think the distinction goes even further. The connection between playing violent video games and becoming violent (or other negative impacts) is tenuous, but the connection between pornography and misogyny is not. One study (complete with control group) found that men and women exposed to porn recommended a sentence for a rapist of about 1/2 what was recommended by the control group. Connection directly to rape? No. Connection directly to attitudes about rape? Definitely.
I can get a reference for this study (I read about it earlier this week) in a few hours after work.
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
Hello,
you seem to forget that pedophiles are mentally disordered people. They get affected by what they see in different ways than you and me. You might compare that to an alcoholic seeing someone drinking at a bar vs. a non-alcoholic watching it.
Additionally, they are not sued for abusing children. They shared material showing child abusing. This also includes animated child abuse. US law isn't quite different at this point, or why would you think that nude games are rated only for adults? No real sex here too.
Since beastiality is taboo, guess LL needs to ban all furries in SL too?
You seem unfamiliar with the study. This wasn't the type where you have a bunch of people in to interview them, ask about their attitudes, and draw conclusions. This was a randomized, blind study with a control group (not double blind, I think). Students were selected and divided into groups and for 6 weeks saw either porn, 1/2 porn and 1/2 innocuous content, innocuous content, or no films at all. Those watching films were told the study was about film techniques.
So the issues you bring up - deliberately misleading interviewers - revolve around selection bias that randomized studies are designed to address.
In short, the study is academically rigorous and not the "pseudo-rational crutch" you describe. It's easier to attempt to dismiss it as such rather than confront the possibility that porn really is bad, however, especially on Slashdot were I'm sure practically everyone enjoys porn. See sig.
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
Where do you draw the line on moral standards?
In a way that's not the point. The point is that - regardless of the starting point - porn desensitizes people to rape. So yo could argue that if we were oversensitive to begin with we end up in a better place, but rather than debate what the correct response to rape should be, I'd just point out that anything that cuts that response in 1/2 is probably not great. And the other issues you bring up aren't really relevant in this particular case because it wasn't a question of rape in general, but a specific case of a woman who was raped by a hitchiker. Not a date-rape scenario, but the traditional forcible rape scenario. Furthermore the question didn't ask about burden of proof, but merely about sentencing once the guy is found guilty.
And finally the negative impacts went far beyond rape. Here's some stuff I grabbed from the article:
"Students were then introduced to a rape case, reading the newspaper coverage of a hitchiking that resulted in the sexual offense. The rapist's conviction was reported, but a sentene was not stated. Studnes were asked to recommend a prison term for the paticular offense. The length of th term was considered to indicate disapproval or condemnation of rape. Sexual callousnes toward women was expected to find expression in minimal prison sentences. Students also indicated their support for the female liberation movement on a scale ranging from 0 (no support) to 100 (maximal support). This assessment was included tolearn whether callousness, should it be created, generalizes from sex to gender."
Here's table 3 from the paper "Number of months recommended for rape, as a function of massive exposure to pornography (by gender)" (Massive, by the way, means like 48 minutes a week.)
Male
Conrol: 93.7
No exposure: 94.6
intermediate exposure: 78.0
massive exposure: 49.8
Female
Control: 119.7
No exposure: 143.6
Inter. Exposure: 101.4
Mass. Exposure: 77.0
And here's Table 4: SUpport for the women's liberation movement as a function of massive exposure to pornography (by gender) on a scale from 0 (no support) to 100 (maximal support)
Male
Control: 66.8
No exposure: 71.0
Int. exposure: 48.7
Mass. exposure: 25.0
Female
Control: 76.2
No Exposure: 82.0
Int. Exposure: 59.2
Mass. Exposure: 52.2
That's pretty damming evidence, in my opinion, of a causal relationship between porn (of the non-violent variety!) and callousness towards women and women's issues.
Source: "Pornography, Sexual Callousness, and the Trivialization of Rape" by Don Zillmann and Jennings Bryant, Journal of Communication 1982
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
There were 160 students total, so 40 per group. Before you go "you can't tell anything from so small a sample" ask yourself how much you know about statistics and setting up randomized samples. If the answer is "a lot" let's talk, but if you really have no idea than just take it on faith that you can get statistically significant results from a study of that size (especially given that they were assigned to the groups randomly and there was a control group.)
I mean, better yet go and take some statistics courses and such. I highly recommend it. But assuming that's not an option, then just trust me.
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.