Slashdot Mirror
Japan Moves Toward Blocking Online Child Porn
crimeandpunishment writes "In the wake of increased international demands that it do something about its legal lenience toward child pornography, Japan is beginning to take action, albeit slowly. Thursday a government task force recommended that kiddie porn sites be blocked as soon as they're discovered, instead of waiting for an investigation or arrests. Making or distributing child porn is illegal in Japan, but possession is not ... and critics have called that a legal loophole making Japan an international hub for child porn."
If only they listened to the world about whaling too.
I remember reading it is like twelve years old. That might not be true, but even if it is, who the fuck is the USA to tell Japan what constitutes child pornography?
If kids can make porn legally in Japan, who's fucking business is it really other than the Japanese?
"Be prepared, son. That's my motto. Be prepared." --Joe Hallenbeck
Obviously, CP is bad. However, I personally commend the Japanese for being slow in attempting a censorship sweep that will cost resources and, ultimately, do between little and nothing to actually protect the actual victims.
My other sig is clever.
simply keeping child porn around on your HDD should not be illegal and what the rest of the world should be doing instead of criticizing japan.
just because 235235235235.jpg on the porn site you visited happens to be of a 17 year old girl instead of 18 and is stored in your browser cache DOES NOT MAKE YOU A PEDO.
GO JAPAN!
I was going to say "Won't somebody think of the children." but then I thought maybe that is the problem. Some people are thinking too much about the children.
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
A giant robot taskforce has also been assembled to combat tentacles of, ahem, varying natures. Hooray!
If each mistake being made is a new one, then progress is being made.
My sister's wife taught English in the rural areas of Nagasaki pref. in the late 90's and she relayed a story about being astonished when she discovered 2chan being browsed on the lab's computers. She tried to have the site blocked but the admin told her it was too popular. For those not in the know imagine 4chan but with even more lolicon, child porn and tentacle rape.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
some European countries (at least The Netherlands) had legal possession of this stuff. So calling one of the last countries to not make it illegal "an international hub" is a bit over the top. I'd be more worried about countries that have high child prostitution.
I agree with shutting websites that distribute child pornography as soon as they are discovered, but on the news in The Netherlands today was the message that police and justice were too occupied with their (witch)hunt of child porn possessors to effectively go after the PRODUCERS and DISTRIBUTORS of it. A damn shame and a testament to how the police/justice need to prioritize their efforts.
Child prostitution should be illegal everywhere. Child porn is evidence of child prostitution in some cases and child abuse in others. It shouldn't be difficult to block websites from selling it.
To stop people from viewing it is a different matter entirely and in my opinion is technically impossible and unconstitutional because its relying on thought crime legislation. As long as no children are being victimized and nobody is profiting from it, it's not a problem.
While child porn is certainly a very terrible thing, the rush to suppress it brings up an interesting point.
we often hear these two arguments:
possessing child porn = supports the industry and encourages further production
possessing downloaded music/movies = damages the industry and threatens further production
If downloading media is such a serious threat to the production of new content that laws have to be introduced to prevent unauthorized sharing, why isn't anyone suggesting that downloading child porn be encouraged to drive the producers out of business?
I guess one, (or both) of the above statements is false. Anyone care to take a guess which?
-I only code in BASIC.-
What does Japan do about the Manga and Hentai stuff that rest of the world considers child porn but Japan considers 'just drawings', and dare I say part of Japanease culture ? I remember sitting on a train in Japan with the guy next to me reading 'Rape Man' and he was just your average dude going to work on the train. I'm not going to get drawn into a 'what is child porn' debate. But I do tend to think a drawing is a drawing, regardless of what's contained in the drawing.
Could this include blocking content obtained using a proxy in Japan? People that still want access are going to find ways around it methinks...
and searched usenets for childporn. I found it, and then deleted it. Months later my computer was seized by law enforcement because the guy I was renting a room from was under investigation for a completely separate matter.
The deleted cp was discovered and I was charged with posession. No jail time, but did have to work at the local animal shelter for a couple days a week for a couple months. The lawyer bill was about $4,000.
I would probably be much more bitter about the whole episode had I ended up being a Registered Sex Offender. Turns out that in my state the offender registry is reserved for the more serious offenses.
Witches are being hunted down, non-believers are being tortured: it's easy to see all our technological progress and think that we've progressed far beyond the fire and stake.
--
Jewish boys and girls become men and women at 13, not 18? In Iran its 15, In Scotland its 16. Who decided you weren't being taken advantage of at 18? does something magical happen on the last night of your 17th year that renders you mature?
sig loading.......
Obviously, CP is bad.
However, I personally commend the Japanese for being slow in attempting a censorship sweep that will cost resources and, ultimately, do between little and nothing to actually protect the actual victims.
Obviously, CP is bad.
However, I personally commend the Japanese for being slow in attempting a censorship sweep that will cost resources and, ultimately, do between little and nothing to actually protect the actual victims.
"We're making an appeal today to build a society without child pornography," said Anges Chan, a UNICEF ambassador and well-known media personality in Japan. "We're trying to build a national movement to appeal to the government to outlaw the possession of child pornography."
Unless they can statistically prove that possession of evidence of the crime leads to
future crimes against children, having laws against possession is a law that is a problem in search of a solution. If police need search warrants they can find other ways to get them but having a search warrant which only leads to digital copies of evidence of the crime does not actually solve or prevent the crime.
