Does anyone have access to the report mentioned in these articles?
http://cphpost.dk/news/national/report-cartoon-paedophilia-harmless.html
(english translation of the second article): https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=da&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.information.dk%2Findland%2F2012%2F07%2Fsexologisk-klinik-tegnet-boerneporno-skadeligt
I’ve been looking for the report mentioned, but I haven’t been able to find it anywhere. Not being able to speak Danish doesn’t really help either.
According to the text, this is an unpublished official letter solicited by the MOJ, so someone would need to write to Ellids Kristensen and see if a copy could be had.
“We have found that, to our knowledge, there is no evidence that the consumption of fictitious images of child sexual abuse alone can lead people to commit sexual assaults on children,” as concluded in the Sexological Clinic’s letter to the Ministry of Justice.
Chief physician and head of the Danish sexological clinic at Rigshospitalet, Ellids Kristensen, who has been at the forefront of the report, believes that in the light of the conclusion of the study it would be extremely inappropriate to prohibit the child pornographic drawings.
"You have to make sure that the fear of child abuse is not going to make society so restrictive that it affects a whole lot of people who are not at all in danger of engaging in children. One should, in my personal opinion, really weigh the artistic freedom higher - because there is simply no evidence that these drawings should be harmful, "Ellids Kristensen says.
I found her details online and would be happy to write to her. I’ll let you know what I hear.
I have heard of rates of sexual assault dipping in Denmark and the Czech Republic during periods of time when CP was legalised. The definition of CP is extremely nebulous (some countries require sexualised images, other require actual abuse, other simply require a naked child), so I’m not sure what sort of content was actually consumed, but I wonder if that would apply to fictional content as-wel?
This is third hand knowledge that’s been circulating in some news articles and places and I don’t have any references to support it one way or the other.
One source, it has other interesting pieces of information too. I’m not sure how reliable it is, but every little helps.
Also, Prostasia might want to look into female pedophiles, as I’ve noticed that there are a lot more of those than you would think, but people pretend they don’t exist.
There are also trans pedophiles, the change in hormones in the body might result in some very bad things happening, if it’s done without careful monitoring and therapy, at-least in my opinion, it’s hard to say for sure. This is not to say that all transgender people are pedophiles, but at-least some portion of them are.
You can find all of the Sexologic Clinic’s research projects (well, all of the hospital’s research is available) here:
However the study these articles mention does not appear to be published on the aforementioned webpage. I’m guessing that the clinic just talked about their findings in a press release or something, and never published a report on it. So I think the best course of action would be to email the sexologic clinic.
PS: I found a lot more articles talking about this study, though probably not worth pasting here because they’re all saying the exact same things to the point of almost just being a copy paste 
This thing reeks of bias, but it sheds some light onto more things. I’m not going anywhere near there to find out if this is true as it’s scary and I’ll likely end up behind bars for it.
It seems that some abusers seem to be genuinely believe that they’re doing something positive?
And I’m slightly crying now due to that.
A pro-contact-er told me something which I sort of already knew.
There seems to be two types of pedophile, ones which are primarily sexual, ones which are primarily romantic and ones which are both. It seems that sexual attraction and romantic attraction are two different things which could be at different levels?
I’d like to see that report also.
This was just casually pulling information from people and nothing formal, but from what I could get from some very nice people.
For some people, lolicon can reduce interest in the outside world towards real people, although it seems to vary and it seems like it may take a very long time and possibly early exposure for maximal effects.
For some, they say they require images of actual real people in addition to that, although not not pornographic ones otherwise they will a lot of intrusive fantasies will appear while working with kids and there are also intrusive dreams.
They said that this may be because they were sexually active and had sex at a fairly early age with their peers making it harder to adapt to other outlets, although it’s unknown as to whether that is truly the case.
This is a very rare one because it is very, very difficult to get information related to CP as people are really nervous about it (as it might get attention from the feds), but someone talked about coming off it.
They said it was somewhat akin to a drug, that there were really high quality ones, but that to get to those images, they had to sift through mountains of terrible, terrible content which almost made them suicidal and they just couldn’t stop themselves from doing it.
They said that getting off it was akin to stopping smoking or getting off some sort of drug with a slow withdrawal process involving multiple phases (or risking relapse) and they said that it was only because they had an alternate outlet at hand (lolicon).
Also, an informal poll on a lolicon site with a high number of pedophiles reported that 20 to 25% of those who identify as pedophiles are also exclusive. It is unknown how many do not identify as that entirely and such a site may draw more or fewer exclusives than is present in the general populace. There were a few hundred respondents in the informal poll, so not a large number, but not tiny either.
There seems to be a common misconception that such sites are filled with CP, but in the year of 2019, one lolicon site with a very visible pedophilic presence only had to dole out four bans for attempting to post it. When it is posted, it is usually taken down very quickly.
Tangentially relevant is the possibility that lolicon art competes with exploitative materials, reducing demand for exploitative materials. Consider that without regulating laws, such would likely be so, so criminalizing harmless activities that compete with exploitative activities doesn’t make sense. Criminalizing both destroys any competitive advantages.
