Slashdot Mirror
MP Seeking To Outlaw Written Accounts of Child Abuse
First time accepted submitter Anduril1986 writes "A UK Conservative MP is seeking to expand censorship in another 'think of the children' debate. The plan this time is to make it illegal to possess written accounts of child abuse. According to Sir Paul Beresford, the MP for Mole Valley such writing 'fuels the fantasies' of offenders and could lead to the physical abuse of children."
Something this fool of a politician should read: Three reasons possession of child porn must be re-legalized in the coming decade by Rickard Falkvinge.
Liberty in your lifetime
This is the logical culmination. We've already had decisions that making a sexual cartoon involving Bart Simpson is child porn http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7770781.stm. This isn't much farther than that.
What a bastion of freedom.
How can something be fought if it is illegal to describe it? How do you get people onside, if you can't describe what they are supposed to be opposing. Saying "Trust me" doesn't really cut it.
It's about time someone is passing a law against any written words about any illegal or illicit activity. Let's burn all the crime mysteries since they just foster and encourage people to commit crimes and murders. And those thrillers that glorify spies and espionage are a clear threat to governments anywhere. Any book that describes any immoral activity should be immediately banned as well, if no one reads about adultery they'll never commit adultery.
From now on, only stories about unicorns and rainbows should be allowed to be published.
Child abuse is abhorrent and should be severely punished, but is there any evidence that reading any type of extreme (or non-extreme) porn leads one to perform that activity?
So... this would apply to police reports also, right? Or it's only illegal if you're not Law Enforcement?
But overall this is nothing more than the thought police coming around again. "Now that we control the pictures, we must control the words!"
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
Pretty soon it will be illegal to "think of the children".
The year is 1984, and thoughtcrime is death.
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
Read the links before you mod the post. The toxicity that exists around the subject impairs most people from having a serious discussion about the subject, and instead rely on the reaction they've been trained to have. Try to resist this reaction as you read the following two well-written articles:
http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-must-be-re-legalized-in-the-coming-decade/
http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-bad-as-you-think-theyre-much-much-worse/
"could lead to the physical abuse of children."
So not only does it want to ban the material entirely because of a few 'bad guys', he also doesn't even know if what he's saying is actually true. Can we ban all books and other media depicting any violence or sexual content whatsoever because they could (but likely wouldn't actually be the cause of it) lead a minuscule portion of the population to commit crimes, too? Actually, can we just ban moronic politicians? They are, without a doubt, ruining just about everything, for everyone.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Goodby Lord of the Flies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_of_the_Flies
Feel free to say goodby to other great books. Add them to the list.
It's OK, it for the good of the children...
Why is Snark Required?
What about courts, jury's, attorneys, ECT?
I was molested as a child (by a relative, but not my parents), and it seriously messed me up. When I was a teen, I sought help though online support groups, and really healed a lot though talking about it. I'm still not really normal, but it could have been a lot worse. Should I be prosecuted for posting my story (including some details) online in the forum where I received so much help?
This is utterly absurd.
UK already has secret witnesses, that can give testimony/lies unchallenged to the court without the defendant being able to hear or challenge them. If this gets its way another part of the prosecution of people will be kept secret and we won't be able to check on how the courts are performing. If people can't see the inner workings of the courts then how can they check the court is working???
So in court lies will be spouted about what happened, and they can do it knowing that people who know the truth that would reveal the perjury will never be able to see the account, and thus the perjury will go unpunished.
It will expose everyone to a bogus child abuse claim.
Look at the Cleveland Child abuse scandal, where some nutter from social services started doing anal dilatation tests on kids and got it into her head all these kids were being abused up the bum, because she'd just been on a course and pumped full of BS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_child_abuse_scandal
They (Dr Marietta Higgs and Dr Geoffrey Wyatt) destroyed many families, and ruined the lives of many children, and yet if the evidence was secret, she would never have been revealed as a quack.
They got convictions against many parents (most subsequently overturned), foster parents the children were sent to were prosecuted, neighbours, you name it, they brought a child abuse case them.
The step to other 'bad' texts is not far. Soon you can't say that Christians are really, really nice folks whereas the Jews and the Moslems are bad people and destroy the will Earth. Soon yoy can't say that atheists are the only well founded cynics. Soon you can't look for similarities between Adolf Hitler, Idi Amin, Dolly Parton, Patrick Dempsey, George W Bush, Pol Pot, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Johnny Weissmüller. Soon you can't find uncensored books. The step to other 'bad' texts is not far, so stop this reasoning about making it illegal to possess written accounts of child abuse. The small steps are more treacherous than you may think now.
