posted
But admitting its abitrary, where do you draw the line? And who gets to make the determination at what crosses it?
(I suppose right now thats the FCC, and its just that their line is in a different place than yours is)
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
mph, how much research and/or time have you spent on sexual disorders? I don't mean the inability to get it up. I mean sexual addictions, rape and incest recovery, etc?
I suspect your answer would have to be "very little".
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
We all know there is a difference in rating of pornography from late night osft porn to hardcore XXX.
Lets say someone makes a hardcoreXXX VCP movie or pic and posts it for consenting adults to view it. Should that be legal:?
I think not--for many reasons already mentioned. Of course if we have laws against VCP , there are arbitrary boundires. But lets start off with the extreme.
Should XXX VCP be legal to make? distribute? own? rent out?
Obviously works of art like American Beauty do not fit here. One: They usually involves a teenager not a 6 year old. And two: They are not XXX hardcore.
Posts: 1034 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
jeniwren -- if I say something incorrect or something you disagree with, by all means address the ideas. There's no need to make this personal.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can find no technically/logically sound reason to give the government the right to make VCP illegal. On the same note I can find absolutley nothing morally right about VCP. As at least one other has said (or something similar to this): The government can't justify regulating this, it is up to people's morals to regulate this activity.
Posts: 21 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
mph, I'm not making a personal statement about you, except that you are clearly ignorant about sexual disorders.
It's nice to think that you can just explain something as complex as the motivations and purposes behind rape and pedophilia in just a few sentences, but if it's possible, I'm clearly not the person to do it. After you've spent some time learning about them, and still have doubts about whether it's about power and not sex, I'll be happy to debate it with you.
(None of which is to say that *I'm* an expert -- however, I have enough experience both directly and indirectly, and have done enough reading to recognise someone who doesn't have the first clue what he's talking about.)
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: The government can't justify regulating this, it is up to people's morals to regulate this activity.
In a democaratic society the people are in charge of government. So we should be able to use the people to make VCP illegal.
Posts: 1034 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe I am being too defensive -- I felt like I was being set up.
But I'll turn it around -- what are *your* qualifications?
Of course you are right that I haven't studied it that much. If I had, I wouldn't have to ask the question to y'all.
I'm not saying that it isn't about power *sometimes*, but your earlier statment was pretty blanket.
Now, I know you were talking about CP. But let's talk about date rape.
Tell me if this is a situation that could ever happen: A guy and a girl are getting hot and heavy, and the girl says stop. The guy doesn't really care that she said stop, and he rapes her. He doesn't do it because he wants to have power over her, he does it because he wants sex, and obviously doesn't respect her too much.
Yeah, I've never been raped, nor raped anybody else. but it's a legitimate question. How true is it that rape is always about power? How much is this idea perpetrated because that idea makes things easier for the victims?
Do such questions mark me as hopelessly ignorant of such things? I guess I've been fortunate up until now to be able to be ignorant.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Alexa -- I am not quite sure where I stand on the VCP issue (although I would probably end up siding with you), but the governement doesn't have a right to just do anything that the majority decides.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
your question does not make you ignorant, it does show the extent of your involvement in sex crimes.
Yes it can happen...but we are talking in the single digit percent range. In short, yeah it happens, but VERY VERY VERY seldom. A more accurate description of date rape would be of the girl who says "no" and the guy who will not take "no" for an answer.
Posts: 1034 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
And Alexa, from what you say, my questions *do* mark me as ignorant. But that's OK -- I am ignorant about a great many things, and I am not ashamed of the fact. Ignorance is the opposite of knowledge. If you don't know something, you are ignorant of it.
posted
I know the government shouldn’t be able to do what the majority decides (hence the bill of rights), that is why this debate is so interesting for me. I think the public has a vested interest in making it illegal, but that does set a precedent for the government to legislate morality beyond protecting human rights.
I guess I want to find the argument that says VCP is violating rights. The closest I can think of is by it's nature it is aiding and abetting pedophiles who are actively seeking to take away the rights of children. It gives them a forum to legitimize their behavior. I still feel I am missing something tho that will nail this in my head.