So what is the purpose of tracking every copy? The only purpose I see in doing this is to track down the distributors. This would be fine but lets be serious, all they have to do is offer a bounty. "If you have information which leads to the arrest or conviction of a distributor of child porn you will be rewarded 500,000 yen."
Just a note,
I believe that Japan allows animated/drawn "child" porn.
So this would not be effecting any of that type.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Independent of the age at which something becomes "child porn", this expression is way too much overused. There was a time when someone saying "child porn" was sounding an alarm, today it's like background noise.
I admit I've seen lots and lots of porn on the web, but never anything that could be remotely called "child porn", unless you call adult women with small breasts and shaved pubic hair "children". If this "child porn" thing actually exists, which I doubt, it's so well hidden that any measures about blocking it are useless. Better try to block the Illuminati instead.
Sadly, the politicians have learned to use "child porn" like they use "terrorism", a convenient handle by which they are able to manipulate the masses.
for Pedobear.
2019 is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop.
It is never appropriate to short circuit due process in legal matters. If you crack the door open, it will open a little wider each day, until the floodgates are wide. There is never an excuse for not waiting for an investigation or arrests, "just for this one kind of offense."
"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."
-- Pastor Martin Niemöller, 1946
You're right, Japanese seem to prefer octopus porn
I know I'm not alone in feeling uncomfortable about Western society's view of sex and nudity as something dangerous, mysterious, and generally negative. It varies from country to country, but it feels like we're continuing to regress into a puritanical and uneducated fear of our reproductive systems, even while other parts of our society leverage that fear - churches, MTV, clothing companies, magazines..
I worry that we're sending the wrong message to youth. That they should be denied sexual education, and told that they will be punished for developing sexually before some arbitrary age - typically several years after the onset of puberty.
Now I'm not going to argue that real commercial kiddy porn is a positive thing. But I also wish humanity would take a step back, a deep breath, and view the issue with some amount of rationality. For crying out loud, we're locking up our children for sending nude images of themselves! Talk about psychosis.
Many men are terrified to approach and help a child in need for fear of being caught up in this institutionalized hunt.
We're justifying censorship, Internet filtering, gestapo-state police invasions, horrific prison terms... for pictures. For all we know (and we don't because research on the subject is utterly impossible), pictures help otherwise decent human beings who happen to be attracted to young people to cope with their sexual orientation. By threatening dozens of years in jail for simple possession, we could be encouraging those inclined to go out and find the real thing.
Why not focus our efforts and energy on things we can (probably) all agree are worse for kids than possession of images like ending child hunger and poverty, war, child soldiers, and such things? Japan can sort her own issues.
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
There are so many cameras and surveillance, with camera phones and facebook that its just too late to be concerned about childrens privacy. Nobody has privacy anymore.
The monster in this situation is the individual who molests the child and then tape records it. The recording is evidence and in my opinion has to be analyzed, the individuals who like watching the evidence might not be actual child molesters and the utilitarian thing to do would be to pay these individuals to find and download child pornography and act as informants to help track down the source.
I don't really think it's a good idea to put people in prison for having illegal bits on their computer. But I do understand that in order to get informants you have to have at least the threat of putting them in prison. That being said I don't think anyone put in prison for having illegal bits should be treated like a sex offender, I think the concept of sex offender now includes anyone convicted of any sort of sex cirme for any reason and in my opinion we need to separate the sex addicts from the violent sex offenders.
Violent sex offenders will use any means including violence, these are rapists, child molesters, the people we believe should be locked in prison for life.
Non-violent sex offenders who are actually sex addicts are in general addicted to a specific substance whether it be bits, a certain pattern of thinking, or a series of behaviors. These individuals get convicted because they have a picture of a 16 year old naked, or they are 21 and had sex with their 17 year old gf. These individuals don't belong in the same category as true violent sex offenders.
The solution in my opinion is to separate the categories so that individuals who are non violent don't get their lives ruined over something dumb. These individuals can help take down the actual violent sex offenders who rape and murder.
Sure you can hack somebody and upload the child porn and charge them with possession. I'm sure this happens to many people which is one of the reasons why possession laws are so flawed. What I'm saying is that distribution would need some legal document attached to it such as a domain registery, ISP records, website logs. And I'm not talking about distributing a few megs, or gigs, but hundreds of gigs. The type of distribution you'd expect to see from a criminal distribution ring.
Traffic analysis and other techniques can be used to get a search warrant. The informants are simply to conduct the search.
Sure it can be abused, but it's a lot better than what we have now.
What exactly is considered a child...
under 18? 16? 12?
next how do you prove an image of someone is not above that age? (can a cartoon character/drawing be considered a child?)
and then you need to define porn... is it nudity period or do they actually have to be intimate?
now once you have that decided on... (yeah right)
how do you enforce it in such a way that you don't stomp over the rights of everyone to get after the people
producing said porn
Kiddie porn pictures are not a substitute for "the real thing". If anything, there is considerable evidence that kiddie porn pictures incent the possessor to go and get the real thing.
Also, in most cases these pictures are sold, not given away freely. If there is a demand and a marketplace there will be folks that will supply it. All you need is a camera and a child or two. And children are pretty easy to get. If a child isn't interested in cooperating, they will be after a few slaps.
Just having such a marketplace is incredibly destructive to children. If it was all about just passing pictures around for free and children freely taking them for people's enjoyment that would be a completely different matter.