Look at all the people copying other types of accounts of wars and slavery and homicidal killing sprees...
oh wait they aren't...
I'm not voting FOR the ability to do it... I'm just saying... reducing our rights further, blah, blah, it's not
even in the US, so yay for fascism. George Orwell.
-AI
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
You find that there are books of child abuse stories. These are not out there for pervy fantasies, they are out there to help other victims. They can read the accounts, understand they are not alone in what happened to them. Likewise writing about it can help people come to terms with it, to remember and cope with the past.
Are there pervs who get their kicks on it? Probably. But hey, people seem to get their kicks on all kinds of things. I've never got foot fetishists myself but there you go. However it is far more valuable for victims as a means for dealing with and understanding what happened to them. Victims of child abuse can feel like they alone in the world experienced this. Stories of other survivors can help them see that they are not alone.
Politicians should not be able to vote on any legal issues of which they have not actually been a victim.
All of this think of the children BS could go straight out the door except for issues raised and voted on by the sexually abused population.
Although I suppose that would give politicians the go-ahead to vote on 'Drug War' laws here in the US, based on how many DC politician reps snort blow.
Big Brother is good. That is all.
... comes very simplistic ideas
You see, the idea proposed by that MP is so simplistic
It supposed to go this way --- See no evil, hear no evil, read no evil, think no evil, and you suppose to do no evil
Will it work?
For simple minded folks, perhaps it would
But ... and this is important, the world we live in is filled with people with all kinds of not-that-simple minds
Even without reading, hearing, seeing any of the "evil" we still can think not-so-nice thoughts
Almost most of us stop at the thinking stage, but some don't seem to be able to control, and commit the crime.
Or, put it in another way, simple ideas do work, but only limited to those with simple minds.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Because there's plenty of horrendous accounts in that text.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
This article was up the other day, it has a shocking description of how abuse happens and the thought process of the abuser. Was that necessary to the overall article? It certainly caused a bit of controversy. Overall however the article presents pedophiles not as a pure embodiment of evil but as sick people who need help and counseling. That is, distinguishing pedophiles from child molesters who have acted on that impulse. It seems that allowing people who have such a bent to get help and counseling without completely destroying their lives would be better to society overall than being out for their blood or driving them to suicide from despair. Strangely the description in the article while sickening did add a human angle to the problem and helped me personally to not jump to condemn someone who might be sexually stuck as a 12 year old in an adult's body. Just... get... help.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
It should be illegal to think about other people harming children. That way, it would be illegal to pass laws like this. And, from their arguments for such silly laws, if you don't think about it, it doesn't happen.
Learn to love Alaska
Maybe this will make it illegal to read the Koran.
--Lee Daniel Crocker : http://www.etceterology.com My life is in the public domain.
Remember Linda Lovelace? When Labour introduced the extreme porn bill, that made it a sex crime (something that would put you on a register and bar you for life from many jobs), part of the argument brought was the claim by Linda Lovelace. She claimed that she was always held at gunpoint and when you see her on a video she is being raped.
THIS IS A LIE, it was investigated by the FBI and found to be a lie. She simply regretted her career when she married a religious man.
Yet the evidence of it is largely illegal now to possess. You can't point to her claim and say it was a lie, because you'll be raided by the police and prosecuted for sex crimes. I can describe a video in which she had sex with a dog, and was clearly really enjoying it, but to have that video would land you in jail.
What if I can no longer describe it? What if the mere words discussion something are themselves a crime?
It seems that we've gone down the wrong road, conflating possession of evidence with the act itself, and now he's doing the logical thing of attacking even discussion of it.
Linda Lovelace did a dog, she enjoyed it, I can't point to the evidence, but I can say that people lied about it for their own aims, those lies resulted in a bad law being passed which is being abused by the police. Yet I can't show you the evidence because it is a crime to show the evidence.
I do not think you have thought it all the way through.
When victims of child abuse go to the courts, the stenographer will do...what exactly? Write down everything that is said. Right?
On the plus side the jail is right there. After court is over you can take the stenographer right over to the holding cell.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Meanwhile, physical and sexual abuse of children in the form of male genital mutilation continues to be ignored.
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3113343&cid=41320355 mentions exemptions for things like Lolita.
There is a difference between actual art and titillating trash, but sometimes it's not obvious where to draw the line
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
Soon it'll be illegal for the police to keep records of child abuse on file. So then it no longer exist. And the world is a better place...?