Posts: 1034 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
mph, I was a 15 year old victim of a 29 year old sex addict. Those experiences started me on a road of sexual addiction as well, which is part of why I know anything at all about where some of those feelings come from. My husband and I spend a lot of our free time working with people struggling with problems. He spends most of his time with alcoholic/addicts. I spend most of mine with relational issues, like parenting, stepfamilies, and divorce. I don't have any certification, but I help because I was helped. I've studied to help myself and become a better lay counsellor. Our group is headed up by a psychologist and licensed family counsellor.
When one person is in complete control of a situation and the other person has NO control in what happens, the situation is about the dominator's exercise of power, not about relationship (which is what healthy sex is all about).
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, you certainly know more than I do. I hope that my questions came across as intended -- an ignorant person honestly trying to understand a difficult subject.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My qualifications on the motives behind rape is formal education and training at the University that I attended and working at a youth home, spending additional time and training working with the sex offenders.
Incidentally, the sex offenders at that facility have been transferred (I heard and hope) because the youth home did not specialize in sex offense. By the nature of the crime and predatory behavioral patterns, sex offenders really do need specific treatment and should not be mixed with other criminal offenders or people who suffer with other mental illness.
Posts: 1034 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I do know we could never test to find out, as I can't see finding a review board for an experiment on VCP giving permission to study a variety of illegal activities without turning in the perpetrator.
Actually, stuff like this is routinely tested using siezed images.
-o-
KarlEd, your link seems to make the opposite point. The issue here is as to whether or not pornography made with real humans who happen not to be children counts as virtual child pornography.
-o-
quote:I have heard the same thing said about rape -- that it's about power, not about sex. People repeat it over and over.
But I have trouble believing that. So far, nobody has been able to show me anything that supports that claim beyond the fact that many people believe it.
I provided a good dozen links on this point in a thread begun by Storm Saxon months ago . . . but Lord, I don't feel like doing the research again. Have you ever looked into any research on why people rape? Psychologists and psychiatrists certainly have studied it. If "nobody has shown you anything" convincing, is it because you haven't been looking?
And yet . . .
quote:Perhaps this is a dumb observation, but I'm getting the impression from this thread that the general belief is that sexual desire for children is about sex. That it is just someone who has an orientation toward children rather than fellow adults. It is not. It's a medical disorder treatable with psychiatric assistance. It's an illness.
Have you looked into the success rate of such treatment? Last I heard, it was virtually nil.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't mean to be redundant, mph. I typed my post before anything on the second page was posted. But every once in a while we have the "Rape is about sex" discussion, and the claim that it is not is usually dismissed rather casually, and it usually turns out to be because of the idea of date rape.
Sadly, I do consider myself to be somewhat of an expert on the topic of rape, and I have read a lot of the research out there.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The statement that simply because 'everyone says' doesn't make it true was a bit offensive. It's not that what you said didn't have an element of truth; just because everyone says something is true, really doesn't make it true. But just because everyone says something is true, doesn't mean it's NOT true either.
Perhaps I should define what I mean by power. A parent who compels a child to obey is doing so out of power...the power of greater experience, the power of greater size, the power of exercised authority. With very young children, an adult may exercise their power over that child very frequently, and often out of a motivation of love. Daddy physically stops his 2 year old from running out into the busy street. He's exercising his power, but it probably isn't out of selfish motivations.
I view healthy sex as being between adults in search of relationship. Maybe it's a deep relationship, maybe they just met 15 minutes ago and want to know each other better, but in my view, healthy sex is about relationship.
Date rape is still about power. It started off as about relationship, but ultimately, he had no one but his own interests at heart and took what was not willingly given. That is not about relationship...it's about power. He might feel guilty about it later -- no doubt many pedophiles feel wretched after raping a child. But he still acted out of power.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ic, yeah, I know (about the effectiveness of treatment). It sucks. Personally, I like to think that treatment can be effective with someone very highly motivated to change. I can't imagine any form of treatment working on someone who didn't have any interest in changing and didn't even see that they had a problem.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: If "nobody has shown you anything" convincing, is it because you haven't been looking?
