the truth has a way of making itself known, whether it’s a politically inconvenient set of facts that contradict popular/moral sentiment, or a cold sore on prom night.
People are going to needlessly and injustifiably suffer because of this, and only in time will it become so difficult to notice that people will begin to think differently. The moral panic will fade away and we’ll have only learned this lesson the hard way.
What the German Supreme Court has essentially done was roll back decades of civil rights precedent so long as it can be tied to child safety in whatever way they so choose.
Why did I have so much faith in a country that opted to dissolve its nuclear power programs in favor of coal.
As I said. A victory would have been short-lived. The EU would have passed regulations like that regardless.
There can only be a shift if pedophiles form a giant movement and collectively expose themselves to society. When people realize that their loved one is also a pedophile, then change can happen.
However, there will never be the strength and courage to accomplish something like this. Someone with a great and far-reaching voice needs to gather everyone. Most people want to live in peace, but outing yourself is in-compatible with a peaceful live.
Oh and a man was brought before court two days after this ruling for owning a normal doll he cut a hole into. This will now continue to happen. People will be wary why a man buys a doll. Maybe for his daughter? Maybe to cut a hole into it. This hole suddenly makes it dangerous. As if auto-erotic acts are gate-kept by a hole.
20 years is very optimistic. The constitutional court has a very bad track record when it comes to rulings against stigmatized sexual minorities. Back in the 50s, they ruled that a law criminalizing male same-sex relationships, a law that was in fact tightened by the Nazis, was completely lawful and constitutional. It took almost half a century after that ruling for this law to finally be disbanded.
So a man got arrested for owning a regular doll that he cut a hole into? As if banning sexual dolls was not ridiculous enough, this takes the biscuit. How did this happen? How was he searched and why?
He was caught grooming a girl and NCMEC reported his IP to authorities. So they searched his house and found the doll. This is the problem with these cases.
You will primarily find doll owners who are predatory, because their predatory online activities are what reveals them to the police. How are they supposed to catch a doll owner who is not doing these things? Much less likely. A rapist is also watching porn. This is also what the dissenting judge told in the constitutional complaints. You cannot derive any valuable information from these cases.
He told the court that his children cut the hole and they were putting toys inside of it together. I was like “bruh” reading this excuse.
The children had also been cutting at it, which is how the hole came to be.
“We used to stick building blocks in there when we played,” said the defendant. However, he could not provide a convincing explanation as to why the doll remained in his bedroom for three years.
It’s demented. Why is this an issue? Cutting a hole into a regular doll now turns it into a crime? What? So men in Germany cannot buy dolls at all in Germany unless they don’t care about being seen as suspicious?
Not to mention that this allows a certain amount of arbitrariness for persecutors. I’m willing to bet that they are not going to bother say the average reborn doll owner too much, but that they are going to look very closely at anything resembling a doll to find holes that could potentially accomodate a penis when a person is suspected of being a pedophile, resulting in pedophiles being unfairly persecuted and punished.
Already happening. I think for the first time in the statistic there was a very visible shift in report volume. Real content declined a bit and actioned on reports for fictional content skyrocketed. Same in other countries. However, you need to be careful since many countries just lump everything into one word making it impossible to distinguish, so for them it looks like a trillion children just got abused.
I am guessing that even criminals essentially see no need for real content since AI is indistinguishable from reality with less footprint and no victim. I find it honestly baffling that this shift is being described as “horrific” and “dangerous”. The entire ecosystem of child abuse material is shifting over to fictional content and this is somehow “horrific”. The problem is erasing itself and only leaving networks alive that actively and physically abuse real children.
Society could actually finally tackle this problem if they focus on real abuse since the volume of real material is apparently shrinking massively.
It will all shift towards fiction, because the amount of content will increase and it is essentially on the same level as real abuse. So they are not incentivized to prioritize.
Anyone even questioning if this is the right path will be slandered and called a Pedo defender. Society does not care about preventing abuse otherwise they would demand more focus and resources be allocated towards real children.
The governments can bypass this potential critique by just classifying all material under one term (CSAM) and obfuscate the amount of real victims. Nobody will bat an eye.
One of the oldest german newspapers published this great interview yesterday dismantling the courts ruling and questioning the courts right to exist, because they destroyed privacy for all citizens with this decision:
Ultimately, with this decision, the Federal Constitutional Court is not only turning constitutional law on its head, but also, in effect, calling into question its own right to exist.
[…]
Even if the current ruling is clearly not likely to provoke widespread outrage—though experts see it quite differently—it should. We must never forget that democracy and the rule of law are not givens, but must be defended every single day. That is why we need a strong Federal Constitutional Court to protect the rights of all citizens—even against potential opposition from the overwhelming majority. Against this backdrop, it would be wrong not to be outraged by the approval of the sex doll ban simply because it happens to affect an already ostracized minority.
I do not think any of this will make a difference. Society is genuinely not interested in the rights of pedophiles and you will never be able to research something like this if it is banned.
Some things are absolute. No one’s freedom should depend on how they handle a doll.
Nevertheless, attraction is not selfishness. It’s no more selfish to buy a doll than it is to buy a teddy bear. One can have an interest in teddy bears without wanting to steal one. If there’s no metric of selfishness, there’s no metric of a disregard for the well-being of others.
The Thing here is that the Federal Constitutional Court essentially ended the one rule that stopped even highly invasive Surveillance Methods, like for example, just recording everything going on in every room of every house!
Your House and your bed is now open to Government intervention including but not limited to: Who you have sex with, what words you say to your significant other, and what rights you ought to have.
It’s not that society doesn’t care about real abuse, it’s that those in political positions are looking to be heroes and win votes for “doing something” to protect children. While not actually doing anything. Abuse still goes on, child sex traffickeng still goes on. People have been screaming at them to go after the perpetrators of crimes against children.
Yet they can pass these ridiculous laws against fiction without having to allocate money and resources to do anything. It’s laziness at it’s finest. Winning votes for zero cost. Maybe they don’t really care about the real crimes because the rumors are true about how most of them are invovled in one way or another?
‘The road to hell is paved with good intentions’ isn’t just a generic proverb about people meaning well but ultimately causing harm, it also illustrates how those who think they’re doing good may co-opt otherwise ‘bad’ methodology to achieve that goal ultimately undermines, if not wholly invalidates, whatever ‘good’ they sought to achieve.
Preventing child sexual abuse from occurring is a noble and righteous goal, but like any other pursuit, it must be done in a way that is thoughtful and considerate to all aspects, including those which may seem inconvenient.
The fact that the scientific establishment is lambasting this decision by the German Supreme Court for lack of actual evidence is a good thing. We can only hope that this consensus withstands attack, both from outside the scientific community and from within by bad actors looking to forcefully orient a consensus that aligns with a politically desired viewpoint.
I think it is harder than you think, because you would need to change the view of the EU. A country cannot legalize something if it is banned on EU level. While diversity is generally a good thing in this case it causes a lot of conflicts between member states.
I genuinely believe that there is no way that it will get legalized within our lifetime. Have you seen how hard child protection organizations lobby in the EU? How are you supposed to go against their opinion? They undermine scientific studies by conducting their own “surveys” which - surprise - always favor absolute control and suppression of every fiction.
It is an entire eco-system where these org. get fed with EU money. They need work. Same with Thorn lobbying for chat control, so they can sell their services. You either accept this reality, or you emigrate. Emigration is rarely an option, so pedophiles will suffer for nothing regardless.