It is proven that birth leads in 100% of cases to death, hence, we will defeat death itself by this move.
Please do not let the religious fundamentalists know about it.
No matter which religion they are from - Christians or Islam - because for them, their respective true prophet never die.
You see, defeating death is no longer news to them any more - Their respective prophets had already achieved that unimaginable feat a long, long time ago.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
If you don't hear about it, it must not exist? You may be unwilling to look upon the darkest evil and depravity that our species has to offer, but I assure you that hiding your eyes will not make it go away. Sure, it's an easy solution to make you feel better, but perhaps you should expend a little more mental effort and try to come up with a better solution.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Danaerys was 13 (15 on TV) when she got impregnated by Kahl Drogo. That's rape and its description is child pornographie. Even if she consented in the book, it is worse in the TV series. Millions of viewers are criminals now and those who read the books are even worse off.
Going to make presenting those sworn statements in court cases problematic.
And handling the records in the govt. child protections orgainizations ....
(Idiot)
the way i see pedophilia: it's sort of like being a homosexual, it's an innate biological desire
biologically, if you are born a pedophile, it's like being born with cancer. through no fault of your own, your genetics has created a mind that finds the wrong thing to focus on sexually. it's a biological error. it's "wrong", it's an "error" BIOLOGICALLY, because attraction to the same sex or prepubescent children results in no offspring
however, homosexuality is not MORALLY wrong, because it is between consenting adults. therefore, homosexuality should be 100% legal
meanwhile, pedophilia means you are attracted to someone whereby any actions you take on your attraction results in inevitable psychological harm, because a prepubescent child can never informed consent to sex. and you have permanently warped their self-image, confidence, and how they think about transgressive, inappropriate, unwanted behavior at a very impressionable age. you've done real substantial damage to another human being. simply by acting on your erroneous but innate and irremovable desires as a pedophile
what a horrible hell
the worst part is, if i am correct about pedophilia being like homosexuality, we must admit then that it can never be cured. you can't cure homosexuality (nor should you try)
but then if pedophilia is an innate biological attraction, it means you are dealing with a human being who is doomed. i mean really, really doomed. to a lifetime of suffering. they must continually suppress their natural desires. what does this do to their happiness? or, act on their desires, and be a horrible transgressive criminal. that's their choice
what a horrible curse. cancer sounds better
willpower is not infinite. no matter how moral the person. therefore everyone who is a pedophile is a potential time bomb. you simply cannot trust them on their own in society
perhaps this explains why so many pedophiles are attracted to the priesthood. as a moral person, who is aware they carry around a permanent desire that means they are in constant danger of acting immorally in a moment of weakness, their reaction is to embrace moral fortitude as hard as they can. and yet so many still fall, and still transgress against children, simply because you are dealing with a strong innate desire and the human mind is not a steel cage, we all have moments of weakness
someday, they will be alone with a child, through accident or chance, no matter how hard they try not to be, and if that day overlaps with a moment of weakness, that we all have, then you have doomed an innocent child to suffer a transgression which will screw them up psychologically. imagine carrying around this curse!
we are left with a horrible conclusion: the only way to "treat" pedophiles, in my mind, is permanent banishment from society
it is an awful thought
but i honestly cannot think of a superior arrangement if pedophilia is like homosexuality and is therefore innate. such people, once identified, simply cannot be allowed to roam freely in society where there is also children, because we have as our duty as moral people to understand the danger they present to children, and themselves
permanent banishment. can anyone think of a better way? castration has been shown to not work. but my mind finds it an inescapable conclusion about the nature of the pedophilia, if i understand it correctly
depressing
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
It's 100% clear. He just wants to erase the lists of public figure child molestors. So it works for the pedofiles, not against them. If someone rapes his child and he reports it, the minute he fills in on a piece of paper a complaint, that's a 1 item pedo list so off he goes to jail and the list is destroyed.
... didn't "Let the Right One In" when they cast their votes. See what I did there?
Great, so actual testimony of child abuse from people who were abused as children will become much more difficult to acquire -> this is what this law will functionally become once implemented. Very nice to bring this up while most of the continent is embroiled in sex scandals involving younger children -> it's a backdoor attempt to outlaw such testimony.
I am John Hurt.
Oh, such writing 'fuels the fantasies' of offenders?
Please do share your expertise on the psychology of child abusers.
Seriously though, can we not support MPs that think they should push for new law based on their own opinion. I'd have no real problem if this law was being proposed following an unbiased and comprehensive study which strongly suggests that the passing of this law will make a significant difference to the frequency and severity of child abuse cases (and I do mean "significant" here as a law banning the possession of any kind of written material is a serious infringement on human rights, one few who have thought carefully about it would support without a very good reason).