Very good news! I have managed to obtain a copy of the Danish letter to the Ministry of Justice. Thanks to Dr Ellids Kristensen for providing this! Here is the full text, automatically translated from a PDF copy (any errors are my responsibility):
Sexological Clinic
Section RH7411
Psychiatric Center Copenhagen
Blegdamsvej 9
2100 Copenhagen EastDate: 17-09-2010
Ministry of Justice
Law Department
Slotsholmsgade 10
1216 Copenhagen KRe: Request for opinion on fictitious child pornography
In a letter of June 23, 2010, the Ministry of Justice has sent to the Sexological Clinic and the Visitation and Treatment Network, a request for an opinion that could shed light on whether the possession, etc. of fictional child pornography that are not realistic depictions that appear in the same way or almost the same way as photographs, etc., can lead people to commit act of child sexual abuse.
In response to the above, the requested authorities have contacted the doctors and experts abroad. Furthermore, an extensive literature search has been carried out. In addition, several employees from the Sexological Clinic and Visitation and Treatment Network from 1-4. September 2010 participated in congress under the auspices of IATSO (International Association for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders). The title of congress held in Oslo, was: “ New perspectives in sex offender treatment: Restorative justice, legal questions and humanistic traditions as challenges to therapy ”. Relevant research presented at this congress is referenced in this answer.
We have had to find that, to the best of our knowledge, there are no scientific studies related to the question asked, and therefore no documentation for the consumption of fictional images of child sexual abuse, so-called "child-porn,” alone can lead people to commit child sexual abuse. The area may be subject to investigations in the future, as delegates at the abovementioned Congress conduct investigations into the consumption / abuse of (non-fictional) visual and film material of sexual child abuse. This is an area of growing interest in scientific research.
In the following, a number of the most recent studies in this area will be briefly referenced and structured:
Kingston et al (2008)1 examined persons convicted of sexual crime where had a real physical sexual contact between offender and victim ( hands-on ) and found that consuming images of child sexual abuse for this group was a risk factor, the sex criminals who had used the illegal pornographic material were more likely to fall back into similar crime than those who had not.
Seto and Eke (2005)2, based on a study of 201 abusers of images of child sexual abuse, stated that the likelihood that abusers of images of child sexual abuse will later commit hands-on abuse is unknown. In their study, they find that people with previous convictions were significantly more likely to commit offenses and offenses again. Abusers of images of child sexual abuse who, prior to the current verdict, had committed sexual abuse, were the individuals most likely to re-offend - either generally or sexually.
In a Swiss study, Endrass et al (2009)3 attempted to assess whether consumers of images of child sexual abuse on the Internet present a greater risk of committing hands-on abuse on children. It involved 231 men convicted of possession of illegal images of child sexual abuse. The study found that 11 (5%) of the men had a previous conviction for sexual and / or violent abuse, 2 (1%) had a sentence for on sexual abuse involving child sexual abuse, 8 (3%) had a sentence for one sexual violation where there had been no physical sexual contact between the violator and victim (hands-off), and one was convicted of a non-sexual violent assault. Evaluation of relapse for the group showed that 7 (3%) of those surveyed relapsed with a violent and / or sexual offense, 9 (4%) relapsed with a hands-off violation and 2 (1%) with a hands-on sexual assault.
On the basis of this material, Endrass et al concluded that the consumption of images of sexual child abuse alone was not a risk factor for committing hands-on sexual abuse – at least not for those individuals who had never before been convicted of hands-on sexuality assault. The majority of those surveyed had no previous convictions for hands-on offenses. The researchers estimate that the prognosis for not committing hands-on sexual violations and abuses as well as recidivism of child pornography for this group were good.
At the Oslo Congress, Endrass et al presented4 follow-ups to the above study. The group of 231 men convicted of possession of sexual images was re-examined for child abuse, and found that after six years, no one had been convicted of hands-on abuse. The majority of these had no criminal history, either sexually or otherwise.
The empirical literature in the field of non-fictional images of child sexual abuse has not provided clear evidence that consumption of this material may pose a significant risk of engaging in hands-on sexual abuse. Some studies (e.g. Endrass 2009, Benz 20105) put forward the assumption that abusers of images of child sexual abuse form a special group. They state that although some of these also commit hands-on abuse, most do not. As stated in several studies, there may be a real risk of former hands-on convicts committing similar crimes again if they fail to use non-fictional images of child sexual abuse. The consumption of images of child sexual abuse alone do not appear to be a predictor of hands-on sexual abuse of children.
As mentioned, research in this area has only begun to increase in recent years. Further and more comprehensive studies must and will be conducted for prevention purposes. Previous studies seem to show that a high-risk group exists for those who the use of non-fictional images of child sexual abuse may contribute to the abuse. The referenced studies seem to doubt the abuse of child pornographic imagery alone can lead to sexual assault.
Documentation that “possession, etc., of fictitious child pornography which is not realistic depicted-things that appear the same or approximately the same as photographs etc., can lead people to commit child sexual abuse” does not appear to exist at the current time.