No, I cannot say that I have spent a lot of time learning about rape. But, I did the same question a couple of weeks ago, and nobody bothered to answer it. You say that you posted a lot of stuff a couple of months ago. No wonder I missed it. I wasn't here' a couple of months ago. Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If child porn is illegal, all porn should be illegal. If all porn is not illegal, child porn should not be illegal. Here's why:
The justification for illegalizing child porn is (unless you believe we can just make anything we consider disgusting illegal - in which case we can probably outlaw gay porn too) that it promotes the raping of children. The problem with this argument is, 'regular' porn would promote 'regular' rape in exactly the same way as child porn promotes child rape. Child porn encourages child sex addicts no more and no less than regular porn encourages adult sex addicts.
I suspect the real reason child porn is illegal and regular porn is not is because many many people like regular porn, whereas almost everyone finds child porn disgusting. The majority won't allow the banning of something it enjoys, but is fine with banning something a minority enjoys.
I'm always an advocate of consistency in laws, and an opponent of arbitrary lines. I'm not sure which is best, but we should either ban all porn altogether, or be consistent and allow it all.
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The justification for illegalizing child porn is (unless you believe we can just make anything we consider disgusting illegal - in which case we can probably outlaw gay porn too) that it promotes the raping of children.
No, the justification for making child porn illegal is that it is the fruit of a crime, since it can't be made without violating children.
If we look to a "promotion" argument, child porn could conceivably promote sex with children - which is illegal - while adult porn just promotes sex between adults - which is not illegal.
Frankly, your post relies on a lot of unfounded assumptions.
Pedophilia cannot be easily cured. In fact, I would dare to say that it can't be cured at all, but only repressed by behavioral modification. And that is almost impossible for adults and only nominally successful for young teenagers. The older they get, the less possibility there is for a 'cure'.
I would agree that pedophilia is about power as well as sex, but it is not that way in the same way rape is about power. Pedophiliacs are typically not violent and are law abiding citizens. They rationalize it all to themself. They 'fall' in love with children. They convince themselves that if they can only get the child to like them, then they will be able to show that child the true love they have for him or her. They are the mentor to the child's sexuality. They tell themselves all sorts of things to make it okay in their mind. They 'court' the child by giving them toys and siding with the child against the child's parents.
The teenager who is leaning towards pedophilia is often very maladjusted and feels threatened by same age peers. By simple virtue of their age, they can feel cool among children younger than them. Usually, the sexual 'switch' needs to be turned on at a relatively young age for this neediness and going to children for acceptance to actually become pedophilia. This can happen coincidentally, or their very maladjustment could be the result of molestation which would also turn their sexuality on in a dominant/submissive relationship that they will later perpetrate on someone else.
Sorry, I just saw your post where you agreed with Ic that the cure rate was practically nil. So I'm not just jumping down on you.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
No, the justification for making child porn illegal is that it is the fruit of a crime, since it can't be made without violating children.
remember, we are talking about Virtual child porn, which is made without violating children...well, that is the debate.
Xaposert,
I have a problem with
quote:The problem with this argument is, 'regular' porn would promote 'regular' rape in exactly the same way as child porn promotes child rape. Child porn encourages child sex addicts no more and no less than regular porn encourages adult sex addicts.
My problem is that fantasies involving adult porn can be role-played between two consenting adults, whereas child porn can at best be role played if you have a partner who looks maybe 12+ years old. I don't think you could find a role-play adult who looks infant-6 years old.
Also, I think there is a valid argument that those addicted to CP or VCP are also suffering from a mental illness, and the nature of the mental illness involves an addiction to (and seeking out of) behavior that corresponds to cp/vcp fantasies not found in regular porn.
Posts: 1034 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just to make it clear, do those opposing the legality of manufactured images do so on grounds of potential influence over the observer? That is, if an adult enjoys watching a child have sex (for whatever motivation), the adult is likely to repeat what he/she sees?
By which case, we should ban all images that "promote" illegal acts? We have a lot of movies and songs to ban, insofar as drug use is concerned...
Posts: 641 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
School girl outfits sell at sex shops. That's an example of how someone could play out a fantasy in a legal setting, and not an uncommon one.
Rape fantasy porn is relatively common. Why isn't this illegal? It could easily be promoting an illegal act.