What about students who need to do assignments about child abuse - they would be breaking such a law!
The slope is long and slippery, and leads down a long way. We'd never agree to a great leap downwards, but every incremental movement downwards is easier than a nudge in the opposite direction.
In other words, this MP is severely 'tarded. Alas, so are many regular folks.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
An excellent plan. It builds on the proven success of banning swear words, thereby stopping perverts from going around having this ... sex stuff.
I for one approve this MP's attempt to ban Charles Dickens novels.
__
Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
He's right wing, so I'm surprised he's literate enough to understand the big words in the article.
Have you noticed how people to the right of the political spectrum always seem a bit less intelligent, and have a noticeably lower reading comprehension age?
Man, the description of those poor kids being abused in the workhouse and forced to steal by Fagin. What kind of sick pervert could pen such filth? My eyes! My eyes!
I'm tired of the way taglines from the Simpsons get abused. This is not a mob of ignorant Springfielders demanding that we set up a Bear Patrol. This is an attempt to do something about child abuse, That is, as you may have heard, a real problem.
Now, you may not care for the argument that depictions of a sexual act cause people to rush out and perform that sexual act. I myself think that it's not very credible. But a lot of people believe it's true. And it's not because they're stupid or hysterical. They simply interpret the evidence differently from you and me.
We desperately need to squash the idea that anybody who disagrees with you is an idiot who needs to be shouted down. It's distorting everything we do, from the way comments are moderated on Slashdot to the viability of pizza making. Oh yeah, and it's making political debate just a little incoherent.
So now pedophiles who want to do the right thing and try and control their urges through reading stories and (for a while now this has been illegal) viewing cartoons will not have those outlets, continue to be pushed towards actual abuse before getting help when it will be far too late and a child will have already have been destroyed by abuse.
the object of sexual attraction is biologically innate
so you can put a criminal in jail, and they mature and develop impulse control, and when they get out of jail the person can actually be cured of criminal behavior for the rest of their lives. but once a pedophile, always a pedophile, forever. nothing cures it. so your analogy does not stand. pedophilia is not criminal behavior, it's innate biological behavior
as for your second paragraph:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3113343&cid=41321067
finally, i'm trying to honestly search for the best moral answer to a morally difficult situation. you do yourself no favors by heaping scorn on me. you are ignorant or blind to the seriousness and complexity of the problem of pedophilia if you think the answer is simple. only if the answer was simple would your level of scorn be appropriate for my hesitancy
finally, you also do yourself no favors by misrepresenting what i say:
i said nothing remotely like that. this is just some weird fear of yours talking, this weird idea has nothing to do with what i said, and what you said is easy to prove as a completely invalid, laughable inference
i mean if we are going to say the kind of law the top story is referencing is a form of hysteria, we can also point to posts like yours as another kind of hysteria as well. we need less hysteria all around, period
so next time calm the bleep down, take a deep breath, then post
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I'd just like to point out that the MP in question is not English - he is from New Zealand - and his qualification to have an opinion on the subject is that he is a dentist (true). It really isn't the fault of the rest of us that Mole Valley is full of people so stupid they would elect a New Zealand dentist to represent them so long as he was a Conservative. It's in Surrey, where former civil servants and bankers are released into the community.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Tough on the causes of thoughts.
Yup, that's right. We'd turn the victims who were trying to prove themselves no longer victims by being the abuser into victims again.
And I would suspect paedophilia isn't anywhere near as prevalent as you think. Most of what you hear of in conjunction with haebophilia is actually interest in post-pubescent children but usually what you get with anti-CP laws. Remember, the minimum age in most countries below which you're engaging in distribution of ILLEGAL porn is a picture of a nude 18 year old.
A picture of a naked 17 year old IS NOT kiddie porn as far as paedophilia is concerned. But when a stash of 14-20 year old girl pics is hauled in, the report will be of kiddie porn being destroyed.
Yup, incest. Multiple times, premeditated.
They can start with the Qur'an and hadith
Bart Simpson being choked is *not* abuse, but if you draw him having sex that *is*??? Not only that it's consensual sex in the cartoon, yet whether it was 'abuse' never could be questioned, because the language is defined now that underage sex is abuse (Bart has been '10' for 22 years now, although he's actually voiced by an adult woman).
The thinking is all broken there.