So you believe it's a statistic fact beyond the margin of error that people do what they watch on TV? People watch horror movies because they secretly want to kill people? People watch gross videos on the internet because they secretly want to do it? This is basically saying that anything a person thinks about for a long enough time, they will be compelled to do it.
This is not true. I'm sure the majority of us have thought about killing people but how many of us are actually murderers? Less than 1% probably. How many individuals who look at child porn or who have been convicted of possession of child pornography are violent enough to actually go molest a child?
The majority of adult individuals know the difference between fantasy and reality. Fantasy is stuff people imagine doing because they'll never be able to do it. People enter fantasy worlds to escape from the mundane real world. Then you have sick monsters who hear voices and have to obey the voices in their head, or who are without conscience and empathy and can rape and torture a child without remorse.
Lets be realistic, the majority of human beings aren't that. And if the majority aren't crazy like that it makes no sense to create laws expecting people to act like that. Lets put it simple, if you saw someone murdered on tape you wouldn't go and murder somebody would you? Because you have a conscience right?
Japan banning child porn would be like America banning greasy hamburgers. NOT going to happen.
I was going to say "Won't somebody think of the children." but then I thought maybe that is the problem. Some people are thinking too much about the children.
"Won't somebody please link to the children?"
*ducks*
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
Exactly as it should be. That focuses police resources on cutting roots (creators/distributors) instead of branches (consumers). Blocking it online is fine, too, but they need to try to trace it.
Do you have ESP?
Agnes* chan is against DRAWINGS of children in sexual acts. Fictional works that are almost all, I say almost because saying for certain isn't possible, not based off real children or events. She's against a harmless outlet that pedophiles can use to curve their lust with. As are many others.
Pedophilia is like being homosexual, it's not something you decide to be on a whim. A child molester is not the same as being a pedophile. I'll say it again to make it clear, "A child molester is not the same as being a pedophile". A child molester should be punished to the full extent of the law. A pedophile who hasn't created child porn, molested real children, or attempted to do either is not a threat regardless of how much the mass media wants you to think so.
2D is not reality. Fiction is fiction, reality is reality and you have to be pretty off your rocker to think otherwise. If you look at some previous statistics over the years you can actually see a decline in sexual abuse towards children with an increase to fictional pornography sales. If you want other places to look, look up Japans rape statistics and compare them to other countries on a rapes/abuse per x amount of people. You'll see that the strict nations who have outlawed FICTIONAL media depicting what appears to be young women/boys in sexual acts have higher rape/abuse per x amount of people. Bing/Google/Yahoo it.
Quit wasting money and man power to put men and women in jail for life who have only own FICTIONAL works while letting the real rapists and real child porn producers run free. It's a serious joke that people are doing jail time on grounds that fictional DRAWINGS are equal to real child pornography. Half their life gone because people want someone to take the fall in place of the real child rapists. Unicef and others just wants an easy way to look good and nothing is easier than targeting harmless people who aren't capable of fighting back.
Leave the drawings, the visual novels, and anime alone; Go after the real rapists instead of the people who have not and will not harm real people.
I have a slippery slope you can slide down :3
For best results, avoid doing stupid things.
Westerners and Asians are so different. When the US military base was originally built, the soldiers didn't feel like banging the prostitutes because they looked like kids. On top of that you have the fact that Asian men and women look more alike than Western men and women, then there is testicle porn, how breasts used to sometimes be shown on public TV, New-halves and the gender guessing games, gender-bender cartoons, and a culture that generally gratifies women who press up like high school children. Everything is just a mess.
Given Japanese culture and their craziness, it would be interesting if when a bunch of no-nonsense laws are put in place the suicide rate suddenly takes a small spike for various reasons.
Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
You watch violent films yes? You play video games? You read comic books?
You're now a murder. Good day sir. I'll see you prison.
Same. Fucking. Thing. It's no different than reading hentai manga that depicts 'children'. Fiction is fiction damnit.
vatican filter?
Wrong. In a premeditated murder the person actually dies - it's only a difference if you planned to do it, but there's an actual victim.
Ad hominem attacks don't fly here, sorry.
Appeals to anonymous authorities don't work either. If your argument relies on some sources, the onus to provide them is one you.
Dilbert RSS feed
Is CP an American conspiracy to secretly protect it's porn industry from P2P and Japan by making people to afraid to use those sources? Just like possessing publications useful to terrorists are to the publishing industry and insane damage claims are for audio and video.
All data should be legal to possess, view and distribute through P2P so that people can download everything they see and decide later what to keep or view. Having to screen your downloads for any reason takes a long time (and isn't close to 100% effective) and if you add up the man-hours wasted on it due to such laws, it would easily exceed the time spent alive per person that terrorism takes away or the time IP rights holders demand compensation for. And it also causes more terror than terrorism.
Mod me flamebait all you want, you sick fuck. Ignoring me won't change what a sick fuck you've become. My opinion doesn't change the fact that masturbating to children means you are a sick fuck. I wasn't the one who drew the lines, I'm just letting you know that you Are A Sick Fuck That Needs To Get Help Like NOW, you sick childfucker.
Well, well, aren't you a rational one. I can't imagine why you're having trouble getting your points across.
You seem angry. Maybe you watched too many Hulk tv shows when you were younger?
I hate testicle porn. But I love tentacle porn.
Maybe I just don't like to watch people tell me that child pornography is a victimless crime. Maybe I don't like that Slashdot has so suddenely entrenched itself with ADVOCATES of child pornography
Wait... so you want to physically harm people just for making a simple argument on a text-based web site? That's pretty fucked up. You should seek counseling.