Since there hasn't been much ground given in either direction, I'll just pipe in that I believe VCP shouldn't be illegal for the reasons so far given.
Posts: 1892 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
VCP is currently illegal because it is increasingly difficult to differentiate between it and the real porn.
Also, there is a morality clause in the Constitution. Congress has the authority to pass a law solely to define morality in this country. Should they? Well, that's another can of worms.
Since VCP has the potential to be used to disguise real child porn, I would argue the government is merely being responsible by making it illegal.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well if we want to reduce confusion between masking real child pornography, then lets gear the discussion to animated cartoons. There's definitely a market, though probably smaller.
Posts: 1892 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW, there are several porn distributors who seek to make it look like their porn is "illegal" like tricking a girl into it, or raping someone, or kidnapping someone to videotape. But with regulation, all these get checked up on. Wouldn't the same apply for the VPC?
Posts: 1892 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can't we think of better things for the cops to have to investigate than fake porn? Now you're talking about my tax dollars at work. I say no. Catch some rapists or something.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:VCP is currently illegal because it is increasingly difficult to differentiate between it and the real porn.
Also, there is a morality clause in the Constitution. Congress has the authority to pass a law solely to define morality in this country. Should they? Well, that's another can of worms.
Since VCP has the potential to be used to disguise real child porn, I would argue the government is merely being responsible by making it illegal.
I'll use Suneun's rape example. Forced-sex porn is fairly common -- should we ban all rape pornos that appear realistic?
Out of interest, could you cite the entirety of that "morality clause" so we can see how it applies to this case in particular?
Posts: 641 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know what really bugs me about these arguments? The extremism. "If we make virtual child porn illegal on the grounds of what people might do with it, then we'll have to legislate against everything else that influences people to do bad things."
Geez louise. You can take anything to ridiculous extremes. Only a weirdo nutcase (that's the technical term ) would be influenced to the sexual molestation of a child after watching Shirley Temple's Heidi. Whereas the vast majority of people who watch it are not influenced to change their behavior in any way. This makes it significantly different from the intended audience of virtual child pornography -- a group of people who by the very fact they're interested in viewing it indicates they have unhealthy, dangerous sexual issues.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
I know there is a bit generally referred to as the morality clause. I have no idea which bit it is. Sorry.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:You know what really bugs me about these arguments? The extremism. "If we make virtual child porn illegal on the grounds of what people might do with it, then we'll have to legislate against everything else that influences people to do bad things."
Geez louise. You can take anything to ridiculous extremes. Only a weirdo nutcase (that's the technical term ) would be influenced to the sexual molestation of a child after watching Shirley Temple's Heidi. Whereas the vast majority of people who watch it are not influenced to change their behavior in any way. This makes it significantly different from the intended audience of virtual child pornography -- a group of people who by the very fact they're interested in viewing it indicates they have unhealthy, dangerous sexual issues.
Then, again, Jeni, I ask you -- what about men who watch forced-sex pornography? They're obviously watching it in order to get off on the concept of forcing a woman to give them pleasure against her will -- they're obviously "a group of people who by the very fact they're interested in viewing it indicates they have unhealthy, dangerous sexual issues."
So. You claim we should ban pornography that feeds unhealthy images into people's minds? Let's make a start with rape pornography.
Posts: 641 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Protecting Morality .--Unless effecting a clear, unmistakable infringement of rights secured by fundamental law, legislation suppressing prostitution 161 or gambling will be upheld by the Court as concededly within the police power of a State. 162 Accordingly, a state statute may provide that, in the event a judgment is obtained against a party winning money, a lien may be had on the property of the owner of the building where the gambling transaction was conducted when the owner knowingly consented to the gambling. 163 Similarly, a court may order a car used in an act of prostitution forfeited as a public nuisance, even if this works a deprivation on an innocent joint owner of the car. Supp.1 For the same reason, lotteries, including those operated under a legislative grant, may be forbidden, irrespective of any particular equities. 164
This is a far cry from your claim that "Congress has the authority to pass a law solely to define morality in this country."
Especially given that suppressing manufactured pornography is, by its very nature, censorship of the rights to freedom of speech and press.
