When will it all whip back around?

I’m predicting that if society really does go down this road of treating child sex dolls, cartoons, fiction, and other forms of fantasy the same way it treats actual CSAM or exploitation, the consequences of doing so will be catastrophic, and the severity of the unfortunate results will take more from us than we’re capable of giving up. I feel as though, with time, society will be forced to reconsider and reverse its position on eliminating that distinction.

The line between reality and fantasy is a very fine one, one that is both innately understood.

The desire to censor/punish art and fiction, where no real child was abused or even involved, of a pornographic pedophilic nature is not centered on a desire to protect children from abuse or to prevent sexual abuse.
It is built on the same line of reasoning that justified just about every other kind of civil injustice.
That reasoning being that of morality, of prudery, of personal or communal offense, and of disgust, in addition to an unfounded fear that the existence and proliferation of such material will lead to a cultural deterioration.
These are the very same cultural boogeymen that justified preserving slavery, racial segregation, limiting the rights of women, censorship of pornography, and the oppression of the LGBT community. To employ these talking points is to imply that they are valid, and to imply that they are valid is to claim that all of these civil injustices against women, minorities, and the LGBT community were theoretically justifiable. They were not.

There is simply no reason to treat fiction as CSAM if your concern is based on empathy for those who are abused and the drive to pursue justice on behalf of those who were victimized.

By blurring the line between reality and fantasy, you are committing the grave error of shifting the focus from that of empathy for the victims of child sexual exploitation and abuse, and towards that of personal offense. Such concerns are similar, and can occupy identical places in one’s mind, but they are not the same.
An attractive female high school teacher preforming oral sex on an underage student for “extra credit” is still just as bad as an unattractive, out-of-shape male gym coach caressing the breasts of and kissing his underage female students while they shower, and both are equally as unacceptable as a garden variety pedophile taking candid photographs of contestants in a locker room at a children’s beauty pageant.

It’s important to understand that treating a comic book, cartoon, or text-based story that depicts such acts makes it harder for individuals to engage with the subject matter at hand and make informed decisions as to how they can and should be addressed, and that by targeting the desire, the interest in those things, rather than the actual, real-world actions or instances is a great and effective way to ensure that the line between real life and fantasy remains well-understood both in theory and in practice.

It also helps to have a more generalized understanding of how pedophilia and pedophilic disorder work.
Pedophilic sexual interest and sexual preoccupation alone are not valid risk markers for sexual abuse offenses against children, as studies have repeatedly shown that offenders who only consume child pornography are the sizeable majority and are low risk of committing a sexual offense while also having higher sexual interest, while contact abusers tend to exhibit lower sexual interest, but also suffer from variable psycho-social pathology and typically engage with pornography less.

Of course, CSAM is illegal and harmful to those depicted and shouldn’t be legal, but if the preventative benefits can be observed without harming children, as fantasy and fiction typically do allow for.
People often think that pedophilia is something that can just “go away”, like it’s a passing kink or something that society can just force people to happily and safely inhibit, which isn’t the case at all. People said the same thing about homosexuals in years prior, with gay conversion therapies showing ineffective results, but also causing suicides and drug dependence. Pedophilia is no different, and these negative dispositions tend to have more significant associations with sexual abuse and risk than pornography consumption or sexual preoccupation do.
Hence why allowing them a sexual outlet to indulge and express themselves is key to helping foster a preventative atmosphere.

Virtual/simulated child pornography is harmless. It will not cause consumers to get up and commit acts of real-life child abuse. It will not “whet the sexual appetites” of would-be offenders, nor will exposure or consumption of it add to any meaningful risk.
Studies on forensic and clinical samples of low-risk populations as well as high-risk indicate that such associations are the product of a selection effect, rather than a socialization effect.

It is my fear that we may have to learn this lesson again, and cause unneeded suffering and harm to people who do not deserve it.

6 Likes

All of this censorship on fiction and art reminds me of:

It’s honestly a scary developement we’re witnessing. Governments are using the pain and suffering of real children to gain more control over their citizens (Demand to end End-to-End encryption, chat monitoring, German state trojan…). It’s the perfect tool to silence the opposition and push your own agenda. Everyone who even questions their methods can and will be labeled as a pedophile, or an egoist, because he puts his own privacy above children “what are you hiding?”. People are not thinking rational when it comes to this topic.

You can argue, link studies and even tell that you experienced abuse yourself. All of this does not matter, because the arguments of most people are based on their own moral code. I got told to suffer from Stockholm-Syndrome for defending pedophiles. It is basically impossible as of now and the only thing that can change this is to educate the public on this topic. Very hard to do so when even scientists are afraid for their lives when doing studies that do not please the public opinion:

An Italian scientist at the international laboratory CERN, home to the Large Hadron Collider, had his scheduled seminar on statistical imbalances between the sexes in physics canceled and his position at the laboratory revoked because he suggested that apparent inequities might not be directly due to sexism. A group of linguistics students initiated a public petition asking that the psychologist Steven Pinker be stripped of his position

People are questioning science itself (even if a consensus exists - flat earth, global warming…) and this is a truly scary path. So, even if studies support prostasias believe they will not be accepted by a lot of people. This is just saddening. I don’t know what can be done about science denialism. Politicians are obviously also influenced by this, because they want to get elected, not lose their public image etc., so they might also not value studies that are received so negatively.