And also: I assume since you're sooo anti-child porn that you also support prosecuting teenagers who possess and distribute pictures of themselves. Because it's black and white right? Right and wrong? And child pornography, as everyone has told you... err I mean as everyone knows, is horrible terrible stuff. So we should lock those teens away for victimizing themselves. Right? Right?!?
Wrong. In a premeditated murder the person actually dies - it's only a difference if you planned to do it, but there's an actual victim.
What's the difference between that and manslaughter then? The victim or the intent?
you guys fantasize about screwing children and you want society to accept and facilitate that.
Ad hominem attacks don't fly here, sorry.
Do you even know what an ad hominem attack is? I'm telling paedophiles that they should expect to be socially ostricised for being paedophiles! That's not an ad hominem attack! Not a paedophile? Then the argument certainly doesn't apply!
Appeals to anonymous authorities don't work either. If your argument relies on some sources, the onus to provide them is one you.
This isn't some bullshit courtroom drama. This isn't a game. The evidence is right out there for anyone to search who wants to -- and it's not my "burden" to provide it. Not providing the links when you can just google it doesn't make me wrong. I am right, and I will allow you to prove yourself wrong if you have doubts. Citing the sources won't change the truth.
I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
I think the point the sane people on here are trying to make is that targeting the possession of CP is just the easy way for governments and law enforcement to perceive to be working to protect children. Whilst seeking out and acquiring CP certainly does great a market for its generation, possession doesn't directly cause child harm. It just doesn't. It indirectly does. As such, if governments and law enforcement were serious about really "protecting the children" they'd commit a majority of their resources (in terms of person, money and legal power) in tracking down and prosecuting the direct causes of child harm (those actually generating CP). It is indeed a cynical point but I believe a valid one that when authorities trumpet prosecuting possessors of child porn, they're merely doing so to make themselves look good, and not actually doing *that* much to prevent abuse from happening. From a mathematical point of view, presume for every 1 person that generates CP there is say 1000 people that view that piece of material. In order to reduce CP by cutting demand, you'd really have to take out 99% of those viewers of the material. However, if you go after that 1 person generating the CP you've achieved your goal and arguably prosecuted the more guilty party in the process.
Law enforcement works best when it's complaint driven. When cops are responding to crimes, they're performing a service function. The quality of that service can be measured. Crime rates, clearance rates, arrest rates, conviction rates, and recidivism rates can all be tallied, and are are politically important.
When law enforcement sets its own agenda, it does less well. It's harder to measure whether a vice squad or a drug squad is doing a good job. Those are the units that tend to be corrupt and/or incompetent. It's also much harder to measure their cost-effectiveness.
This problem shows up in the rhetoric. We have the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, and the War on Kiddie Porn. We don't have the War on Financial Fraud, the War on Child Labor, or the War on Bribery. Which is a problem.
If we were serious about Protecting the Children, child labor laws would be much tougher.
What you are doing (besides drooling on your keyboard) is called an "Appeal to emotion" and is usually done by someone who cannot argue the facts because they aren't on his/her side, hence the emotion. What your rant cannot change is this: Busting someone who has drawn images is a thoughtcrime, nothing less. With real CP a real child got hurt, but with hentai and lolicon someone used ink and paper to draw what they thought. If you can be arrested and lose your freedom for putting your thoughts on paper? pretty much the definition of a thoughtcrime.
So you go ahead with your foaming at the mouth while the rest of us have an intelligent discussion, kay? Have you ever talked to law enforcement and asked what they thought on the subject? I used to have lunch daily with a guy working the state crime lab in charge of CP (He tried to recruit me but....bleech) and you know what he said? The average amount of children abused by those evil CP collectors? Zero. Most were socially retarded losers that would hide in the corner if you offered them a naked anything. One he said even screeched like a wild animal if anyone came into physical contact with him, yet the average term being handed out for these dangerous criminals? 40 years. They would have actually gotten less time if they had actually raped and murdered a teenager than for possessing pictures. Sorry dude, that is seriously fucked up.
So I have to go with my friend here who thought a better use of the resources would have been to get therapy and rehab for sex addiction for those that hadn't actually touched anybody, and instead used the resources they were wasting on their prosecution for hunting down those that made the images in the first place. He also said the witch hunt atmosphere made it nearly impossible to try to "flip" one of the low level consumers to get higher up the chain, because no prosecutor would dare give a deal to anyone caught with CP and looking at 40 years+ they simply had no incentive to turn. So your "sick childfucker" drool drool drool is actually making things worse, as anyone who has experience with law enforcement knows one of the best ways you have to break a criminal org is by snitches, which thanks to the witch hunt we simply don't have because guys like you would vote any prosecutor that cut a deal out of office. Great going there, congrats.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
This is why I am not a libertarian.
Stop dodging the question. You've made it quite clear that you are adamantly against child porn, whether it be production, distribution, or just possession. It therefore follows that you believe that if a 16 year old girl takes a nude sexual picture of herself in the mirror, she should be charged with production and possession of child pornography.
In that hypothetical scenario, do you support prosecuting that 16 year old girl? Yes or No. BTW, if you say no, then you (by your own statements) are enabling sexual predators to rape a child. If you say yes you lack enough common sense for anyone to bother taking any more of your comments seriously.