Prosecutors with dodgy cases would add a child abuse allegation simply to be able to suppress the evidence from public scrutiny. Just as now they make terrorism claims to make use of the 'state-secrets' doctrine in the US. If you create a path for abuse of the legal system, it will be abused.
The situation now with divorce cases is that the wife will throw in an unsubstantiated claim of abuse in order to gain sole custody. The risk for them is that false claim is open to inspection outside. What if they can shut down the details of the divorce case simply by adding in a claim of abuse?
He should be ashamed.
There are a lot of genre's within Anime/Manga but the "harem" genre (one lead of one gender, multiple other genders) have long since had the lolicon character. A child like character who for some reason is part of the group. A child genius bumped up several classes or whatever.
But this caught some critism, so what did happen a lot suddenly? An older character, just with an under-developed body. Still pretty much the same, just the supposed age is different. And the character still cutely reacts with small fisted fury at being talked to like a child.
English versions of more erotic Anime/Manga often deal with age issues bij simply raising the age of all the characters to 18, regardless of how obviously wrong it is.
All a writer of child abuse porn has to do is state that X is 18+ somewhere, not mention a minor age anywhere else and then just write the story as before. The audience can easily imagine the implied age if they want to do so.
Hell, the internet is full of porn where something is implied, that isn't really taking place. For that matter, so is "mainstream" media or do you think most Hollywood stars have real sex on the big screen?
Thought crime this is not quite yet but it is damned close. Start outlawing fantasy and only outlaws will have fantasies and anyone who has fantasies, will be an outlaw.
But sure, you aren't defending pedo fantasies?
Ah... you got me.
Fighting the evil was so much easier when the evil went after adult porn. You could stand up for Larry Flint, but for a child porn writer? Not so much. The evil has won, they have the perfect weapon.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
The first thing I thought is, how are we going to record any actual child abuse? How about social workers detailing such events, are they falling foul of the law with their reports?
Probably there will be some exception there.
FTA:
The law would be tightly written, he insisted, to cover obscene writing of a nature "that it must reasonably be assumed to have been produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal".
Only "absolutely vile" material would be targeted, he said
Esli epei etot cumprenan, shris soa Sfaha.
It doesn't stop at Cleveland, Orkneys had their own social workers doing their own brand of pedo panic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ronaldsay_child_abuse_scandal
The took children away from happy families, the children denying any abuse was used as evidence of the strength of the abuse! Eventually the judge threw it out as a garbage case, after a major campaign exposed the case as flawed. Thank god they were able to even discuss it.
Rochdale Satanic abuse cases:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_satanic_ritual_abuse_allegations#Rochdale
Social workers spotted satanic 'indictors' and seized children from 20 homes based on a false accusation, that was later withdrawn:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/sep/24/scotland
Again, she withdrew it after her case was scrutinized publicly, the ability to see how bogus the claims are is what prevented this from destroying 20 families.
Again and again we have malicious actors making false claims, and eager social workers ready to snap up these false claims. It's very likely that many prosecutions for child abuse are wrong, but the claim is so emotionally weighted, that juries think it's better to convict on lack of evidence than let an accusation go unpunished. This would stop even scrutiny of the case.
Long, long ago, I was married to a woman who ridiculously accused me a cheating on her at every turn. At first I thought "cute jealousy" but it persisted. Then it became unreasonable and unrealistic... then disturbing. Turned out that she was a cheater. She was the one cheating and she simply projected her tendencies upon me. And that's when it occured to me how many people see things. Most people tend to see others as they see themselves.
Ben Folds did a song "Trusted" that goes like "It seems to me if you can't trust You can't be trusted" which neatly puts into words how I have come to understand certain bits of individual human behavior. A person who is suspicious of others is a person who is likely to take advantage of others... and on and on and on.
What I'm getting at is all these weird child porn related laws where stories and accounts and other things generated from the minds of people are to be banned, limited, prohibited and criminalized must surely arise from the minds of pedophiles. I realize it seems naive to see things as I do -- that pedophiles need help, and all that, but we are criminalizing thought here. And the legislation is surely coming from the minds of people who would think to think of these things because frankly, it never would have occurred to me that such things would become "erotic material" for someone else.
Surely these legislators are or are connected with pedophiles themselves.
