I also found this too
We still need more research to affirm that lolicon/shotacon is completely harmless, since there is conflicting findings and conclusions. I don’t think it’s possible for it to be causal.
That’s the equivalent of stating that it’s morally permissible for anyone to satisfy their sexual preferences in ways that do not involve children.
I’ll explore this thread more thoroughly soon.
And what is wrong with that?
2 Likes
That’s my point. Commonly, rhetoric opines the idea that if a bad guy might like something, that something must be evil. The type of thinking could be used to condemn chocolate bars.
Also, it doesn’t matter who’s not causing harm.
2 Likes
I saw this news article and study mentioned on the CBLDF page and was also tried to read the study.
https://cbldf.org/2012/07/danish-report-discredits-link-between-cartoons-and-child-sex-abuse/
2 Likes
Hi there, there’s an attempt to ban fictional images of child sex abuse by Conservative groups in Taiwan.
The government agency that is handling this issue is trying to make new guidelines, with a meeting that involves Conservative groups that wants to put a blanket ban on all sexualized fictional images of loli, and Taiwanese ACG content creators (Anime, Comic and Games) who are defending freedom of expression. The meeting will be held in March.
I’m trying to search for Danish case, the PDF of Dr Ellids Kristensen’s mail to the Ministry of Justice, to aid the case, but its appears that the PDF link is dead. https://sandstorm.prost.asia/shared/_7fJHX3vd3mkwUCzecxGsf6BYSg8FHYIQTs9-ubuFSt
Can you please reupload the pdf?
1 Like
It looks like we are at a turning point globally, and this turning point could go either way
Elites are pushing for loli bans and porn restrictions in the name of child safety, but these measures aren’t necessarily popular: general public doesn’t care either way, and the few that do are appalled by the suppression of free speech that would entail as well as the sheer ridiculousness and collateral damage it’ll cause
Vocal minorities are strong but politicians keep getting stuck into huge practical and ethical walls, while trying to keep a harsh line that isn’t reasonable or sustainable anymore
Fictional CP laws, age restriction laws and credit card companies withdrawal all immensely harm all of the global adult entertainment industry while doing nothing to fight CSAM
I think law enforcement and prosecutors want to focus on serious cases too instead of running into cases of sexting or Skyrim mods
This thread.
Here’s research about doll owners.
No, but thank you.
I already know the existence of the Danish article, I need the PDF of the letter sent by Dr Ellids Kristensen to Ministry of Justice.
It was sent by terminus fours years ago, but the link is now dead.
Do you have a research regarding the correlation between fictional illustrations and CSA?
Have you tried the Way back machine?
I tried but may have done something wrong. I rarely use it.
No, way back machine doesn’t work. Its completely blank.
1 Like
Google Translate.
NEWS
Reading time: 3 min.
Sexological clinic: Cartoon child pornography is not harmful
There is no scientific evidence to say that cartoon child pornography causes more people to commit abuse against children. This is stated by the Sexological Clinic in a statement in response to the Social Democrats’ proposal to ban the pornographic drawings. A ban can no longer be justified, says the spokesperson for culture, who himself helped bring forward the bill
INLAND
July 23, 2012
"People who have pedophile tendencies are lured into this image universe, and eventually it is no longer satisfying enough to look at these images. They get the urge to take action themselves,’ said the then judicial rapporteur, current Minister of Social Affairs Karen Hækkerup (S) in April 2010, when the Social Democrats put forward a proposal to ban the so-called fictional child porn - drawings and animations of children in sexually abusive situations.
But there is no scientific evidence to say that cartoon child porn should be harmful, is the official conclusion now from the Sexological Clinic in a report that the then Minister of Justice Lars Barfod (K) ordered in connection with the Social Democrats’ bill.
“We have had to establish that, to the best of our knowledge, there is no documentation that the consumption of fictional images of sexual abuse of children alone can lead people to commit sexual abuse of children,” as the conclusion reads in the Sexology Clinic’s letter to the Ministry of Justice.
Senior physician and head of Denmark’s sexology clinic at Rigshospitalet, Ellids Kristensen, who has been at the forefront of the report, believes that in light of the study’s conclusion, it would be extremely inappropriate to ban the child pornographic drawings.
"You have to make sure that the fear of child abuse does not make society so restrictive that it affects a whole lot of people who are not at all in danger of preying on children. In my personal opinion, you should really value artistic freedom more - because there is simply no evidence that these drawings are harmful,’ says Ellids Kristensen.