This is exactly the crux of the problem. Crucially, it is much much easier to locate those 999 people than it is to find the one who actually produced it. Consequently, law enforcement agencies target the easier criminals: less effort and more impressive on your resume. The problem is the metric we use to assess the performance of law enforcement which leads to suboptimal distribution of limited resources.
Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
You were implicitly referring to people in this thread who were saying the possession of those images should be legal. Whether they like the pictures or not is irrelevant.
If you don't care what people think, why bother posting?
Dilbert RSS feed
In that hypothetical scenario, do you support prosecuting that 16 year old girl? Yes or No. BTW, if you say no, then you (by your own statements) are enabling sexual predators to rape a child. If you say yes you lack enough common sense for anyone to bother taking any more of your comments seriously.
Well, gee, let's see, um, so you basically are telling me there's no right way to answer the question you say I'm dodging? Obviously, not warranting your trap question with an answer was the best answer I could have given, and should speak volumes for my common sense.
I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
It's not a trap question. You're vehemently against child porn, correct? What I described is child porn. Do you support such prosecution or not. Yes or No.
And yes, your desire to break bones and report to the FBI anyone that dares even discuss whether child porn laws are appropriate speaks volumes about your common sense.
What you are doing (besides drooling on your keyboard) is called an "Appeal to emotion" and is usually done by someone who cannot argue the facts because they aren't on his/her side,
Perhaps you should remember that my fact-based post was modded "flamebait/troll" and the post you're responding to is the answer to that mod's emotional response? Tit for Tat and all that.
You're ignoring the issue completely. "Lock up anyone with a picture on his computer for 40 years" is not what I'm suggesting is it? What part of "seek help" did you not understand? You mention councelling, yourself.
NO no no... The point of that post... That post was made to wake someone out of their sleep. To evoke an emotional impact that will help someone realize that they're not the well-adjusted, ok person they thought they were. That can not be done with a dissertation. It must be done with a bucket of cold water.
I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
I haven't seen any posts here claiming that child pornography is a positive thing. They are just disputing the rationality of penalizing aspects of it.
But again, you're avoiding the question. Do you think a 16 year old taking a sexual picture of themselves should be illegal or not?
The legal age of consent in Japan is 13.... well there's your problem.
"The Japanese Agricultural Ministry is not responsible for child porn."
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Yes, obviously child porn is bad... that this is already a horrible piece of dogmatic reasoning, is not even the worsed of it. What is next?
Read up on "The people vs Harry Flint". Why did so many people come to the defence of a porn peddler? A crude porn peddler at that? Why defend a guy selling smuts with a few crude and insulting attackings on decent public people thrown in? (Some child porn addicts call this parody/satire) Because of this:
First they came...
It might be one of the most paraphrased quotes in history but it remains extremely valid. Remember, the guy who said it was a nazi symphatizer. Or to put it in this context, the anti-porn peddler hit by anti-depravity laws.
"obviously child porn is bad". I call this dogmatic because it leaves no room for argument, this is the classic tactic of the dictator. "Obviously X is bad" has been used countless times. Put communism in place for X and you got the McCarthy trials. Put independent woman and you got the witch hunts. And you can't argue against it, because it is obvious. You get to the point that just arguing against it becomes a crime by itself.
Child porn is the moralists dream. Nobody can argue that sex with a toddler should be allowed, so you have won the entire argument and then it becomes just a matter of constantly increasing the definition of child and eventually porn. Different countries have different ages of consent. Do you REALLY want the entire world to have to accept the age of consent of the most puritan nation on earth? Plenty of arguments to raise the age to 21. Say bye bye to any porn and once you accepted that to any nudity. Venus the Milo? Could be under 21, FORBIDDEN!
One of the indicators that the people who want to introduce these bans have not so hidden agenda's is that they talk bull shit. Japan is introducing censorship because of international pressure. Funny, Japan goes on whaling despite international pressure. It keep denying its warcrimes despite international pressure. But the one thing that could benefit the Japanese content industry like Sony, that they act upon. Oh, you don't see how censorhip of CP can benefit Sony?
Simple, file sharing networks are filled with CP and copyrighted content. Ban them for the CP and the copyrighted content follows. Freedom of exchange information means CP. Can't be helped, just asked the people behind Freenet. By its very nature the founders of freenet support CP because that has become the ultimate test of free anonymous speech. If you support that people have the right, the need, to be able to share any document without fear of reprisal, then you support the exchange of CP in practice.
It is simple really, freedom is the freedom to do really bad things. If you are free to drink, then you are free to drink yourself to death. If you are free to buy a rope, then you are free to hang yourself (remember that one of the first things they do when you freedom is removed in a jail, you are stopped from having the means to commit suicide).
Freedom is not some limited concept. You can't say: "well you can't do these things because a lot of people find them disgusting" because there will always be someone somewhere who finds something disgusting. You might not like 2 girls 1 cup but you would like it even less if all the content of the world had to pass through the approval of some Utah citizen.
But because of Dogma, if you want to protect freedom, you are defending the CP peddlers. It is almost impossible to fight this and I am fairly certain we will come to regret this. "Daddy, where were you when they took freedom away". "Why, I was thinking of you my dear, I killed your freedom to protect you."
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Ahem...
The US is not the Western World.
In Australia sexual education began in primary school with the simplified explanation of reproduction (where to babies come from). The majority of sex ed is in highschool, this focuses on both the scientific (explanation of ovulation, gametes, cell division) and the social aspects (contraception, peer pressure, STI's) of sex. Much like with drug education it's written and conducted in a way that it does not promote the sex rather it accepts that teenagers are going to have sex so you may as well know how to do it safely. Socially, sex is not viewed as evil and dangerous in Australia, which is one of the many reasons Senator Conroy seems like such a nut case (well, he is) and has essentially gotten nowhere with his plans.