As a tangent, I find it ridiculous that either prostitution or gambling is illegal, though I doubt either will remain illegal for much longer. Within the century, I'd imagine, both laws will be gone or at least greatly relaxed.
Posts: 641 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find it ironic that you can not pay someone for sex, but you can pay someone for sex as long as someone is filming it.
Posts: 1034 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Daed, I'm inclined to agree with you on the clause. I guess I didn't pay enough attention in my government class back in high school. It's funny, though, I'd still swear I remember reading a bit specifically about morality. I think I'm getting old.
The VCP still seems to be covered under the definition of obscenity, which is not covered under free speach laws.
As for the legal gambling and hookers, I'm hoping I'll be raptured out before then.
posted
The right of states to use the police power to affect public morals has been confirmed in numerous Supreme Court Cases. It is only regulated when it touches a fundamental right or involves a suspect classification. Lawrence was decided on both these grounds.
In the case of pornography, the law touches on free speech, so it will receive review to make sure prohibitions are narrowly drawn.
Given that substantive due process in the economic sphere was rejected during the depression, I doubt gambling will ever be protected by a Supreme Court decision.
posted
I'm questioning that too, Jon Boy. Despite assertions here that
quote:Rape fantasy porn is relatively common. Why isn't this illegal?
and
quote: I'll use Suneun's rape example. Forced-sex porn is fairly common -- should we ban all rape pornos that appear realistic?
I was under the impression that forced sex porn is illegal in the US, making it fairly uncommon. The biggest markets for rape porn seem (to me) to be the Asian markets. If I am in the wrong, please correct me. I think you'd be hard pressed to find American rape flicks, and as we're discussing legality/legislation, we should make these distinctions of illicit origin.
quote:Lalo, are you saying that rape pornography is legal right now? I find that shocking.
Of course it is, provided it's role-played. Manufactured rape. If that's legal, I see no reason why artificial child pornography, as disgusting as it is, can be prohibited by law. Nobody's hurt by the creation of it, the same way nobody's hurt by the creation of "unconsensual" pornography. Whether people are inspired to do illegal acts by the viewing of pornography is a different matter, but if you're going to pursue that tact, why limit yourself to pornography? Grand Theft Auto encourages carjacking and the murder of policemen and pedestrians. Reading Marx may spark a desire in you to overthrow the United States government. Playing thought police isn't a role I'm comfortable with any government, least of all my own, assuming.
quote:The right of states to use the police power to affect public morals has been confirmed in numerous Supreme Court Cases. It is only regulated when it touches a fundamental right or involves a suspect classification. Lawrence was decided on both these grounds.
In the case of pornography, the law touches on free speech, so it will receive review to make sure prohibitions are narrowly drawn.
Given that substantive due process in the economic sphere was rejected during the depression, I doubt gambling will ever be protected by a Supreme Court decision.
The Depression was a good amount of time ago. I don't see how the state can determine the spending habits of its citizenry if it's truly dedicated to freedom for all -- in time, I suspect that particular statue will be relaxed considerably, given the inconsistency of its existence with the rest of the Constitution.
Which morality systems has Congress used its police powers to enforce that haven't touched on the rights of the citizenry or infringed on the articles on the Constitution?
Also, out of interest, what's your opinion on the legal status of prostitution?
Posts: 641 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm. It's possible I'm wrong about the legal status of forced-sex pornography in the US. If it is illegal, which I doubt, I have some friends -- and some stores -- to turn over to TIPS.
However, as I've seen official DVD versions of "unwilling" nurses who sleep with their patients and the like exhibited by friends at open parties, I seriously doubt its illegality. Or is that French movie, the one that stirred up so much controversy with its rape scene last year, illegal to view in the United States?
That's a rather disturbing infringement of my right to free speech, if true...
Posts: 641 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) would be influenced to the sexual molestation of a child after watching Shirley Temple's Heidi. Whereas the vast majority of people who watch it are not influenced to change their behavior in any way. This makes it significantly different from the intended audience of virtual child pornography -- a group of people who by the very fact they're interested in viewing it indicates they have unhealthy, dangerous sexual issues.