4 Likes

Treating child sex dolls as CSAM seems to be related to the misleading slogan “fight pedophilia”, as if pedophilia were something like COVID-19 that can be cured and that the society need to stop it from spreading.

Censor or punish art and fiction is more ridiculous. A fiction doesn’t need to be of a pornographic pedophilic nature to be considered CP in the EU. For example, it is legal for a couple of both 15-years-olds to have sex in reality in many EU member states. But if a fiction realistically depicts a couple of both 15-years-olds having sex, it is considered CP according to DIRECTIVE 2011/92/EU, which applies to all EU member states. People are also becoming too “enthusiastic” about whether a fictional character is “pedophilic”. I saw tons of discussions on whether Rudeus in Mushoku Tensei: Jobless Reincarnation is a pedophile on the anime subreddit. This is so crazy. I mean, is Akemi Homura a pedophile if she beat the Walpurgisnacht in the last timeline and became a couple with Kaname Madoka thereafter in Puella Magi Madoka Magica? Even if a fiction is indeed of a pornographic pedophilic nature, I still don’t see a good reason to ban it, or why on earth are the glamorization of violence and drug abuse not banned in fictions?

And there is a question I am wondering, should a fiction be banned if its author’s purpose of creating this fiction is to promote child abuse? For example, we know the NAMBLA has posted many articles on their website to defend and promote child abuse. If NAMBLA decides that to better express their views, they create a fiction of pornographic pedophilic nature with the intent of promoting child abuse, should this fiction be deemed illegal to produce, distribute (and possess)?

1 Like

I am not even sure why all of the sudden. All this outrage wasn’t as bad when I was a teen. Anime culture becoming more and more mainstream kind of drew the attention of the older generation to it (Australia banning everything Hentai, because of CSAM. It all started with one gov. official seeing a skimpy Anime figurine in a colleagues office).

Nobody wants to be labeled as a pedophile, so taking an extremely offensive position is the best way to protect yourself from such allegations. Do you really think that all these people going wild actually care about children? Insulting, bullying and hurting kids is still seen as funny on the internet - how is this type of abuse fine? (and this happens to real children, not fictional anime characters) Especially to people that seem to care so much about child safety? You could argue with them for days and follow up with questions like “What did you do to contribute to child safety?” etc. and they would not be able to give anything of value. It’s just collective thinking and a fear of losing your public image by seeming pro-pedophilia. A lot of people think they have knowledge on a topic, but in reality many just share their believes. They barely get any feedback or different opinions which would questions theirs. If you even try to reason they will just call you a pedophile and move on.

5 Likes

What bothers me the most about this hysteria is that it does nothing to help children who have been the victim of abuse or protect them from abuse.
It feels like a political hot-button issue that tries to use the moral/social paranoia that surrounds child sex abuse as a means to get away with satisfying some… innately tribalistic hatred which goes hand in hand with disgust.

I think it goes without saying that banning child sex dolls or censoring and criminalizing artistic and literary expression and sexual indulgence of the abstract concept of children, as opposed to materials that are intrinsically linked to real children and their abuse, does nothing to prevent child sex abuse and I think people know this, but this socially-induced paranoia and pressure is what keeps people from thinking critically.
It’s why morality itself should never be a valid justification for censorship.

4 Likes

I’ll say it again.

CSAM, as a formal definition, is limited to materials and depictions made of and from actual child sex abuse. This fact of the matter highlights the empathy for the children depicted, and further emphasizes the need to prevent further abuse.

Lumping in drawings, dolls, or anything else that are NOT of real children innately devalues and trivializes this focus, and shifts it to the mere concept, an idea, rather than the actuality. This has the effect of blurring the focus by shifting it towards subjective, almost wholly arbitrary things, such as emotional impact, personal offense and feelings of disgust, rather than a pragmatic approach to a concrete and objective interest firmly planted in that of preventing and punishing harm done to children.

Treating fiction as CSAM would be akin to treating violent movies or video games as snuff films because they depict, in graphic detail, the death of what is described as, or appears to be, a human being.
Hell, even depictions made using youthful adults who appear to be in their early or late teens playing the role of fictional child characters in order to create simulated child pornography would meet the definition of CSAM if this approach were to be taken.
There is no meaningful difference between a cartoon child and an adult actor/actress playing a child character.