Then again here it's not unusual to see a naked breast or simulated sex (I.E. grinding under the covers) on the telly here and we are a lot less liberal about these things then many mainland European nations.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
..., how breasts used to sometimes be shown on public TV, ...
That is more a sexual confusion amongst Americans, not Westerners. Europe has had breasts on TV since forever.
- These characters were randomly selected.
i really dont think child porn is wrong... dont understand me wrong and come calling me "fucking pedo", read the rest of the comment before.
of course child being raped is wrong, but i dont think child pornography itself is, i really dont see why society thinks that sex is wrong and child should be protected. what impact having sex in childhood will have in adult life? sex isnt harmful, is something natural.
imo child porn will be like homosexualism, today it is a crime and everybodys agrees that it is wrong, but eventually it will be accepted as a normal thing...
Sir, sir, just show the doctors where the evil man touched you so we can help catch him. By your vehemence and demeanor, I would say you have been molested as a child or have fantasied about molesting a child or both. In fact most sexual predators are hard-wired into the behavior/trait before they are teens. Especially with pedophilia. It can not be cured, which is the sad thing. It is not often controlled either, which is sadder. Drugs, aversion therapy, counseling, incarceration or all of the above combined does not work. Most teen age offenders, by the time they are caught, and we are talking about teen agers still when caught, have offended at least 10 times, on average. We did a course on pedophilia and the treatment of it during my senior year of college. As I went on to work towards my MA, yay!!!! one more year (hate having to work and go to school plus do internships) we have covered it some more in some course work that deals with treating incarcerated clients. From what I have learned from classes and with talk after class with two professors who have worked at separate institutions studying and treating adolescent sex offenders, the rate of cure is 0%. Neither one will say they successfully treated any of the clients, even ones who completed a three year program without re-offending during those three years. That speaks louder than anything I can think of.
Lets be realistic, the majority of human beings aren't that. And if the majority aren't crazy like that it makes no sense to create laws expecting people to act like that. Lets put it simple, if you saw someone murdered on tape you wouldn't go and murder somebody would you? Because you have a conscience right?
It has been shown, in multiple studies, that pornography leads to sexual deviancy and inconsistent expectations of sex -- and that individuals will seek out to attempt these acts. Pornography is based on lust and greed. Those two fellows tend to erode a person's sense of morality to the point where they, like you, completely lose their sense of morality. One year ago, you probably considered even the CONCEPT of having child pornography as something despicable. Now, if you bother to look, you're advocating the filth. It's not the world that's changed -- you've probably even degraded to the point where you'll tell me that there's not even such a thing as "right" and "wrong" because those are oh so relative!
The greatest flaw in your psychopathic argument, however, is your disregard for disregard. Normal individuals will see movies where people are murdered and banks are robbed. They will chuckle and label the deeds as "bad" or "misbehavior" and move on. Normal individuals, however, will not masturbate to pictures of death and thievery. Sexuality is one of humanity's most powerful stimuli, and it becomes very dangerous in the hands of people who have lost their sense of right and wrong.
Come on man, you call yourself corporate suit. Let me guess, you are a borderline sociopath who can't get laid and who unlike a normal person cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality?
Unlike you, I do have a conscience and I know right from wrong. I also know the difference between fantasy and reality. Reality is a lot less fun.
If you think pornography makes people into crazed maniacs who are morally bankrupt then explain why Japan has lower incidents of rape and murder than the USA? They have the most pornography so shouldn't they have the most murder? They have prostitution so shouldn't they have the most rapes?
Wouldn't it be logical to create an animated child porn industry? Cartoon child porn would reduce demand for actual child porn according to your logic.
If the goal is to reduce demand without reducing liberty, fake child porn accomplishes that goal.
Any person who ADVOCATES child pornography and is, himself, not a paedophile is a GRIEVIOUSLY misled individual.
I seriously hope you're kidding.
By that logic, someone who advocates going to psychiatric counselling is a psychiatrist.
Better yet, someone who casually engages in debates on the side ofa communist government is a communist?
please.
All the people here are advocating is legal reform such that things that have no victims are not crimes. Legal justice, fairness and logical laws.
The term pedophile is thrown around way too much nowadays. I think it needs a bit of clarification.
There are two definitions of a pedophile. One is a "legal" term and one is a psychological condition.
Legally, a pedophile is defined as a person over the age of 18 who has had or attempted sexual relations with a minor/child. The law typically designates minors as those under the age of 18 (although this varies per state/country).
Psychologically speaking, a pedophile is a person who exhibits a sexual preference for prepubescent children. Since puberty begins and ends at different times for different people (see Saaya Irie age 11), this definition is quite different from the legal definition. That is to say, underage is not the same as prepubescent.
An adult, one might be attracted to, or aroused by, a post-pubescent female under 18. Does that make them a pedophile? I don't think so.
Japan doesn't seem to make the distinction for 18 years as some kind of magical age that confers the ability to make healthy decisions regarding one's sexuality. The Japanese are a bit more liberal regarding the blurry line between adolescence and adulthood.
As Westerners we're uncomfortable with their attitude. However, using terms like child pornography as a label for any nudity or mild sexualization of those under 18 years old seems a bit extreme. I'm not sure that it's reasonable to label any topless photo of a 16 year old as child pornography. But I realize that it may be a slippery slope.
