• ilmagico@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Every country has different rules, standing on wikipedia.

    Personally, I feel that if making completely fictitious depictions of child porn, where no one is harmed (think AI-generated, or by consenting adults depicting minors) was legal, it might actually prevent the real, harmful ones from being made, thus preventing harm.

    • theangryseal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      At the same time, an argument could be made that increasing the availability of such a thing could land it in the eyes of a person who otherwise wouldn’t have seen it in the first place and problems could develop.

      It could normalize something absurd and create more risks.

      I’m no expert and I’d rather leave it to people who thoroughly understand such behaviors to determine what is and isn’t ultimately more or less detrimental to the health of society.

      I just know how (anecdotally) pornography desensitizes a person until it makes more extreme things less bizarre and unnatural. I can’t help but imagine a teenager who would have otherwise developed a more healthy sexuality stumbling on images like that and becoming desensitized.

      It’s definitely something that needs some serious thought.

      • Jaxom_of_Ruatha@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        “I’m no expert and I’d rather leave it to people who thoroughly understand such behaviors to determine what is and isn’t ultimately more or less detrimental to the health of society.”

        One of the big problems with addressing this problem is that NOBODY thoroughly understands these behaviors. They are so stigmatized that essentially nobody voluntarily admits to having pedophilic urges and scientists can only study those who actually act on them and harm children. They are almost certainly not a representative sample of the entire population of pedophiles, and this severely limits our ability to study the psychology of the population as a whole and what differentiates the rapists among them from the non-rapists.

        • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think Japan would make a really good case study. Childlike aesthetics and behaviors are strongly sexualized in Japan. They also produce the most simulated CSAM per capita with few laws restricting production. Actual child pornography wasn’t made illegal until 1999. They still sell photo books of tweens in swimsuits and stuff in Japan. That, and lolicon, which is basically hentai with kids in it.

          There isn’t the same stigma against attraction to children, and we see that some 15-20% of the Japanese male population holds some aesthetic preferences that most westerners would consider pedophilic.

          I think we’d probably see similar numbers in America if we could cut though the stigma, which some people would panic over, but if anything we should be relieved that despite such numbers, actual sexual abuse of children is very rare.

          I mean, the writing is on the wall already. Nothing in the West is more sexualized than youth, we just like to pretend that 18 is some magical age where you looked completely different the day before your birthday or something, and ignore that puberty comes a lot earlier than that.

          What really matters is the social norms surrounding these things. We shouldn’t care if a 40 year old man thinks a 15 year old girl is attractive, we should care if he tries to do anything about that attraction, because the latter is a conscious choice that does harm, while the former is more complex matter of human sexual response.

      • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most of what you’re repeating about porn “normalizing” things and “desensitizing” viewers is straight out of the puritan handbook. There is evidence that men who overconsume porn and don’t have a healthy sex life can fall into self-destructive patterns, but porn consumption doesn’t work like a drug. It’s not like the more you consume the more hardcore of content you desire, or that being exposed to certain types of porn will create new preferences that you wouldn’t otherwise have had. This is just long-standing anti-sex-work propaganda that tries to liken pornography to narcotics.

        People who consume CSAM are already into that kind of thing. Seeing CSAM isn’t going to turn anyone into a pedophile just as playing GTA isn’t going to turn anyone into a hardened street criminal. The goal should be to protect children, not to censor any content that sexualizes youth, because that really is a slippery slope. More on that here: https://nypost.com/2010/04/24/a-trial-star-is-porn/

      • ilmagico@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, valid points, but it’s not gonna be easy to tell, in practice. Doing a proper scientific test is likely going to be unethical for obvious reasons, so we’re left to wonder if the cons outweigh the pros or not.

    • papertowels@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thanks for sharing that link. I hated reading through it, but it answered the question haha…

      I don’t really have strong feelings about it but I do think I lean towards agreeing with you.