This proposal falls into the beyond-belief-stupid category. Its result will be to prevent public debate; paradoxically it would make it much easier for, say, the Roman Catholic Church to cover up its activities because newspapers would not be allowed to report on what was going on. Most of the public has no idea what child abuse is, and this proposal would prevent them from being educated. This is important because some of the practices of immigrant communities may amount in British law to child abuse, but now you wouldn't be able to tell them that doing such-and-such is illegal. The effect of this proposal would be that it would be illegal to tell Mrs. Patel that female genital mutilation is illegal in language she would understand (hint: she probably doesn't know Latin). By the way, I notice you created a straw man by referring only to sexual abuse. There are plenty of other kinds.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
No, the difference is more subtle. Right-wingers tend, inter pares, to have less intellectual curiosity and are less likely to challenge the status quo. But then, that is more or less a definition of "right wing".
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
FOR FK SAKE IT IS 'CONFIDANT', 'CONFIDANT', 'CONFIDANT'!
Seriously who in their right mind would think 'cosmonaut' is the right word here?
I've built up so much character I have an alter-ego
The problem is that people with a propensity to irrational violence read the Koran and use it to validate their propensity. It works for the Bible too - progressive Christians and Jews regard the glorification of Philistine-bashing in Chronicles as evidence that the Bible is a story of the progress of the Israelites from barbarism to Jesus, backward fundamentalists, both Christian and Jewish, take it as leave to maltreat the Palestinians ("King David did it and he was beloved of God - taking their land is OK").
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Wouldn't this make large swaths of novels like the "Song of Ice & Fire" series illegal? If I remember correctly, Danerys is getting the shit smacked out of her by her older brother in the first few chapters of the first book. It goes downhill from there.
There is a war going on for your mind.
Story about all sorts of crazy sexual encounters.
The the last line, "Oh yeah, they were all 7 years old."
UWAA...
This is such a terrible thing that it doesn't even deserve a serious reply, everyone else pretty much filled that space for me.
This person should be ejected from parliament for being an actual idiot and trying to make it harder to find actual cases of child abuse.
I don't think this idiot realizes that you can find people through the words they type on to whatever website they put it on and figure out whether there is even any truth to it simply by analysing the texts for various clues.
If this does pass, I damn well hope religious texts get banned as well. So many are filled with those "awful awful stories". Let's see how they will react then.
Of course fictional depictions of murder, mayhem, robberies, extraterrestrial imposed genocide including most of the world's children being liquidated, or weaponry among surviving tykes rising up against said aliens is fine to read.
Seandainya Saya Jadi Member dan Franchisee Minimarket Alfamart , Waralaba Alfamart adalah usaha minimarket yang dimiliki dan dioperasikan berdasarkan kesepakatan waralaba dari PT. Sumber Alfaria Trijaya Tbk, selaku pemegang merek Alfamart. Dengan motto “Belanja Puas, Harga Pas” model bisnis Alfamart adalah menjual berbagai kebutuhan sehari- hari dengan harga terjangkau dan berlokasi di sekitar wilayah perumahan.
most people substitute logal decision making with emotional responses. This is why politicians keep playing the for teh children card, it's easy score and since the target audience uses emotions instead of brains it doesn't have to produce a measurable result.
The long term solution is to hand out procreation licences based on the result of an IQ test and to reform education to create people who think for themselves instead of reproducing the lecture without asking themselves a single question in the process. Basically eliminate the record/playback education system.
Currently there is zero reliable evidence child pornography does indeed increase child abuse. There is some indication availability of normal pornography reduces rape significantly, and this may be true for child pornography as well (especially if you think of it as rape) or not. But at this time, we just do not know. We urgently need to find out.
Making laws that include drastic penalties without strong scientific evidence is a very bad idea. There is no scientific evidence in this case, which makes it an even worse idea.
The right approach to child porn is this: Find out who abused the children, arrest them, decide on therapy and punishment. (No, you cannot lock them up forever, you need to help them as well, to make sure they will not do it again.) Same for people trading the stuff for money and hence creating a market. Here, punishment may well be enough. This costs real money and effort though. Making dangerous laws and arresting the people downloading this stuff is so much easier and cheaper. (Fun fact, of 12000 people identified in Germany as possible child porn owners, almost nobody was charged. Numbers are hard to find, but for example in Cologne, of 500 people having had their homes searched, exactly no one was charged. Of course what you find in the media is only the large number. But then, Germany does not have a prison industry either.)
Also needed (and usually conveniently overlooked) are safe therapy offerings for people with the urges that want to get rid of them (which will save a lot of children), and (also usually conveniently overlooked) real help for the children and adults that went through this.
