My proposal for how Child Pornography should be combated

I feel that if we seek to change the sex laws and sexual behaviors of the west. It’s important that we leave no stone unturned because every inch of American sex law is corrupt. I personally believe that our perception and combative strategies against child pornography need to be changed as well.

Teens and adults both routinely get put in prison for ‘‘possession of child pornography’’ and honestly I think our definition of what constitutes as child pornography on a legal level needs to change because the subject definitions of child pornography are vast.

I personally believe that selfies taken by teens of their own nude bodies shouldn’t constitute as child pornography but there are many ways that teens can expose their own bodies in a picture. Some of them don’t even take selfies but rather sit the camera on some structure giving the impression that the picture was taken by someone else and believe it or not, teens can consent to asking another person to take a picture of their exposed bodies. There are also parents who go to jail for taking pictures of their young children in the bathtub or at a fucking pool party where they are half-naked. And because mental abuse is a major component of child molestation, it’s pretty difficult in some cases to determine whether or not a picture of a nude minor or a minor in a sexual act was taken with malicious intent.

Because of these issues, I propose the following solutions:

Possession of child pornography should only be a punishable offense if the media in subject displays obvious sexual violence. If the media in question comes from a movie, it is disqualified as child pornography. At the same time, I do not believe that any federal authority should be allowed to use state surveillance to track and locate individuals who have questionable material on their private devices. It’s a hard pill to swallow that the USA routinely uses state surveillance for this goal and many others under the guise of ‘‘national security’’. State surveillance is easily abused and is a violation of human rights and privacy.

Alternatively, I would also suggest a lack of punishment for possession of child pornography but rather criminalizing its production, meaning that rather than going after people who have media displaying sexual violence of children, we go after the people who produced it. I feel that this would make a bigger difference as a person who possesses media displaying sexual violence for children isn’t really harming anyone if they keep it to themselves and if they keep sharing it, the source material becomes increasingly murky. I also believe that if we place the porn industry under federal supervision as all industries should be, we could end up cleaning up the porn industry in a manner that alleviates sexual violence in pornographic material entirely. The only reason why the porn industry is as shady and chaotic as it is, is because there is very little to no federal supervision over it.

I agree with your need to combat the nature and guidelines surrounding child pornography, but how would you go about it, truthfully? State surveillance, in the wrong hands, would be extremely detrimental and destructive, but I don’t think removing it entirely would solve anything. Let me rephrase that. By what means should societal surveillance be allowed before it gets underhanded? If given the choice, how would you decide whether one can be charged with child pornography? This is all speculative to me, so your opinions would be most definitely appreciated.

The problem is that the only way to combat people in possession of child pornography or online child predators, in general, is to utilize state-sanctioned surveillance which is inherently evil. You cannot regulate the fair use of state-sanctioned surveillance. It’s like giving a 5-year-old a Ruger SR40c. The ‘‘good hands’’ that you would entrust with such technology can easily be turned bad at any time.

Granted, without state surveillance, it would make it harder to combat online predators. Thus I believe that extending government regulation into the sex industry would actually have effects on stopping online child predators as a ‘‘ripple effect’’ of sorts. The entire porn industry is shady, sleazy and disorganized and this is because there is no federal influence in it because the U.S Government doesn’t want to touch that stuff while holding animosity towards it at the same time. If the porn industry becomes regulated, it will consolidate itself into safer and more legitimate businesses that are able to expand and manage themselves in normal manners. This would naturally deplatform online sex predators as the only thing that makes them money is the illegality of the actions they are performing. A safer sex industry will attract more sex workers and deplatform those who are unwilling to conform to better standards and the worst of the worst people in the porn industry will be those people.

So basically, my plan involves deplatforming online child predators rather than creating an easily abused system of state sanctioned surveillance and privacy invasion to catch them. They may never be held accountable for their crimes but the rights, freedoms and privacy of all American citizens are preserved at the same time and I find that to be a greater cause worth fighting for.

Define sexual violence. Legal text is important, even that much can get people debating for decades over what it means exactly.

Kind of like how Japan used to be prior to 2015 then? I would hazard a guess that some of this has to do with moral panic, some with disgust, some with the victims dissatisfaction as to the existence of the content, and a lot with how hard it is to actually track down the producers.

They are very slippery folks and, to be slightly blunt, the mere concept of the existence of the worst producers (sadistic ones) really rattles me emotionally. It is very strange and deep-rooted into the core of my being.

On the other hand, if possession was legal, then I’m sure that at-least some pedophiles would take it upon themselves to screw some of those terrible people over, as many are very unhappy about their antics. It goes back to the getting punished for reporting a crime aspect and doing better by turning a blind eye to the behavior. I can’t say for certain if such a thing would work.

The child porn industry or the existing porn industry? I’m not sure if this would be politically viable (political suicide even), although it might be the lesser of two evils. I would have to think about that.

Good idea, I could see Australia / U.K. using it to track down traffic violations tbh.

There was something I always found weird about child pornography law tbh.

Watching and distributing necrophilia is legal.

Watching and distributing bestiality is legal.

Watching and distributing someone bashing someone’s skull in with an axe is legal.

Watching and distributing children being set on fire is legal.

This is not. It’s weird but first amendment applies to all those other things, but this one has really heavy penalties, even if you’re taking a photograph of yourself.

In regards to how best to handle this pressing issue, it would be best, like Lolishadow had said, to have some kind of defining criteria as to what exactly constitutes as inappropriate sexual material. We’d also have need of specialists, such as psychologists, mentalists, administrators, reconnaissance agents, and more. They would further be split into several teams, busy scouting the dark net meticulously. They would also need much discretion and make sure to leave as little of a trace as possible. It would also help to hear the opinions of those considered to be sexual offenders and such, seeing as even they, might offer some intelligence towards how others of their ilk may communicate or operate.

It seems to change all the time. If you open up any newspaper, you will see people pouring out of all sorts of wood-works one would never expect. It would seem that certain types of informants are too “dirty” even for the FBI to stain themselves with, such people are beneath them.

The police also have a very limited budget for handling this.

Psychologists are useless. They know even less than a random person on the street does and they’re fed information that is actually harmful. If you have a discussion about pedophiles on just about any random forum, you will get the usual die! spiel and perhaps two or three people who sort of know what they’re talking about. Psychologists are below the die! bunch.

One of the reasons that people don’t get therapy is because they really are useless. Someone who works with psychologists quizzed them about what they would do with such a patient and they said that they would pretend to be sympathetic, quickly extract any information they could possibly use against them and call the police. Even if they haven’t touched anyone.

Little morsels of data like that make their way to the four corners of earth and before long no one wants anything to do with them.

From what I can tell, a lot of it appears quite openly on popular search engines like Google, Bing and Yandex. This kind of ties into the problem where someone might search up your name or images of similar people and see a bunch of people getting off to you.

This is just information derived from Prostasia and news media however.

I agree that many psychologists misunderstand and misdiagnose their patients, but it would be difficult looking for one with an analytical approach someplace else. What would you suggest?