My interpretation of this is that they are trying to avoid calling self-produced images by a stigmatizing name, and recommending that minors who produce them shouldn’t be charged. They are not saying adults who share them shouldn’t be charged. But you’re right though, it’s a bit rich for them to be suggesting that there should be even a narrow exception for real photos, and yet that drawings should be banned unconditionally. It makes no sense.
Their laziness on dealing with child abuse (e.g. using easy definition to incriminate things) will certainly ruin the society. They are all culprits of facilitating sexual abuses on real children.
The statistics already show that at least UK, Sweden, and Korea have their sex abuse crime rates potentially increasing since every enhancement of their child pornography laws.
Reference (with stats of multiple countries): http://seeksee.web.fc2.com/53.html
Just thought I’d share something I saw on Twitter.
The problem is their censorship of manga and online games in July, 2001. According to Chosun Ilbo, the number of sexual crimes committed by teenagers increased from less than 60k (in 2001) to 145k (in 2002).
We will be talking about this in Seoul on October 4. I’ll post a registration link soon.
No one cares about the U.N. in any other areas, so I guess they need to find excuses to make themselves look relevant.
Of course, this isn’t about eliminating crime, but making it disappear from view, out of sight out of mind. If someone really thinks this will reduce crime, then they are a fool, it only punishes people actively trying not to commit crimes or greater crimes.
It gets even worse. Removing sexual content in hopes of “reforming” or “protecting” people, especially already innocent ones, makes the entire act of sexual exploration in terms of understanding one’s inexplicable urges and latent sexual desires(child pornography doesn’t count, because one participant is not willingly exploring their sexual inquiries in a nominal way; they are unwittingly being sexually exploited) a crime in itself, which is unbelievably absurd, given that it is absolutely necessary to avoid sex crimes. It also seems unconstitutional to act without warning, observation or reason, which exudes an air of entitlement. They choose to act without observing or understanding the content, It’s creator, and fans, and how they feel about it, along with how it actually effects their behavior(It doesn’t make people into predators, and I doubt such people even know or actively consume it and act on their twisted desires). Absolutely pompous and pretentious, this lot of councillors.
The explanation is very simple. They see that people have such images in their possession and see on some occasions they also have child pornographic images. Sometimes, they will see people with child pornographic images who have committed “hands on” crimes.
They therefore conclude that drawings cause people to escalate to child pornography and that child pornography leads people to escalate to “hands on” crimes.
This, of course, ignores the fact that someone who is highly sexual and / or desperate enough to commit a “hands on” crime is also likely to be sexual and / or desperate enough to view such imagery. Perhaps, not drawings, as these are actually kind of obscure in the West, although maybe in Asia where hentai is very well-known.
I would therefore surmise that they would have carried out those crimes anyway and that each step has no relation to the previous. If anything, drawings keep someone preoccupied and distracted. At worst, they are useless.
As for things that may actually contribute to crime, ignoring things like opportunists who aren’t even attracted to kids, is the demonisation from society that drives people out from normal society and into echo chambers.
Molesters are usually the noisiest (I don’t see many of them around tbh, likely down below), followed by pro-contacts (or pro-choice as some seem to be calling themselves now) and finally followed by everyone else who is largely quiet. If you’re going to hear anyone’s opinion, you’re likely to hear theirs, barring some level of moderation.
Society also promotes child pornography in the news all the time. There was one time when a huge attack was launched to take down those sites, tons of media attention were given to them, and it ended up telling so many people these sites existed that their numbers swelled many times over.
One founder of one of those sites even stated in a news article that the sketchy dark web communities helped him to come to terms with his desires after being ostracized by society and noticing one of the attacks. He later went on to found something truly horrible.
There are folks who moderate and folks who don’t. Prohibiting harmless activities only infringes on the liberties of those who do respect social boundaries.
The question then becomes; how do you spot or catch a predator or pedophile? Chris Hansen on Dateline NBC captured criminals to be through deception, intention, and interrogation, but as shown in the final episode of To catch a predator, that doesn’t always work. Many might be much more secretive, or attempt to build, a false, joyous persona to operate within society. How will sudden confrontations affect your social standing? How can you come to a compromise or conclusion? So much to ponder…
One thing that we would love to be able to do is to get a positive presence on the dark web where people who maybe originally went there out of curiosity to see illegal images can find another community that is more supportive of non-offending. Here is our concept note.
I hear that Germany is moving to ban tor hidden services precisely because of it’s use in crime. This is harder to do in the U.S. for a number of reasons, but it might not be impossible given the trickery around FOSTA.
As for MAP Support Chat, I feel that the story there is a lot deeper than people think, but not anything I should postulate about on a public forum. I do believe there are some things they could do in order to distance themselves from the notion of being a dangerous influence, although those measures might not be popular as they may reduce it’s scope.
I’ll continue reading.
As a side note, Tor is not enough to avoid being DDoSed and neither is something like Cloudflare or other DDoS protection providers, but I won’t mention details on a public forum. It’s not a huge secret, but I’m not that stupid.
If anyone running a platform is really curious, you can PM me, either here or in one of my haunts (but not ones I’ve left).
People who believe in the fucking bible think is “criminal” simply “'cuz Gawd sez so!”
It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy, the worse the culture around it is, the worse the damage incurred becomes, simply because you have to deal with the stigma and shame from doing it. Breaking that down would take a really, really long time.
Also, never watched tcap, it doesn’t seem like something that would be particularly pleasant and the sheer premise of it seems to reek of moral panic. People commit crimes, but for a variety of reasons. Even the priests, who I recall seem to beliieve they want… affection?
Someone doesn’t commit a crime for the sole purpose of being “evil” as it were. A lot of the sorts of people these “pedophile hunters” seem to catch are mentally handicapped people, people who are lonely, etc.
They might not even understand what is even going on. Sometimes, they will do “bait and switch” where they give one age and switch to another and sometimes someone will get confused, especially if they’re quite dim.
Moral panic low quality toilet paper TV shows are often a bad model for just about anything, and oftentimes, those organisations will get infiltrated by criminals trying to rebrand themselves as virtuous by going after the fuzzy boogeyman.
The hunters should be warned. I’ve seen reports of hunters pandering illegal content.
It’s a crime to ask for it, to look for it or to pander it. The actual illegal content doesn’t need to exist.
“Law criminalizes advertising, promoting child pornography even if underlying material doesn’t qualify.” That’s per United States v. Williams (2008).
If looking for it is a crime, then, obviously, hunters are committing a criminal offense by hunting for it.
Criminal activity, I’m confident, violates Twitter’s TOC.
Just in case some fail to understand, I’ll leave this link.
It doesn’t help that these sorts of laws actually impede research in a number of ways keeping us permanently in the dark ages just about everywhere in this field, but I digress.
To a certain extent, the police can pick and choose which cases they take to trial, so in practice, they probably aren’t going to be getting charged for that. I did however hear of a case where someone was actually charged for it after reporting the presence of it somewhere to the police, when they had nothing to do with it.
And it’s not deep web, it’s dark web, deep web just means a page isn’t indexed by search engines and covers lots of things like pages behind paywalls, password protected portals, people who opt out of crawling, etc.
Be careful with that link, it has lolicon of a child playing in water and that Vietnam war photo to prove a point.
I hope such a warning will chill the hunter mobs. Their activities accomplish little or no good and may be causing more harm than good.