The proposal for a ban came in the wake of an article in Information that described how the child pornographic drawings were illegal in both Norway and Sweden, and two weeks later the Social Democrats presented their bill, which sparked a great debate.
On one side were the supporters of the bill who believed that the cartoons were morally wrong and that they risked inciting potential offenders to commit child abuse.
The other side of the debate pointed to the problematic nature of restricting artistic freedom of expression without any scientific evidence that the drawings have a harmful effect. And in the Folketing the proposal ran aground, when a majority of the parties demanded an official statement from the Sexology Clinic before they would take a concrete position on a ban.
But there is no evidence that the drawings had any harmful effect, reads the official conclusion from the Sexological Clinic.
One of the proposal’s biggest critics was the chief legal officer of the liberal think tank Cepos, Jacob Mchangama, who today welcomes the Sexology Clinic’s conclusion: "It is gratifying that we have now documented that, as far as we know, there is no connection between animated child pornography and actual violations, and that there is therefore of course no need to criminalize further in this area. But the whole process is a classic example of a politician spotting something, and then suddenly headless symbolic legislation has to be made, without having properly familiarized yourself with the substance,’ says Jacob Mchangama.
Banned in Norway and Sweden
In the bill, the Social Democrats looked to the neighboring countries as role models in the area, and proposed a “proper ban on animated child pornography based on the Swedish model,” as it read in the bill. But since then, the situation in Sweden has changed significantly: In the autumn of 2010, the first actual conviction in the area occurred, when the Swedish translator of Japanese manga comics, Simon Lundström, was convicted of possession of child pornography drawings that he had been hired to translate. He then appealed the case, first in the High Court, which upheld the sentence, but last month he was acquitted by the Swedish Supreme Court, which emphasized that a "criminalization of possession of the drawings would go far beyond what is necessary, ’ as it sounded from the court according to the Swedish newspaper Expressen.
Minister of Social Affairs Karen Hækkerup does not want to comment on the proposal, as she is no longer a court reporter. But the Social Democrats’ culture spokesman Flemming Møller Mortensen, who himself contributed to the proposal to ban the drawings, no longer believes that a ban can be justified in the light of the new information.
"It is good that the Sexological Clinic has looked into this. And so, as long as it cannot be proven that these drawings would lead to harmful behaviour, I think we must protect freedom of expression and artistic freedom,’ says Flemming Møller Mortensen, who, however, states that he, as Culture Commissioner, cannot comment on the legal aspects, or whether the Social Democrats officially put the idea of a ban on the shelf altogether. It has not been possible to speak with judicial reporter Ole Hækkerup.
3 Likes
“Social Democrats” Therein lies the problem. The kind of people who play the “jump-to-conclusions” game and make assumptions about things. Better known as “Libertards”. Don’t try to confuse them with facts when false ideologies will suffice.
1 Like
I think you’re overlooking a massive segment of who is generally behind these overreaching laws
1 Like
Liberals and leftists can generally be reasoned with, if you convince them that there is no harm. They might reject it initially, but eventually the chime of reason will affect them. Addressing the concern that these materials increase risk or affect attitudes friendly to CSAM is paramount.
Conservatives, however, are slaves to their emotions. If they are uncomfortable with something, they will ground that. Even Strom Thurmond never renounced his racist, pro-segregationist beliefs and stances in their totality, and William Rehnquist even suggested that segregation should be reaffirmed.
1 Like
Well any far left or right is too mired in false belief systems to accept the truths of reality. Conservatives come from a moralistic, religious ideology. Both sides BELIEVE in untruths, assumtions, and opinions over facts.
4 Likes
Except in both Japan and Denmark, those pushing for more censorship at least in terms of this stuff is one of the left side of that respective country’s politics. I love how you said “generally” because we have lefties, like Vaush, who practically uses pedo and Nazi interchangeably.
2 Likes
Those “Leftists” in Japan openly identify as communists, which follow the same theory of governance for the arbitrary regulation of social behaviors that conservatives follow.
Something people need to realize about communism is that it’s mostly conservative ideals and talking points, but what makes it downright authoritarian is how much power it affords the state to deal with issues that are best left out of its purview. Consolidation of industries, social control, etc.
I can never look at modern-day “communists” and not roll my eyes, especially if they think that their interests would be.protected from state control.
2 Likes