I would hope we can find a way to protect children from harm, while still maintaining a realistic attitude about post-adolescent sexuality.
Mr. Suit... Thank you. I should like to shake your hand.
Humans are terrible replicators of Godly things.
I would just like to note that I do not condone the abuse of children, but CP != child abuse.
While some CP is little 5 yo girls being raped, the vast majority is likely to be 17 yo girls who took and distributed the pictures themselves.
And the amount of hate and non understanding surrounding the viewers of CP is amazing.
Their is not something that happens magically on a child's 18th birthday that suddenly makes then sexy. and people ages cannot even be accurately guessed to within more then a few years.
The charging of 17 yos for distributing pictures of themselves, and normal people with a few pictures of lolicon on their HDD, just takes time and valuable resources away from catching the real CP makers and distributors.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
So, if I'm 16, I can have a girlfriend, and we can have sex, but I can't take a picture of it?
Up until a few years ago the ABC, operating out of our nations capital in the ACT, was the only entity allowed to distribute X rated pornography in the country. Ironically no entity in Australia was technically allowed to produce the material, leading to a ludicrous situation in which it was produced in black markets and then legitimized by our government-funded broadcasting commission.
Read on how pornography encourages, and leads to sexual deviancy
You lost me at "sexual deviancy". What's that supposed to mean? Not fucking in a missionary position?
The troll has been defused. You can stop feeding it now.
> 2 copies of the same picture of the same abuse does not mean more abuse than 1 copy of the picture of that abuse.
So, would you like it if you were known as the "star" of some famous CP? Would you mind people looking at that if it was you that was abused? Is there nothing at all between draconian censorship of everything and free-CP-for-all?
People often say that it doesn't lead to more child exploitation. But can you really say that when you look at the pornography on your computer, you don't want to do it? And what about the fact that, fairly often, they're buying these pictures?
Of course, it makes a lot of sense to block child porn (which we really should call "images of child abuse") for the general public while it remains available for pedophiles through proxies and "secret" networks. This way, the general public will not push politicians and law enforcement departments to fight child porn. Pedophiles should be happy.
no, I don't have a sig
Gets better though. International lobbying to "protect the children" has ensured that erotic pictures of people under 18, is generally considered child-porn; even in jurisdictions where the age of consent isn't 18. (i.e. most countries, the norm for age-of-consent is more like 15-16)
That's right: You can be a 17 year old Norwegian couple, and screw eachothers brains out, perfectly legally. However, if you document it, by taking pictures, then exchange those pictures with eachothers, then BOTH of the participants are guilty of production, distribution and possession of child-porn.
How's -that- for absurd ?
That is more a sexual confusion amongst Americans, not Westerners. Europe has had breasts on TV since forever.
America is a prude nation is that regard. Just adds to the gasp factor for them. I was just using it as another general bullet but it wasn't the basis of my argument. Oddly enough, modern Japanese television shows shy away form it much more than they used to.
I wonder if slashdotter's vision of Asians are only that of super-models who have had their noses broken to reshape them and breast implants? (I don't mean you specifically Rakshasa Taisab.) That is what the prostitutes did to get the interest of the westerner around the army bases. It's a shame though because of the very false image it creates.
Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
The biggest problem with child pornography and paedophilia is that it has become a thought crime.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1035315/Father-branded-pervert--photographing-children-public-park.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/7474968.stm
http://www.shropshirestar.com/latest/2008/09/08/town-park-staff-to-quiz-adults/
It's not just abuse of "Think of the children" even Steve Jobs comes out with the age old you-can't-discuss-this-unless-you-have-kids.
http://www.iphoneincanada.ca/iphone-news/gawker-media-vs-steve-jobs-in-email-flame-war/
In the UK this subject cannot be discussed rationally, without a angry mob of vigilantes coming around to your house e.g.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4719364.stm
When the satirical TV show "Brass Eye" covered the media and public reaction to paedophilia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brass_Eye#Paedophilia_special_.282001.29 thousands of people complained and public figures denounced it as sick despite it's ironic nature.
A proper discussion includes considering all aspects and viewpoints before coming to a conclusion. However, if you do not immediately take a severe stance against paedophiles even for the sake of argument, you must therefore be one of them. And you must be hurt.
Hence, posting AC otherwise someone could trace this back to me and my life would be fucked regardless of my true opinion.
Well, since this was posted by CorporateSuit, I'd say he was referring to anything that doesn't involve bending over and grabbing your ankles ;).
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Protip: frothing at your mouth on an online forum doesn't evoke an emotional response besides amusement and/or annoyance. Talking about "breaking bones" isn't a bucket of cold water, it's noise, and will be filtered out as such. And calling anyone who dares talk about child pornography without getting hysterical a "sick fuck" doesn't "wake up" anyone, it just makes you seem like an idiot and the people you attempted to insult as the smart ones by contrast.
Another protip: Slashdot servers are located in the USA, so if the FBI wants the IP addresses of the poster, they can get them, making your "I'd turn them over" stance quite redundant.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
"obviously xxxx is bad... but" is the phrase which people use when they actually want to defend a thing but the debate is so tainted by bigotry that they dare not simply launch their defence. They first have to calm their overheated and often irrational opponent - by basically conceding the bulk of the argument from the outset.
With no emotion you wouldn't favour anything, hate anything, you wouldn't be motivated one way or the other. It's your emotions which set you going and rationality and logic that determines the course you need to take to get there.
Don't fool yourself. Everybody on both sides of this debate is driven by emotion. If they weren't they would have no view on the matter.
In that hypothetical scenario, do you support prosecuting that 16 year old girl? Yes or No. BTW, if you say no, then you (by your own statements) are enabling sexual predators to rape a child. If you say yes you lack enough common sense for anyone to bother taking any more of your comments seriously.
Well, gee, let's see, um, so you basically are telling me there's no right way to answer the question you say I'm dodging? Obviously, not warranting your trap question with an answer was the best answer I could have given, and should speak volumes for my common sense.
What is becoming patently obvious is that you are choosing not to answer the question because you already know that if you answer the question then it becomes obvious that your position is untenable. You've painted yourself into such a corner that you desperately don't want to do that, and so you refuse to answer the question. This is not a trap or trick question, it's not something like "when did you stop beating your wife?", it's simply a question about how your position applies to a simple and very relevant situation - people have been found guilty in such situations in the US, so it's not even hypothetical. It's like you saying "if I had to think about your argument, then I would have to either support a contradiction or admit that I'm wrong, so I lose either way. It then speaks volumes about my common sense that I refuse to think about your argument." You are certainly right about the last part. Good job to QCompson.
If I have copies of pictures someone else took of a DUI-caused car accident including the victims, should I be prosecuted for possessing pictures of a crime?
Mod Me Up. You'll make a grown man cry.
I mean, it's a picture of a crime, not a crime itself.
Otherwise, half of the Rotten.com (not linked 'cause NSFW) website would be illegal.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I didn't realize /. had such a large number of NAMBLA members.
My point was NOT about CP, but about when you allow censorship of one thing, you open the flood gates for censoring of everything else.
As I predicted, you would tear me down for promoting CP, because I dare to argue against restriction of free speech.
It don't matter what rules for censorship you come up with, someone else will extend them. The proof? Check the list of banned sites by the Australian internet filter. That was for CP. So what are sites about drugs and suicide and other ideas unrelated to CP doing on that list?
READ the quote I linked and try to see past "but I don't like jews either" and realize that no matter who YOU are, if that list is allowed, then you are going to be on it sooner or later. The nazi's were never going to run out of people they considered to a drain on society and the censors are never going to run out of material they find objectionable.
But hey, no worries because anyone who dares to argue against censorship with you, is a pedo right?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
At this point I'm pretty much resigned to the fact otherwise intelligent people, sometimes even trained empirical sciences, will make claims about the obviousness of childporn. "Obviously, CP is bad." Really? And upon what foundation do you make that claim? I wish I could even get agitated about this anymore, but the queue of people without principles extends far beyond my capacity to deal with it.
Tell me about what is "obviously" bad about a child making pornography and posting it to the net? What is "obviously" bad about an image of a naked teenager? What is "obviously" wrong about a record of lovemaking? All of these are included in your category of CP.
The only thing obvious to me is a now inborn instinct against knowledge of what exactly child pornography is. And from that, any conclusion can be had.
Enjoy your police state, motherfuckers!
With real CP a real child got hurt, but with hentai and lolicon...
Who says children are hurt in child pornography?
What about a 12 year old who jerks off on his webcam and posts it online? Was he hurt? Those who say yes have to develop a complex fiction about who may or may not end up seeing it, the purported harms of pornography, the fact the child "doesn't really understand" what could happen --as if any of us can know what will happen when we get involved in anything. Perhaps a stalker will track YOU down from your twitter feed and cut your head off. "You didn't really understand" what Twitter was about.
It takes only the slightest bit of principled thinking to realize that the category "child pornography" is at least as broad as that of "adult pornography." When you look at adult pornography, do you see one thing, or many kinds of things? Are some of these things offensive? Are many of these things innoffensive? Are most people in adult porn out to hurt people?
But something now makes it impossible to generalize thinking from one category to another. That something is... I'm sure you can figure it out.
Child porn is evidence of child prostitution in some cases and child abuse in others.
You're an astrophysicist who believes in only two categories of heavenly bodies, planets and stars. You're a rocket scientist who only believes in up and down. You're a philosopher who believes in nothing but true and false. You're an empiricist who goes on faith, by what other people have told you, and a statistician who makes generalizations from a handful of examples.
But you're not much of an expert in child pornography.
If I were a pedophile, and having pictures or drawings could land me in prison, I would go out and get the real thing instead, why try to be satisfied with just pictures if the punishment for that and the real thing are the same anyway?
Are Jenna Jamenson video's illegal? She was only 17 when she started in the porn industry, but faked her age. I saw it on a VH1 special about her. So are all Jenna Jamenson fans pedophiles? If I looked for her first film would that be child pornography? I also probably spelled her name wrong, but I'm not about to Google her name to double check being at work and all...
My advice to anyone who has a Jenna Jameson video, immediately destroy it. Physically pull the film out of the tape and either dump it in acid or burn it beyond recovery. Then bury it somewhere so that the feds can't dig it out of the trash someday.
If its on your computer then you better wipe with an NSA level wipe after encrypting the file system. It's illegal enough that you could get years in prison just for one picture, and if its a movie you'll probably be treated as a pedophile and make the list/registry.
And it is very regulated in Europe on time and how it can be shown, something that janet jackson event would of failed. if you want examples do a search for that time frame and there was a big stink in europe because part of a female breast was shown during prime time as part of a educational surgury.