What is not going to work is trying to keep this stuff offline. Attempts can however be conveniently used to establish a censorship infrastructure, and that is why politicians are so interested in this topic. The missing help offers and the going for the easy targets (child porn downloaders instead of those that create and sell this stuff) is quite telling. Also, when they had the "stop-sign" law passed in Germany, the content distribution industry was very much interested to use them as well. (The law has by now been abolished, at great effort, as it obviously did not protect any children at all. What may have helped was that several organizations of people abused as children were strongly against it. These people are basically the only ones that can actually say what they think about these efforts.) Same for the data retention, the content industry is very much interested in this one. Establish it with the specter of child pornography, wait a bit, use it to identify kids downloading music.
What is fascinating though is that as soon as any politician proposes something non-working, non-helping and otherwise extremely dangerous to "protect the children" nobody dares to say anything.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
See, Aussies? This is why they disarmed you: so that when you finally begin to clue in to the fact that certain politicians seem to understand suspiciously well what fuels the fantasies of the twisted and demented, you can't do anything about it...
Next logic step, mind police. Isn't it funny how dystopian novels and films slowly are becoming reality..
Hmm, we should encourage people to write more about perpetual energy since this would lead to the development of perpetual energy.
Laws on prior restraint of speech like they have there would never get past judicial review in the US because of the 1st amendment.
Any law trying to ban the written word would face strict scrutiny unless the material itself is considered obscene. The american legal test requires it to be
"whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." which makes it very hard to prosecute even if they can get a conviction they are often tossed out on appeal.
Amazing what a wanger a certain kind of conservative gets over the thought of a deviant drooling. It's almost as if they think these materials are wasted on the average folk, and by outlawing its possession, seek to confine its possession among the cognoscenti.
[There follows a conversation between Hannibal and Clarice with some bearing on the title of the work, which this volume tastefully elides.]
Sigh.
Hyperbole is nice, but this is just trash, Slashdot.
An MP is just a guy who got voted in. Alone, his views and opinions mean nothing. He has to get a vote through Parliament for it to mean anything or have any effect.
"Sir Paul, who was a minister in Sir John Major's government but has been on the backbenches since 1997, has been campaigning for ten years to tighten up laws on indecent material featuring children."
"Backbenches" is an important word. Go look it up. He's basically a nobody, even with the "Sir", and in 10 years still hasn't managed to do anything this way.
Next, he also deliberately and purposefully excludes entire categories of things like, for example, Lolita, etc. for those who just don't read the article. He's not stupid enough to think he can ban possession of half the "I was abused as a child" documentary or classic literary novels out there.
"The MP's latest ten-minute rule bill was given an unopposed first reading by MPs but further progress depends on it being given sufficient parliamentary time."
A ten minute rule bill is one that gets ten minutes of time in debating. That's how far it's got. They gave him ten minutes and then nodded appreciatively and ignored him. Imagine how many other "ten minute bills" have gone before Parliament since they were introduced and NOTHING has happened.
The guy's an idiot. The idea is stupid unless you SEVERELY castrate its power in law (which makes it useless). Nothing has even remotely been "approved", they've just listened and "will respond", like several million petitions through the Number 10 site that got the same treatement.
The only place giving him airtime is Slashdot, really. So people can shout about what colour / wing he is and how stupid "that lot" all are.
We need to get the phrase "evidence-based lawmaking" into the public mind, as we've started to do with "evidence-based medicine".
http://i.imgur.com/djqjb.jpg
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
Sounds a lot like he believes that if you don't see something it therefor doesn't happen.
So next time you see a politician being beaten up by tugs, just cover your eyes and the crime will go away, even better the crime will never have happened!
oh wait, that is the problem here, isn't it?
Be seeing you...
There are a lot of good lagitimate reasons for people to have written examples of child abuse. It depends on the context and the intention behind having it.
of Shakespeare, his play Romeo and Juliet shall be banned in Britain. After all Juliet was of a "pretty age" just shy of fourteen.
who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
I'm pretty sure that stuff like this only occurs to people who battle such urges in their own life.
I suppose he must get off on such things, so naturally thinks everybody else must too.
Same goes for most other moral crusaders.
Is this wanker just projecting?
http://www.ala.org/alsc/awardsgrants/bookmedia/newberymedal/newberyhonors/1994newberymedal
I wonder if the MP would ban the 1994 Newbery Medal winner about a twelve year old selected as his society's scapegoat and abused as such.
A Conservative MP is seeking to change the law to close a loophole which allows paedophiles to legally possess written accounts of child abuse.
I may or may not agree with his position, but he's not proposing anything that would ban books.