Yours sincerely
Jørgen Bech-Jessen
Clinical psychologist
External lecturerThorkil Sørensen
Professor, Dr. Med.Ellids Kristensen
Consultant, Clinical Lecturer
Coordinator of the Visitation and Treatment Network1Kingston DA, Fedoroff P, Firestone P, Curry S, Bradford JM. Pornography use and sexual aggression: the impact of frequency and type of pornography use on recidivism among sexual offenders. Aggressive Behavior 2008; 34: 341-351.
2Seto MC, Eke AW. The criminal histories and later offending of child pornography offenders. Sexual abuse: a journal of research and treatment 2005; 17: 201-210.
3Endrass J, Urbaniok F, Hammermeister LC, Benz C, Elbert T, Laubacher A, Rossegger A. The consumption of Internet child pornography and violent and sex offending. BMC Psychiatry 2009, 9:43.
4Endrass J, Rossegger. Is the consumption of child pornography a risk factor for child sexual abuse? Forensic Psychiatry and Psychotherapy 2010; 17 (suppl 1): 33.
5Benz C. Treatment of consumers of illegal pornography: More than relapse prevention. Forensic Psychiatry and Psychotherapy 2010; 17 (suppl 1): 13.
It is unfortunate that this data mostly concerns real child pornography and treats even that as one homogeneous group, but it may be something that could be extrapolated out to more ethical sources, and as technology improves, so will our approximations of it.
Perhaps, a thorough comparison of the impacts of the following could be the basis of a study:
CP: Sadistic content (aka “hurtcore”), bestiality, sex, masturbation, sexual posing, sexualizing legal imagery with photoshop, deepfakes.
“Technically legal”: Nudism, child models, youthful actresses, lolicon / 3dcg modeled off real people. This is not to say that these are all necessarily condoned, but that more research in this area could be useful.
Fictitious: photorealistic 3dcg, 3dcg, pseudo-3d, realistic lolicon, lolicon. Guro, scat, rape, consensual, posing, nude. Thankfully this section is fantasy, because some of the things that fall into this are very disturbing (i.e. mutilation) and not something I would ever want to wish upon a child.
Legality is also one potential variable which may have an impact on results, if something is strongly illegal, then someone would need some level of poor impulse control or other problem by definition to get over the hurdle to view it.
There may be more that I’ve missed and it may be difficult to get a large enough base of people to do such research on in it’s entirety.
Please note that laws vary from country to country and even “technically legal” may be banned partially or in it’s entirety in certain countries and even fictitious content. Be aware of the law or you may fall prey to serious consequences that could catastrophic consequences on the rest of your life.
You might also want to see if it is actually pornography which has an impact on the sex offenders or whether a sex offender which is more likely to commit a crime is more likely to have viewed pornography due to having a higher sex drive / lower impulse control / any other factor.
To paraphrase one person:
I don’t really particularly care what I look at, I mean, I do but not so dramatically. I just look at whatever is in-front of me and is most convenient. If it’s cp then it’s cp, if it’s lolis it’s lolis.
I haven’t looked at anything yet other than stumbling upon a few bits in stupid places, but cp isn’t as bad as it sounds, as-long as it isn’t abuse, hell I hear a lot of it is just “nudism”. The thing is that either way I’m going to prison for who knows how long, whether it’s a cartoon or whatever, so what does it really matter.
Right now, I just look at lolis, they’re lighter, warmer, softer and happier, but a certain self-righteous and prude country which holds pretensions of loving “freedom” wants to subtly pressure other countries to outlaw producing it, so who knows how long they’ll stick around. Shrug.
If they want to put a bullet through my brain, then go for it, that’ll be great, I am sure they’re dying to do that to all of us anyway. Just leave the hypocritical torture out of it, especially the hypocritical torture they call “therapy” which is really just brainwashing and “gay conversion therapy”.
On another note and unrelated to that, there seem to be a high number of pedophiles self-harming or attempting suicide or otherwise looking for reflief of sorts. They say it’s due to being demonised and seeing themselves as monsters, even if it’s an ethical outlet. It is kind of surreal to see people proving emotional support on what is essentially a porn (lolicon) site.
Thing is, my philosophy in being “demonized” is that those who would call you “monster” and push you to suicide are your enemies, and if your enemies fear you as a “monster” and if your very existence can be a bane upon those who would wish you harm, then that is a good thing, much like how Nobunaga Oda openly embraces his “Demon King” label. Of course, not everyone thinks like that.
I’m currently gathering information for case studies. The study would focus on the benefits, and most specifically, whether or not the child like doll (CLD) has a cathartic effect or not; I am undecided whether this study would be longitudinal or not as it’s still in the planning phase.
I have several customers of mine who are MAP and have purchased small AFMs* for intimate use, additionally I have others who are in the process of purchasing. Many have confided in me their desires and some are willing to participate in the study. It may be some time before the work is ready for publication but it’s a start. If you or anyone else you know might be interested in participating please contact me.
*Action Figure Models
Unless I’m misreading this, it’s interesting to note that it was the Conservative party who asked for this research to be done as a response to the Social Democratic party who was pushing for a ban.
All co-sponsers are republicans. I don’t know of any requests for research.
I meant that Danish article. That’s why I said Conservative and Social Democrat, rather than Republican and Democrat.