2 Likes

Hell, even depictions made using youthful adults who appear to be in their early or late teens playing the role of fictional child characters in order to create simulated child pornography would meet the definition of CSAM if this approach were to be taken.

This is already the case in the EU. It’s even illegal if the actors are publicly known. You are also not allowed to produce sexy pictures of yourself where you’re trying to look like a child (twintails, childish attire and behaviour - Twintails are even specifically mentioned). If you do you can basically “abuse” yourself and go to prison for production and distribution of CSAM.

Pseudo minor or pseudo youth is a legal term from the field of youth pornography and describes actors who are of age, but can give the appearance of a minor in terms of their external appearance. [1]

Australia has also changed their laws to include porn with adult woman who have a flat chest to be CSAM.

government’s banning of small-breasted women and female ejaculation in pornography.
Internet censorship in Australia - Wikipedia

The laws surrounding this have stopped making sense years ago, but nobody is willing to change them, because that would be public suicide.

4 Likes

Ironically, in terms of politicians for this purpose, we need either someone with strong convictions who’s not afraid of political suicide or someone shameless enough not to give a shit about it (yes, you know the one). Well, at least, this delusion of blending reality and fiction is now affecting stuff other than lolis:

At least, misery gets more company.

Science has nothing to do with consensus. Either the theory explains all known facts or it doesn’t. All theories are subject to questioning. Darwin’s Evolution has been questioned and modified many times over the years. It evolved. (Pun intended)

1 Like

Honestly I’m just terrified of going to jail because of some cartoon stuff

3 Likes

Never been terrified of it personally, but I’m one of those rare cases who would actually try and fight that in a court of a law if I ever got to that “bridge I need to cross.”

From time to time I would stage a mock trial in my head. “What would I say?,” “What would I do?”

I had to stop doing that after a while because my thoughts were just constantly that and it was taking a toll on my mental health.

Now I just take one day at a time and let the cards fall wherever they may.

5 Likes

Isn’t that impossible when there are already precedents? Because that would require the supreme court to undo lesser court verdicts. Not possible in the UK for an example, because they had multiple cases and also obscenity laws.

No idea.

Thing is, everyone just rolls over and pleads guilty. They don’t actually try taking a chance with a jury who might do Jury Nullification.

Still, it can’t hurt to try.

1 Like

I should point out I do live in the UK, and Jury Nullification has worked here on one occasion I can think of.

Did break the law, did go to trial, jury told the gov’t to get fucked more or less.

Problem today is that British people have become so damn spineless.

1 Like

Problem today is that British people have become so damn spineless.

They classify loli as CSAM tho. It is infinitely harder to fight this, because of the backlash this would cause.

BREAKING NEWS: COURT JUST LEGALIZED PEDOPHILIA”

If you can you should move to a more civilized country like Denmark, or Finland.
Idk how this would work for UK people now that Brexit happened tho.

I think that’s what probably makes it more interesting to try in court.

Would the jury be willing to jail someone for upto 30 years (after all, the guidelines for CSAM should apply for something they declare to be CSAM, right? :D) for drawings? (And even longer than the grooming gangs got.)

Reminds me a little of the Deathwish episode from Voyager.

“Well, this’ll make for an amusing diversion. Will you send him to prison for eternity? Or will you assist in his suicide plan? That’s a toughie, but that’s why they made you captain isn’t it? To handle the really tough ones…”

Would the jury be willing to jail someone for upto 30 years

Punishment for it seems to be absurdly high. I would be more inclined to support therapy for people who watched CSAM. In what point is a 10, 20, 30 year sentenced justified in this case? It’s too expensive and useless, because it will lead to re-offending eventually.

A fine, parole + therapy seems way more logical. Nordic countries (punishment in Finland is like prison up to one year or a fine) and Switzerland do it this way and it works. We already know from America that long sentences are a waste of time and money. It’s sad that society is fine with harsh punishments as a “symbol”, or to send a signal and cause “fear”. This has never worked and never will.

Why bother with building an infrastructure of help and support which would actually reduce CSA tho when you can just increase penalties and satisfy the public with it?

Do you have any plans on moving out of the UK? With stuff like BDSM even being banned I see no luck in it being changed any time soon. I feel kind of bad for you, because BREXIT made residing in other EU countries significantly harder…

I don’t have any means to flee the UK, sadly. (No job, no money, no Uni degree, no skills, too old for certain visas, etc, etc.)

At this point I consider it my prison. ;_;

1 Like

Nobody is being abused in a drawing of a fictional, non-existent character. So it isn’t in my book, sure it’s disgusting and if a gov. decides to regulate it then it shouldn’t fall under CSAM laws, because that makes no sense whatsoever. Because when you get prosecuted for Loli then in the registry people will only see “Indecent pictures of Children” and that’s it. Now try saying it was just cartoons.

1 Like

Child Sexual Abuse Material

No child in loli, so it’s not CSAM

4 Likes