So if you were abused and document your abuse, which I think would be safe to say would be "absolutely vile," you could be prosecuted. Lolita, the book he mentions was in fact banned by British Customs as being indecent but he now views as art. By the 1950's standard the MP would be considered an advocate of pedophilia.
Wouldn't that make a lot of Biography books illegal? We need a good old fashion book burning event. Fahrenheit 451 anyone?
This from the same man who has made it a crime punishable by imprisonment to refuse to provide keys to encrypted files, when there is only a "suspicion" that the files are actually encrypted in the first place and that the subject knows what the keys are (guilty until proven innocent).
I really wish he had just stayed a dentist in New Zealand instead of being elected my MP by my ignorant and bigoted neighbours.
The MP says he is motivated to do this because he knows there is a correlation between child abusers and abuse record holders, namely that child abusers like to have records of their own and others' misdeeds and get off on them.
However, his proposed legislation doesn't do anything to stop the abusers from abusing in the first place. It would only be valuable if there were people who have abused children, but would not have done so if having the records was illegal. He hasn't proved that to be the case at all.
In any case it all seems rather pointless since the real criminals don't give 2 tiny craps whether what they're doing is illegal or not.
i have an account for you.
he was 15. i was 5. he put his penis in my mouth.
that's a true story.
here's a better idea. let's just make telling the truth a capital offence, then we can legally murder everyone but the politicians.
The first thing I thought is, how are we going to record any actual child abuse?
This is England. If you can't write it down, it's time to bring back bards and minstrels to accurately record police investigations and court proceedings.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Every new law written is to fill some "loophole" in the current laws. Yes, he proposing to ban certain books.
The problem is awfully simple: the MP is, most likely, lying through his teeth and he damn well knows about it. If he claims that "[such writing] fuels the fantasies' of offenders and could lead to the physical abuse of children", he better have it as established view in relevant disciplines, backed by papers, and not something that just came up (if even that). Alas, this "view" of his is just a fantasy, something he made up.
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
The only thing worse than books about child abuse are books that encourage it, right? Like this horrible tome:
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
--Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (KJV)
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
"According to Sir Paul Beresford, the MP for Mole Valley such writing 'fuels the fantasies' of offenders and could lead to the physical abuse of children."
[citation needed]
Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
What about people reading the law books? When they see a law about child abuse, it could also spark their fantasies to encourage the crime. Therefore, the law should exist, but be removed from all texts. DUH.
... as well as the Koran, Snowcrash, Lolita, Romeo and Juliet... I am sure there are many more, a significant part of "classical" literature contains sex scenes involving minors. And since in a lot of countries sex involving a minor is automatically deemed rape, this idea would banish them to the trash bin. That the majority of classic literature was written by a bunch of dirty old men surely doesnt help. Or am I missing something here?
Invita Invidia
Life time politicians 8 years max total then your back to the real world.
Mr. Blair wrote a book which predicted all this sort of crap.
You may have heard of it.
The title is "1984".
Yes, because not speaking of Voldemort means he won't come back. We all know how well that worked out for Harry Potter. And this guy calls himself an Englishman?
There's the issue of how the child, if an actual existent child is depicted in the pornography, feels.
If it's a kid who doesn't exist anywhere--we're talking animated or otherwise virtual depictions as opposed to live-action video or photography--then there's evidence that can haunt the victim. This is why some murder victims' families have requested that the particularly graphic images not be widely distributed...and why there's occasionally issues caused by the victim, once older, wishing to not have the evidence existing outside of the proper hands.
In journals and the like, unless it's an especially famous case, the identity of the victim will be cloaked: Little Alice Smith will become A.S. or even Female Child A. Releasing the victim's identity is a violation of ethics when the victim is under the age of majority because, legally, minors cannot give their consent...to having their names shared. (This is also why most places you cannot be in pornography until you're 18: you may be able to legally consent to the sex acts but not the rest!)
However, this still makes the actual laws overall bad ideas. Making accounts of child abuse illegal to possess means that you are basically condemning any abused children & those abused as children from being unable to be treated--because you're making illegal the journals and reference works used by those in the health professions to identify & treat the victims!
You're also going to cause problems for those studying, for example, what the sexual fantasies of pedophiles are; how exactly would you go about figuring out the common threads in what a group of people wanks to without examining the wank material?
Wide distribution of iffy materials that contain sufficient identifying information to track down the victim should definitely be discouraged, but making it an offense is overkill. Just encourage hosting sites to have a procedure they will actually follow through with for requesting the removal of such materials.
The victim better not write about what the sick bastard did to them. Unless the victim keeps quiet, allowing the criminal to get away, the victim gets punished.