Pedo Files: A Summary - Page 2

[B]
2) You're potentially supporting it by "showing" people that there is a demand

- Nomatter HOW small, whether you are providing ad income on a forum (reddit?), or if you accidently seeded 1MB of a file, or if you just made the click-counter go up by 1 hit, you are actively supporting whatever you downloaded and telling people out there - "hey, there's demand, go make more and maybe someone will buy it".

Does this make you a contributor to child abuse? Should you care? Does, for instance, second-hand smoke from your cigarette make you a child abuser? Does buying Levi's jeans and other USA companies make you a child abuser (link)? Does bringing your child up under a particular religion (compared to no religion, or compared to a different religion) make you a child abuser? Does paying your taxes make you a child abuser (war etc)?

Again, food for thought on generating perspective around these issues.

On November 07 2011 14:24 r.Evo wrote:
Your "1)" is pretty much solved by the actual definition. To quote wiki it is "typically characterized by a primary or exclusive sexual interest"

Also if you get to the psychological basis there is a difference between "Pedophilia" (0-10), "Hebephilia" (11-14) and "Ephebophilia" (15-19)




Yes, I do get that this is a very, very thin ice topic. However, please take a deep breath and consider these facts:
-Sexual impulse towards children (or animals, your mother or your grandpa for all that I care) is not "wrong" itself. It's an impulse. If you're a human being you will have impulses which indicate to rip someone elses throat out and shove a knife up his ass (hint, that's what your impulse towards the OP sounds like. Does that make me call you a sick fucker? No.).
-Acting on your impulses is a whole different story.

-The possibility to find close examples to your original impulse within a legal environment is, among people who actually care about the psychology behind it, often considered the best possible "treatment". There is a thin line between desensitizing and satisfying. Desensitizing is what happens a lot of the time when people are being isolated and get some kind of "material" about their original input. Satisfying is what happens when you (dingding) are confronted with your impulse in a socially accepted way.


For a brief time I used to do some workshops on an entirely different matter with a psychologist who is specialized in bringing out testimonies by pedophiles who actually did rape/molest children and assisting convicted ones during their prison time and we had quite some talks about that exact topic. In his opinion the people who actually DO commit those crimes are, emotionally, cornered between their "impulse", social (or rather emotional) isolation and their sense of what's actually right or wrong. Here's the trick: The more they isolate themselves from societies standards, the more likely they're going to act on their impulse.

Once this kind of "spiral" starts, no one cares about punishment anymore. It doesn't matter if they get sentenced for life or killed. There's just the initial impulse left and the thin string that keeps them from committing the crime (the knowledge that it's wrong) keeps getting thinner and thinner. THAT is where the real danger lies.



What I meant by "The possibility to find close examples to your original impulse within a legal environment" considering childporn would actually be (don't laugh, things like that exists e.g. in Japan) stuff like e.g. a brothel with legal girls who look as if they're not legal yet or lolicon. By giving people who have such impulses or conditions the possibility to legally get some kind of substitute you keep them socially integrated and the bond that says "This is my society, I know that my impulses are off the chart but, hey, this is not all of it but it's enough for me" gets stronger and people are less likely to commit actual crimes.


tl;dr: