Deep Dot Web Meme and News From the Other side of the Web
I was going to post this just a few hours before the news about operation Onymous started to flow in, but now it seems more relevant than ever. I am sure that once the media will start showing interest in real problems, LE budgets will follow the publicity footsteps:
In case any Law Enforcement agent/agency is feeling bored lately – One of our dark net sources provided us with some other place where you can spend your endless resources. Recently, a new low was reached as someone / some group – started promoting a new “Darknet crowdfunding site” aimed at Child pornography producers looking to make some money off their “content”. The site describes the “unfair” reality where CP producers are unable to earn money from their “productions” since people are sharing them for free on Tor’s various CP sites right after the first copy is sold. The site aims to tackle this problem by offering a crowdfunding platform for those producers, as its stated:
This site is the best method for child porn producers to sell their content. Before, it was almost impossible to make commercial grade child porn, since as soon as they sell it to one person, that video is all over TOR for free. This site aims to solve that problem by having many pedos each contribute a small amount of bitcoin towards the video. Once the total contribution reaches the asking price, the video is released here, on this site, to everyone who contributed at least 0.05 bitcoin. The producer is then paid the asking price, minus a 22% commission. If the asking price is not reached after one month, then everyone who made a contribution is given their money back and the video is erased from the server.
Further more, the site admin go on and explains how he has “Zero tolerance for rape or even coercing an unwilling child to participate”:
Our biggest concern is the welfare of children who appear on this site. {Site name redacted} has a ZERO tolerance policy for rape or even coercing an unwilling child to participate. If there is even the slightest hint that your video contains an unwilling participant, it will not be posted on the site. Light bondage is acceptable as long as it’s just role playing and the child does not appear to be in distress. In addition, children younger than three years will not be allowed to appear on this site, since children younger than that do not necessarily have the ability to communicate whether they like what you are doing to them. The same goes for children who are asleep.
We also require that if you are a producer, you must pay your child actors a fair wage. The purpose of this site is so that your delicious lolis can afford college, not so that you can exploit them for your own personal gain. Of course we have no way to enforce this rule, but please respect it anyway since it is the right thing to do.
And Obviously all of this could not exist without some safety advice and bitcoin tumbling:
People seeing this site may be concerned about the anonymity of bitcoins. There have been many false rumors in the pedo community that bitcoins are traceable. You can protect yourself with a bitcoin mixer like fogcore5n3ov3tui.onion. You can transfer bitcoins from fogcore directly to your bitcoin address on this site. You can also protect yourself through buying and selling bitcoins with cash instead of a bank account at localbitcoins.com. Localbitcoins.com requires javascript. Make sure you disable javascript before returning to any onion website.
The problem with sites like this one that makes it even worse than the normal ones, which are bad enough anyway, is that the only reason it was created is to Incentivize people to produce even more CP and get rewarded to do so.
Our source is reporting that there are already some live campaigns on the site that are being funded and provided us with a screenshot, details redacted:
So LE, Now that all these horrifying Silk-Roadian-Market Sites are down (Ok not all of them, just few), Lets see how fast you could take this one down along with the others. Ready? Go.
Sicko perverts that look at that crap
Unfortunately even if they take down this site, OpenBazaar, a p2p network of e-commerce that cannot be taken down, can easily replace it, and OB will not have a moral stance like the admin of this site does (and it wont have a 22% commission either yikes!).
I really hope this is a honey pot.
No children under 3? So a 4yr old child is able to consent to these sick fucks? Jesus Christ I hope these people die.
Well yes. Sexual stimulation feels good for all people. Sexual stimulation reduces stress, releases bonding hormones, and it is fun. All things good for kids. Only when it is forced it is bad.
Can’t believe LE is prioritizing toward closing darkmarkets over tracking these fucking sickos, but in a way seeing they NEVER did anything substantial about this over decades i’m pretty sure it’s beneficial to them, hell i even suspect these satanic evil POS are part of it and are the first users and producers of such content.
Why not put a link to this site? I’m sure theres not a single twisted sicko that doesn’t know the URL, let us at least spam and DDoS them to pieces.
If you want the URL you can find it in 30 in the place where all the others are listed…
Can we get a noob version of what this means? It’s not under the marketplaces tab right?
And I pray to the great and Mighty Thor that this is a honeypot. We need “PedoDDoS2014″ to trend on Twitter. Someone call in Anonymous, the good fight needs to be fought on this one.
Everything you dont want to visit can be found at the hidden wiki onion.
Looks like you forgot to redact the name of the site in the screenshot. Already found an URL. Thanks, didn’t know about this site
Joking aside, just wanted to point it out. It took me literally 30 seconds to find the URL from the name. So if you redacted the actual URL in the screenshot, you should do the same for the name if you don’t want to bring more visitors to that site.
Fixed!
I’m going to play devil’s advocate here, because I’ve been thinking about this for some time. Before you decide to bash me, keep in mind that I’m just trying to spark conversation here.
You guys are saying some awfully judgmental things about this group of people, but isn’t that the same kind of things that people have been saying about homosexuals for decades?
What exactly makes these people different from homosexuals? It doesn’t sound like they want to victimize anyone, and I’m sure they didn’t choose to have these sexual urges. So, they want to have sex with children… at what age do you draw the line? 18? 15? 5? And why do you draw the line at a particular point? Back in the old days, people used to get married at much younger ages than now. You could marry a 13yo back then, but now if you get involved with one, you’re a sick pedo.
When I was in high school, I had a gf who was 13; she was extremely hot, with a full bush and 36c breasts. Most people thought she was older than me. Would I be a sicko if I looked at a girl her age with a similar build, and wanted to bone her in my 30’s?
Simple answer is yes, 13 is not old enough to be considered an adult no matter what you look like. Years ago people might have got married earlier but they married people around their own age and I doubt they were 13, even if they are it doesn’t make it right. In school back then teachers whacked kids too, so is that OK?
Look this argument is BS, theres a huge difference between to consenting adults(gay) and an adult taking advantage of a child, it doesn’t matter that they look older they have a lot of growing up to do, mentally.
People conparing these to gay are way off the mark, its all about the consent and children who might even give consent don’t really know what they are at, remember when you were 13? I do, I thought I knew everything and was old enough to look after myself but its not until at least 30 do you realize how wrong you were, its like watching sports they call 25-30 year olds “good kids”
Are you looking for somebody to say you were OK to be with a 13 year old? I’ve kids that age and its anything but alright, deal with these kids 24 hours a day and when they get upset after a friend says something dumb, then you might understand what you did to that kid.
And to answer your other question what age do we draw the line, I believe its around 18-20. It does matter what age you are though, somebody in their late 30’s has a lot more experience than a 13 year old, its soo easy to fool them especially a young girl with “Daddy issues” I’m sure you know what I mean, I’m guessing you understand its wrong to take advantage of somebody no matter the age, the fact they are so young makes it easier for the older person to take advantage and therefor makes it taht bit worse, if it was such a little of a thing why do they hide it so much?
I’m was actually really hard not to use words like sick or scumbag but I realize you are creating conversation, at least I hope so.
‘It is overtly obvious that children who have been sexually abused grow up to deal with severe psychological problems.’
Some homosexuals also grow up with severe psychological problems. And what is your definition of sexual abuse anyway? I mean, if we didn’t live in a world where sex was demonized and you had sex with a young child who really enjoyed it, where’s the harm?
And no, I’m not looking for justification for anything. It is amazing how quickly people jump to casting judgment on someone who dares to ask these kinds of questions. It’s like ‘If you ever DARE to ask about a negative stereotype about a particular race, then you are obviously a racist douche.’ It’s actually a pet peeve of mine. Why can’t people ask these kinds of questions without having accusations of being a pedo hurled in their direction?
For a start I didn’t say anything like ‘It is overtly obvious that children who have been sexually abused grow up to deal with severe psychological problems’ and I didn’t go hurling abuse either. So calm down, I did say it was for conversation. I also said that I believe the age should be 18-20 thats different to what it is. If you don’t want an opinion why ask? I already said it was hard not to call these people scum and I do believe its a compulsion and they don’t choose to have but it still is not right and the people doing it know this too.
Now you ask what is sexual abuse, is that a serious question? Anything involving sex with an underage kid and an adult is abuse. You said about marriage between someone as young as 13, I presume that would be another kid around the same age, if not, what would happen with an adult who prefares 13 year olds? The 13 year old would quickly out grow what he likes. That being the case the kid would be dropped once too old, thats abuse, using somebody for sex. And no matter what pedo’s think these kids don’t like it, I was one of those kids and had group with literally 100’s not one of them ever said anything other than feeling guilty(thinking it was their fault) or felt embaressed by it, I have heard from 100’s in group and see them crying after they have grown to be 40-50 years old.
You were with a group of people that were socially indoctrinated to view it as the worst thing ever. Regardless of their consent or lack there of. Just like gays would form groups about how being gay was bad for them.
Are you kidding? In almost all civilized world age of content is 14/15, not 18/20!!! And psychological disparity between younger and older individuals nowadays is really lower than 30 years ago!
In my schooldays most of my 14 years old classmates were engaged with over 18 boys! One girl was engaged with a 37 years old, yes it seemed creepy to me but you can be sure it was her business!
I bet you’re an american… you’re really raving mad with your sex problem.
Yo Gideon:
There is no differnce between child pornography and child sexual abuse you sick fuck. An adult with a camera coercing chlidren into sexual acts is sexually abusing a child. The children don’t know what they are being told to do is wrong, despite their gut feeling that it is.
The child victms grow up with psychological damage because they realize that someone they trusted: a loved one ( relative ), priest or teacher took advantage of, and violated them.
Regarding homosexuals with psych issues, many do not have any. Those that do, do so because of the view society has of them.
Of course you are seeking justification you coward. Why else would you be ” engaging in discussion ” in defense of pedos.
You never addressed my point regarding why even hardened criminals, along with the rest of society, despise you pedos. Why is it that when you are incarcerated you will be gang raped and beaten to a pulp on a daily basis
Having sex with a minor is essentially rape. The pedophile is having sex with someone who can’t give consent. Simple. Comparing this to homosexuality is logically invalid. The confusion arises when we make decisions based on our feelings without consulting our minds. People don’t like homosexuals, people don’t like pedophiles, so the 2 must be the same?
NO! Pedophilia is rape. Homosexuality is not. It doesn’t matter how much we like one or the other…rape is wrong!
Using your logic children can never consent to anything ever.
Your view is that since you don’t like it, you deem children can’t consent. You then falsely label it all rape which then leads to attaching a stigma to the unharmed child. A label that carries a lot of baggage.
A more logical approach is, “the child’s consent is not strong enough to be allowed.” Which can then be backed by parental consent of the child’s consent.
Your black and white approach is terrible logic meant to enforce moral views built on panic and hysteria.
Fun fact, the homosexual movement once supported paedosexuals heavily before the 80s. Until it became politically beneficial for them to contribute to the hatred of paedosexuals for their own social gains.
well put
Gideon – you are obviously a pedo. Homosexuals engage in consensual sex, therefore no one gets hurt. There is no such thing as consensual child pornography. If you believe that, then you are seriously deluded. More likely, that is just your means of justifying your guilty conscience.
It is overtly obvious that children who have been sexually abused grow up to deal with severe psychological problems. So you engage in aberrant sexual behaviour, for your own personal gratification, with no regard for the impact on another human being.
You are selfish and cruel. There is a reason pedophiles are considered the lowest form of criminal on the planet. There is a reason that even among hardened, imprisoned criminals pedofiles are reviled as the scum of the Earth. If you are ever incarcerated you will be praying for death.
‘Gideon – you are obviously a pedo.’
According to Wikipedia: ‘Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger. As a medical diagnosis, specific criteria for the disorder extends the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.’
So no, that does not include me. I’m not one who thinks you should be having sex with people that young, but as far as I’m concerned, if the bush has hair, then you can at least be excused if you happen to feel a little twitch in your jeans when looking in their direction. For example, if I had told you my ex-gf was 18 and you were attracted to her, would you suddenly not be if I then revealed that she was 13?
And another poster said the cutoff age is 18-20, but I’m not sure why. I’ve known some people who were more mature at 15 than others were at 40. I’m not suggesting that anyone should be out shagging every 15yo they come across, but I think perhaps we should be using another criteria besides age when determining if they’re old enough to be of legal age. Not only for sex, but to voting and other things as well.
If there are any 40 year olds that are not as mature or more mature than a 15 year old theres something wrong with that 40 year old.
And there is a huge difference between looking at a young girl and being attracted to them but acting on that urge is where the problem is, I’m not for a second saying you should not look at a good looking girl, hell I have seen girls in school uniform that I thought were goodlooking but I don’t go and try sleep with them even if they were looking for me to.
This is great. DeepDotWeb now requires java and cookies ? Fuck you. I will never engage in discussion here again. Are you part of operation Onymous now ???? Assholes.
You do not need JS or cookies.
EDIT: You are right actually. new spam plugin, fixing in a minute. Sorry.
– Fixed.
Idiot, you don’t need cookies or JS.
I just found out that he was right actually – because of some connectivity issues with the spam filtering, i used another spam plugin since yesterday, and it requested that SOME people will enable JS in order to comment, personally i couldn’t see this since i am logged in until he pointed it out and i checked now, anyway it is now disabled for everyone.
“Idiot, you don’t need cookies or JS.”
Hey Idiot numer 2 – momentarily it did require cookies and JS. Lighten up on the insults douche bag.
Unless you have ever seen childporn first hand, please dont say things about how it hurts children. If you saw just 1 minute of childporn, you would see that kids LOVE having sex just like everyone else.
Now thats talking out your ass, see it and you will know the kids like it. Bull-shit, I was one of those kids that was abuse when I was around 10-11 and no I didn’t fucking like it, I hated it so much that it messed my head right up. No self esteem, no confidence and it took years for me to get help and get over it, I thought it was my fault now I’m older and know it was not me it was him, so guess what? He won’t be messing with kids again thats for sure.
It sounds like you were raped, and I am very sorry to hear that. Some people who are attracted to adults are rapists and some people who are attracted to kids are also rapists. But please understand that the kind of childporn most of us watch is not like that. I personally would not try to touch a kid who “didn’t fucking like it” and I am very sorry that whoever did this to you was not the same kind of pedo I am.
Joe, I am sorry you were molested. However your experience of being forced is not applicable to experiences of consent.
Yeah, children love sex so much that you sick rapists (sex with a child is always rape) have to travel to third-world-countries all the time to find poor and desperate kids who have to prostitute themselves to survive.
I was in Cambodia, and I saw how the little girls and boys there “enjoyed” it, when they followed some ugly western bastards to their hotel rooms, crying so much that my heart broke (informed the police, but they are part of this shit there. Gave some of the kids money and said, they should go home, but soon realized how useless these actions were considering the unbelievable amount of pedos and child prostitutes there)
Note: I do not doubt that there are some sort of “sexual” (of you want to use that term for the first tactile experiences of children) feelings even children have, BUT AS THEY ARE MENTALLY NOT READY TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS, NO ADULT HAS THE RIGHT TO USE THEM FOR SEXUAL BENEFITS. It is called “sexual partners” for some reason, and a child never can be your partner, it will always be in a way weaker position than you.
Children have plenty enough options to grow into their sexuality sharing experiences among equals, e.g. other children of their age. They don’t need some sick pedos who try to manipulate them in a way only a child can’t be aware of
“Yeah, children love sex so much that you sick rapists (sex with a child is always rape) have to travel to third-world-countries all the time to find poor and desperate kids who have to prostitute themselves to survive.”
Literally irrelevant to the topic at hand. What if I said this?
Yeah, women love casual sex so much that you sick rapists (sex with a women outside of marriage is always rape) have to travel to third world countries all the time to find poor and desperate women who have to prostitute themselves to survive.
“I was in Cambodia, and I saw how the little girls and boys there “enjoyed” it, when they followed some ugly western bastards to their hotel rooms, crying so much that my heart broke (informed the police, but they are part of this shit there. Gave some of the kids money and said, they should go home, but soon realized how useless these actions were considering the unbelievable amount of pedos and child prostitutes there)”
Please don’t make shit up to try and bolster your point.
I saw a documentary and the guys said that the children were excited to see them since they would be making 100 dollars to play with their penis. The guy said they looked excited as much as their own kids on Thanksgiving.
“Note: I do not doubt that there are some sort of “sexual” (of you want to use that term for the first tactile experiences of children)”
Doesn’t matter if you doubt it. Children have a sexual drive that is repressed by society and parents. Yet children still act sexually with peers and adults anyway. You can’t socialize biology away.
“BUT AS THEY ARE MENTALLY NOT READY TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS, NO ADULT HAS THE RIGHT TO USE THEM FOR SEXUAL BENEFITS”
The adult is responsible if the child is harmed. The child and adult can both gain pleasure so it is not one sided when consented. Children as young as infants are capable of orgasm. Orgasms feel great when attained consensually.
“It is called “sexual partners” for some reason, and a child never can be your partner, it will always be in a way weaker position than you.”
I am not a paedosexual but please don’t insult my platonic relationships with kids. We are equals because I view them as such. You may view kids as lesser than you but that is your issue. Not mine and not any paedosexual who also views kids as equal beings. It seems you have the problem.
“Children have plenty enough options to grow into their sexuality sharing experiences among equals, e.g. other children of their age. They don’t need some sick pedos who try to manipulate them in a way only a child can’t be aware of”
Or with an adult who is loving, treats them with respect, and takes their consent as serious as anyone else’s. That’s far from a sick person. Also, I find it funny when they do it with other kids it is okay, but with an adult suddenly they can’t be away.
Cognitive dissonance is powerful it seems.
Pretty much everyone who has gone to Cambodia to research the subject for themselves has found that it is extremely rare for prostitutes to be younger than in their mid-teens. The people claiming otherwise all seem to have in interest in making false claims – as soliciting donations is their bread and butter.
In the past this may have been different, as I once saw a documentary where the “rescuers” secretly filmed some younger sex workers. Curiously, even in that biased documentary, the girls were all quite obviously happy to be getting paid for their work, and the only time they were unhappy was when they were being rescued and afterwards – some complaining that when they were locked up in the “rescue mission” they did not have nearly the income (a few cents a day in the mission) that they did as sex workers. Those who could escaped from the “rescuers”.
What sort of “rescuers” enslave the people they rescue? “Rescuers” who can turn a good profit from it, naturally, by drumming up support and donations from moralistic cultural imperialists in the rich world. I don’t put much stock in people like that.
wow……some disturbed individuals here…..little kids love having sex??? what the fuck is wrong with you? the inability to make life altering decisions is one of the main things that makes a child a child. a 4 year old would probably love playing in a pile of toxic chemicals or dogshit but its not in the childs best interest so adults dont allow this behavior. and i cant believe that even 1 site like this still exists. and LE is proud about shutting down some drug markets….markets that would not allow such disgusting, CRIMINAL behavior to be posted on their sites. so yea, the victimless drug crime or a bunch of baby rapers, whats your priority LE? so depressing….YOUR NOT SUPPOSED TO FUCK CHILDREN YOU ABSOLUTE PIECES OF SHIT!!!!! ONLY ADULTS THAT WILL ALLOW SOME FUCKING WEIRDOS LIKE YOU TO TOUCH THEM. NOT KIDS WHO DONT EVEN HAVE THEIR THOUGHT CAPABILITIES YET!! YOU FUCKING PEDOPHILES.YOU NEED YOUR SCROTUMS CUT OFF!!!
” the inability to make life altering decisions is one of the main things that makes a child a child”
Having a consensual sexual experience is not life altering by any objective standard barring disease or pregnancy. On those points the adult would always be responsible as well as the child’s guardians.
“a 4 year old would probably love playing in a pile of toxic chemicals or dogshit but its not in the childs best interest so adults dont allow this behavior.”
Those activities would be a health hazard for both adults and children. Objectively one can determine the harm comes directly from the chemicals or shit, the same can not be said for a consensual sexual relation.
“i cant believe that even 1 site like this still exists. and LE is proud about shutting down some drug markets….markets that would not allow such disgusting, CRIMINAL behavior to be posted on their sites. so yea, the victimless drug crime or a bunch of baby rapers, whats your priority LE”
Ignoring your baby raper hyperbolic insult, I agree that the LEA are committing a crime by preventing individuals from a consensual transaction.
“YOUR NOT SUPPOSED TO FUCK CHILDREN YOU ABSOLUTE PIECES OF SHIT!!!!! ONLY ADULTS THAT WILL ALLOW SOME FUCKING WEIRDOS LIKE YOU TO TOUCH THEM. NOT KIDS WHO DONT EVEN HAVE THEIR THOUGHT CAPABILITIES YET!! YOU FUCKING PEDOPHILES.YOU NEED YOUR SCROTUMS CUT OFF!!!”
Many children enjoy this activity you insist is not supposed to be done. Your opinion comes from your upbringing and social views. Not objective facts and not the opinions of the children themselves either.
wrong aqgain asshat…..i know people who were molested and they are not ok. AND every instance of sex with a child is a molestation. they do not have the life experience to make their own decisions….thats why they are children you fuckin animals. death is too good for you pigs. YOU DONT FUCK LITTLE KIDS>>>>OR MURDER PEOPLE ANS WEAR THEIR SKIN!!!! who has to be told this??????baffling
“i know people who were molested and they are not ok”
I know adult women who were molested and they are not ok. However this does not allow me to judge consensual instances of sexual contact. Only non consensual. I agree, non consensual sexual contact is bad for a child.
“AND every instance of sex with a child is a molestation”
So you feel it is your right to over power a child to demand that they did not consent? You think it is okay to force a child to feel a certain way about something they enjoyed? That sounds very bad to me and capable of causing mental anguish.
“they do not have the life experience to make their own decisions”
Any decision at all? Every child who played tackle football with an older person was physically abused? After all did they have the experience to consent to all the possible accidents and injuries and pain that could arise? Or, as is most likely the case, do you want sexual interaction to be a special case because of how you were raised and your own moral views?
Child raping motherfuckers! In prison pedos enjoy getting satanically raped to death with a broken mop. They smile as they die.
How many of you have seen child porn? None? Very few? Okay.
Where do you get your info on the content of child porn. From the media? The police? Groups that have a very high incentive on making you think it is the worst thing ever.
The most logical opinion to take on child porn is no opinion.
I am also pleasantly surprised to see that paedosexuals care about children and that this is being shown. Most sites would purposely leave that part out.
Sexual contact feels good for all people. If it is consensual then it is not harmful in any way.
This is a fact.
That is total rubbish, why do they ask that you don’t post videos with kids crying? I’ll tell you, coz it happens a lot. They also advise you to let the kids play and be a kid, don’t just have sex all day.
Now its you that is making your mind up before knowing the facts, I have gone on one or two sites, I had an interest after my own experiences in life.
It is nothing short of aiding a molester to molest, I’ve seen dosages of sedatives to give kids safely, why would they need to be drugged if they like it? They also give advice on how to get access to kids and how to groom kids.
Now thats a word I’ll focus on for a minute.
These kids are being groomed to have sex with, a kid on his own would not know about sex and they are naturally curious, on top of that if they do go into it curious but don’t like what they are doing it won’t stop, the kid can’t control the adult. Its wrong on more than one level, kids are physically not ready for sex, they have to develop that in their teen years and even then they are only developing. Most kids will believe what you tell them and on TV its not hard to see that sex between adults is portrayed as fun and something everyone loves. A kid sees this and doesn’t know what to make of it, are they wrong coz they don’t like it or is that guilty feeling the way you’re suposed to feel. Kids don’t even understand their feelings at that age and anyone that twists it so that they can have sex is just thinking of them self and not the kid.
There is no way the love they claim is anything more than lust, as soon as the kid is older they are no longer attractive to the pedo and most likely dumped when the pedo has a new kid fooled. Don’t forget who is meant to be the responsable one here, a kid is curious about nearly everything, are you saying its OK for a 7 year old to do heroin if they like it? Both will really mess up a kid.
I’ve never once heard of a kid sticking up for a pedo when they were after being caught even with just with images of the kid. At the endd of the day pedos are adults the kids don’t know one way or the other about sex so its simple trickery on the part of the adult and thats just talking about the kids that might go along with the idea, if they don’t what happens then? Do you really expect me to believe that they would not give in to the urge after taking the huge risk in the first place, its that black and white to most, kids are out of bounds for beating, abusing mentally and of course having sex with and communities feel very strongly towards anyone that would do any of these to a kid and I’m guessing thats why it is hidden so much, I don’t see anyone protesting on the side of the pedo, yeah maybe from behind an anon account but actually going and protesting for better rights for pedos, even in Coalinga Mental Hospital which is really a prison in California, not a whole lot of support for them.
“That is total rubbish, why do they ask that you don’t post videos with kids crying? I’ll tell you, coz it happens a lot. They also advise you to let the kids play and be a kid, don’t just have sex all day.”
Because they care about the kids. You are trying to twist this to support your preconceived notions. Being sexually aroused to someone does not mean you do not care for them. In fact it naturally makes you care for them more, ignoring negative anti-sexual social influence.
“Now its you that is making your mind up before knowing the facts”
I never said whether the site is good or bad. I never said that child porn is all good or all bad (your assumption). I am merely making statements based on the facts and research and my actual observations.
“It is nothing short of aiding a molester to molest, I’ve seen dosages of sedatives to give kids safely, why would they need to be drugged if they like it?”
Most stable paedosexuals are vehemently against sedating kids for sex. That is rape, by definition, nothing more.
“These kids are being groomed to have sex with, a kid on his own would not know about sex and they are naturally curious,”
Actually many children are sexual with one another or adults while living in a very anti-child-sexuality society. It is precisely because of their natural curiosity. As a child myself I gave and received oral sex from a neighbor girl. I loved it a lot.
” if they do go into it curious but don’t like what they are doing it won’t stop, the kid can’t control the adult”
If the adult doesn’t allow it to stop, it is rape/molestation. Most paedosexuals care about the opinions and rights of the child. To them, a child should be able to say no and yes.
“kids are physically not ready for sex, they have to develop that in their teen years and even then they are only developing”
There are more kinds of sexual interaction than just intercourse. Anything that hurts the child would stop immediately, anyone who makes it happen is a rapist.
“Most kids will believe what you tell them”
Is that why most parents and teachers are at a loss for how to “control” their kids and students?
“A kid sees this and doesn’t know what to make of it, are they wrong coz they don’t like it or is that guilty feeling the way you’re suposed to feel.”
The guilty feeling comes from adults teaching them that sex is bad and dirty. Then when they see it or partake in it and it naturally feels good they get inner turmoil. Caused by misled adults teaching them sex is bad, not by the sexual contact.
“Kids don’t even understand their feelings at that age and anyone that twists it so that they can have sex is just thinking of them self and not the kid.”
Kids definitely understand their feelings unless they have a mental disorder. Especially after the ages of 6 or 7. They may not understand sexual feelings simply because of forced ignorance. You can’t raise a child, hide anything sex related from them, then claim that their ignorance of sex proves they aren’t interested and can’t understand it.
“There is no way the love they claim is anything more than lust, as soon as the kid is older they are no longer attractive to the pedo and most likely dumped when the pedo has a new kid fooled”
This is patently false. I have talked to many paedosexuals and the most common case is that the child moves on without so much as a “hey I like this other person now” while the paedosexual is heart-stricken. Kids are adaptable and lean towards pansexuality before their sexual identity really solidifies in the tween/teen years.
“Don’t forget who is meant to be the responsable one here, a kid is curious about nearly everything, are you saying its OK for a 7 year old to do heroin if they like it? Both will really mess up a kid.”
The adult is always responsible. Heroin objectively harms both adults and children. Sexual contact is good for humans when it is consensual. It does not harm.
“I’ve never once heard of a kid sticking up for a pedo when they were after being caught even with just with images of the kid.”
Look at how you and others are responding? Do you think the media would publish a story of a child defending their lover? It has happened, the one case where the 18 year old was giving the 11 year old a blowjob. The father started to beat the older guy to death and the son was begging him to stop.
“At the endd of the day pedos are adults the kids don’t know one way or the other about sex so its simple trickery on the part of the adult and thats just talking about the kids that might go along with the idea, if they don’t what happens then?”
Kids don’t know about most topics in life at first, is it evil to introduce something to a child, gauge their response, and react appropriately from there? If the child doesn’t then the paedosexual stops.
“Do you really expect me to believe that they would not give in to the urge after taking the huge risk in the first place”
Our current social atmosphere fuels abuse and punishes consensual experiences. It is easier to keep an abused child quiet than a child who consents, this on top of making anyone who is a paedosexual feel like a monster makes them become one. Basic social psychology. In effect, you and others like you create the monsters while people like me and child loving paedosexuals try to mitigate this damage.
“kids are out of bounds for beating, abusing mentally and of course having sex with and communities feel very strongly towards anyone that would do any of these to a kid and I’m guessing thats why it is hidden so much”
Actually, in many places kids can be non-consensually beat and spanked but can’t consensually take part in a sexual experience. The communities are messed up fundamentally.
“I don’t see anyone protesting on the side of the pedo, yeah maybe from behind an anon account but actually going and protesting for better rights for pedos, even in Coalinga Mental Hospital which is really a prison in California, not a whole lot of support for them.”
Hmm, people calling for death, murder, torture, imprisonment, just in this thread. And you wonder why paedosexuals and people like me hide behind anonymity? Also most social movements started with little support then grew as people got smarter. It will happen here too.
Listen, your abuser was a fucking asshole, and many paedosexuals would have stopped him. Please, even if you don’t agree with anything I say, understand that judging a whole group of people based on the actions of one abusive asshole is not the way to go about this.
“As a child myself I gave and received oral sex from a neighbor girl. I loved it a lot.”
And there you have it. A biased opinion.
“And there you have it. A biased opinion.”
Uh okay, so that’s all you took out of what I said. Anyway… what makes that any less valid than if someone says “I was molested so all sexual contact is bad”. In fact I am just saying “I had a good experience and others can too though I am aware of the bad experiences, so we should look out for those and not mix them all together” a much more logical outlook.
The fact that you try to placate this with the idea that pedos are doing this to “make children happy and pleasure them” rather than for their own personal pleasure is insanely delusional.
“The fact that you try to placate this with the idea that pedos are doing this to “make children happy and pleasure them” rather than for their own personal pleasure is insanely delusional.”
I have no sexual interest in children, though I have had preteen girls attempt to initiate sexual exploration which I have rejected.
Still, sexual orientation causes people to want to please their partners as well as receive their own pleasure. Which is the same for paedosexuals. They want children to be happy and pleasure and they want to be happy and pleasured. It’s a two way street.
For years law enforcement and the media told us that child pornography was a $20 billion per year industry.
This points to a different reality: that no one, or almost no one, was earning any money off of it – aside from law enforcement, quack therapists, and all sorts of lawyers and non-profits like NCMEC (who nevertheless pay their workers high salaries).
The claims that children enjoy appearing in these videos are consistent with what FBI agent Ken Lanning reported about this material (i.e., that the children were often laughing and smiling) a quarter century ago.
In light of the actual evidence that is available – such as The Rind Report, a.k.a. Rind et al (1998) – it may be time to ask whether sexuality is really harmful to children. Isn’t it curious that the exact same behavior which researchers find promotes peace and contentment in our closest primate cousins (bonobos) is claimed (without evidence) to have precisely the opposite effect among humans?
Of course, the public is not allowed to see the evidence for themselves. We are constantly told that each person arrested was in possession of “the very worst child abuse images possible”, though invariably when we discover what those images actually consisted of we find that the “very worst” is not what we might expect – such as (with the Azov case in Toronto) images of nudist boys playing, one or two of whom had an erection.
Perhaps those parties who have an interest in the child abuse industry – which is to say, the lawyers, cops, and quacks making hefty salaries by abusing kids – have been somewhat less than truthful in their claims. Perhaps that is why they make it illegal – with draconian penalties – to find out for ourselves.
Anyone involved in this should be prosecuted to the fullest extend of the law. Preferably a law that locks them away in a cell with a huge guy named “Bubba” who will give him protection in return for certain nightly favors. That’s the only way that pedophiles can learn that there’s no such thing as non-exploitative sex involving adults and children.
The hacker community should pool their resources to endlessly DDOS attack these sites.
I came across it the other day. I do Tor the old fashioned way. I crawl it.
Yeah, it is good to know where law enforcement’s priorities really are. Their priority is to protect their monopolized valueless currency, at all costs from teh evul bitcooners.
Okay, this is going to be a long post, but I can’t be silent anymore. I’m fairly sure that I have missed some important stuff, I’ll add it later if I’ll remember.
There are as many misconceptions about pedophilia (and child porn) as there are about drugs, if not even more. You know that media, police and society are often full of shit when talking about drugs. I could give examples but I believe I don’t need to.
I will give examples about CP and pedophilia though.
You will have to learn a new word – teleiophilia – the attraction to adults.
Some common misconceptions:
1. “Pedophilia is the molestation/sexual abuse of children.”
No, it’s a sexual attraction (maybe even an orientation, but please, I don’t want to go there now, I’m not explicitly stating that it IS). In layman’s terms, that means that your brain evaluates children as sexually attractive. No one knows how and why someone “becomes” a pedophile, but most sexologists have the opinion that you’re born with it. Just like when you’re a heterosexual man, you just like women. You like them. You fall in love with them. Even if you say to yourself that you don’t, you’ll still like them, because your brain evaluates women as sexually attractive (same with homosexuality). Pedophilia isn’t an act, just like teleiophilia isn’t an act.
2. “Pedophilia is a crime.”
It isn’t. No law in any civilized country mentions pedophilia. It mentions sexual molestation and abuse (see point 1).
3. “Pedophiles choose to be pedophiles.”
Why would anyone choose that? (See point 1 again)
If someone was born as a heterosexual, they could not be a pedophile even if they wanted to.
But yes, pedophiles (or non-pedophiles – see point 4) can choose to DO SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH A CHILD or not.
4. “Everyone who molests children is a pedophile.”
Not true, again. This is a tough one to explain, but this point needs more attention, so I will try.
Most cases of child sexual abuse (I mean actual abuse, forcing the children to sex, beating them, even killing them in some cases) is done by heterosexual teleiophiles. Yes, you’re reading it right. These people have the same sexual orientation as you (most likely). You ask why someone who is not sexually attracted to children would rape a child? I will give a few examples: alcohol (or similar drugs that make you indifferent to others’ feelings); sexual frustration; the child is easier to rape because it is weaker than a grown up adult; the child is the only “thing” that can be reached at the time when the abuser is horny and cannot control himself (if there was a dog near him at the time, he would rape the dog); etc…
These people are “normal” in regard to sexual orientation (if they had to choose between sex with a woman and a child, they would choose the woman), but have other psychological/personality problems. These ARE NOT pedophiles.
But yes, there are cases when actual pedophiles rape or even kill a child. But they also have other problems besides pedophilia and the percentage is so small that it’s almost not worth mentioning (if I had to guess, I would say that only 1 out of 100 cases of sexual motivated murders of children was done by a pedophile).
On the other hand, when pedophiles “molest” children, in most cases there isn’t even a penetration, just touching, looking or mutual masturbation or oral sex.
5. “Every pedophile will molest a child at some point in his life.”
No, see point 4 too and then read this.
I will compare pedophiles to heterosexuals now. If a heterosexual man likes/loves a woman, does he want to hurt her? Rape her? Kill her? Answer for yourself. Do you want to hurt someone whom you love? If your answer is no, then please continue.
Pedophiles fall in love too. But they fall in love with children. It means that a pedophile who is psychologically healthy (apart from the pedophilia) would never want to harm a child. Yes, there is also a lust, but it’s also in hetero- and homosexual people. The main point is – if the woman doesn’t want you, you will not rape her.
6. “Most child porn is a recording of actual rape. The children in CP are always crying and the man is fucking them without mercy.”
Someone already mentioned this here, he had a good point, but again. Most CP videos/pictures are a recording of a “consensual” sex (I will get into that later) and the children are often actually smiling and most of them seem to enjoy it. Most “CP” videos the police babbles about are nudist videos – no sexual activity, maybe some erection and light wanking here and there. And they call it “extreme hardcore child porn”. There are some real rape videos out there, but most people in the CP community hate these kind of videos.
7. “CP is a multi-million dollar industry.”
I have never met a person who paid for CP in my life on the Internet. Never, ever. In the 90s it was more common (VHS tapes from Russia, paying with bank accounts etc.) Not anymore. Most people who watch CP know that leaving a money trail to them is a no-no. Bitcoin could change this, as we can see on the site which this article is about. But most people (99% – my guess) wouldn’t ever pay for CP when they can get terabytes of it for free on Tor (or by other means). Would you pay for weed or coke if you could just download it for free?
8. “Female pedophiles don’t exist, only men can be pedophiles.”
I’ve met a few female pedophiles, but it certainly seems that the ratio is inclining towards men greatly. If someone wants me to elaborate more on this, I will, but I think that it’s not important to write more on this at the moment.
9. “Pedophiles aren’t interested in adults at all”
I’ve met a quite large number of pedophiles who are attracted to children and also to adults. I’ve even met some that are attracted to little boys and adult women [(not little girls nor adult men)(I've never met anyone who was the other way around)]. If they like adults too, that’s great – they can live their sexual life without hurting anyone and they can live a reasonably normal life.
Okay, my own story now.
I’m 18 years old. And I’m a homosexual pedophile. So far I have fallen in love with 3-4 boys aged 10-11. Adults just don’t interest me sexually – I’m one of the less fortunate pedophiles.
But guess what… I have never touched a child in an inappropriate way. And I never will. I told my mom about my sexuality (I wouldn’t do it now again, but one can’t take back what he said). She didn’t kick me out of the house. She still loves me. Why? Because I’m still the same as I were before. I have never hurt anyone.
I was born with this damnation called pedophilia. I started to notice it since I’ve been a child myself.
And now that I’m 18, what can I look forward to in my life? I can’t have a family, a girlfriend, a normal love life.
I would love to.
But I will not be regretting myself here.
Am I worse than you? Am I worse just because my brain is wired differently than it “should” be? If you think so, why? I’ve never hurt a child, I could say that most children I know like me a lot.
And that’s the case with most of us. We enjoy being around children, playing with them, taking care of them. Without anything sexual. We understand children, we live in the same “world”.
And on the topic of “consensual” sex with children. Yes, it exists. Whether you like it or not, there are a lot of children who would love to have sex with an adult. But you’re right, almost every sexual contact between an adult and a child is harmful to the child. But not because of the sexual act itself. It’s because of the society’s view on this. Even if a child came to his/her adult friend and said “I want to suck you off” and they do it together, the child will eventually learn what society thinks about it and will feel ashamed. Feel guilty. Feel hurt. So the best thing for pedos is to abstain from any sexual activity with children.
The pedos are separated – ones who want to have sex with children consensually, believing that they can protect the child from the harm (which is impossible in most cases) AND the ones who have similar opinion to mine (you won’t find many of these people on CP forums, though).
On the topic of child porn and its harmfulness. Many people say that every time someone watches a CP video, the child suffers again. This MAY be right. But why are videos of adults being raped or tortured legal (isn’t a video of a child -not naked- being beaten or tortured legal too? Not sure on this.)? Or some “prank” videos – I mean the really cruel ones. What about beatings?
Would you not feel hurt or disgraced if thousands of people all across the world watched a video of you being beaten by some gang? You would, right? But guess what. It’s essentially legal. They can watch it, they can save it, they can distribute it, they can sell it. They can even wank off watching it. But if I were to upload a naked picture of myself when I was 5, I would commit a crime. A horrible crime.
Surely, the children don’t feel good knowing that someone wanks over their porn videos. But as you can see from what I wrote above, this isn’t a valid argument.
And what about animated CP? You can’t tell me that it harms anyone. But it’s still illegal in some countries. Even written CP stories are.
And for your interest, when CP was legal in Denmark, the child abuse cases decreased A LOT. And then again increased when a law was passed to prosecute the possession of CP. Search for it if you want to know more.
I (and many of us) don’t want to legalize sex with children. All I want is a world that can differentiate between someone who hasn’t done anything wrong from someone who rapes people. I would like all of you to have at least some respect for those of us who don’t have sex with children and want to lead a good life. Please. We are people, too.
Thinking that we’re all rapists is the same as if I said that all heterosexuals rape women.
Do they? Or not? Not really sure now.
And two questions:
What would you do if your child told you that he/she is attracted to children?
Who is worse? A pedophile that watches CP, or a non-pedophile parent that treats his/her children as shit and beats them?
Will everyone bash me for this post? I think so. But it doesn’t matter. Just wanted to get this out of me for years.
Will mods delete my post because I outed myself as a pedo? I really hope not. It’s a freedom of speech, right?
Thanks for sharing that Matt. Good for you on deciding not to “act out”! Most paedos are gentle and harmless like you. I believe the Law preventing sex with children is vital and must be upheld but those that do break this Law should be treated in a civilised manner in prison. I belive this for ethical reasons. If you want a pragmatic reason ; if a perp thought they would be used violently in prison they might consider drastic action to silence the witness.
Sadly not all paedophiles are like Matt. There are some who get a thrill from the power they excersise within an organisation – often a church – having sex with the kids and getting away with it. Some of them are really nasty sick bastards – not many thankfully.
Hi all,
I thought I might contribute to this discussion and cut away the flak a bit. While I want to maintain my anonymity, I am an academic researcher published in the field of child sexual victimisation and exploitation, and I have also had experience working professionally within this area.
First of all, paedophilia: the sexual attraction to children. I use the term ‘paedophilia’ and ‘paedophile’ for ease of understanding, incorporating hebephilia (the attraction to pubescent underage children). I will use the term ‘children’ to refer to teenagers as well. Now, there’s two understandings here: 1) the psychological condition as set out in the DSM, and the broader sexual attraction to children.
Is being a paedophile illegal? Of course not. Being sexually attracted to anything is legal in most Western countries–it is *acting out* on some of these attractions that are illegal. So being attracted to animals, for instance, is fine–but if you sexually interact with an animal, that’s bestiality and a crime.
Are paedophiles born attracted to children? Well this is something that’s still being researched, and hopefully one day we’ll have an answer. Right now, however, you cannot definitively state that paedophiles are born that way. One of the problems is that, unlike homosexuality, it is impossible to definitively tell whether a person will grow up to be a paedophile by looking at their childhood behaviours. Heterosexual children act a certain way to the opposite sex; homosexual children act a certain way to the same sex (this is a generalising statement, obviously). Are there paedophile children? It’s impossible to tell.
My personal opinion, based on my studies and professional experience, is that paedophiles are not born that way. I believe it is a developed paraphilia, and that there are multiple ways of developing it. I think there may be certain pre-conditions that can be developed through life experiences that increase the chances of developing paedophilia, such as lowered compulsion control. These pre-conditions won’t *always* lead towards developing paraphilias, obviously.
Now, I will define acting out on paedophilia as “child sexual victimisation” (yes, it gives you a preview into my beliefs for the next big question!).
Is child sexual victimisation negative for children? I firmly believe it is. Studies conducted on children and adults who have experience child sexual victimisation, including self-report studies, victim surveys and the more traditional population studies indicate that negative life effects such as post traumatic stress, lower life, work and education achievements, re-victimisation as children and adults, substance abuse, depression and suicide are common. Meta-analyses of such studies have reached the same conclusions–an older one off the top of my head is Paoluccia, Genuisa and Violato (2001) if you’re interested.
My direct experience in this field also corroborates these findings, including experiences with victims, perpetrators and others who work in the area.
I have read comments in this article that indicate a belief that children can consent to sexual contact, that they enjoy sexual contact (as evidenced by child exploitation material) and that older children, such as teenagers, are less likely to be harmed. I will address these points here:
Consent. Children, including teenagers, cannot give informed consent to a sexual encounter with an adult. Even if they appear mature, or are physically mature, they lack the life experience and emotional/psychological maturity needed to give informed consent. A human being’s brain does not actually finish developing well into the 20s, but a lot of the crucial development occurs in the teenage years that allows for better choices. Of course, not even all adult choices are well-informed, but the line is based on practicality as well as science. An 18 year old can be taken advantage of as much as a 13 year old, but it is more unlikely, and an 18 year old hopefully has more resilience and emotional maturity to resist it.
Notice I said ‘adult’ there–children going through puberty do experiment with their peers. Such experimentation *can* go wrong, however for the most part it relatively healthy and born of curiosity. The key difference is that peer sexual interaction is on an equal level, lacking the inescapable power imbalance inherent to adult-child sexual interactions. A sexually mature adult cannot be on an equal footing with a sexually immature child.
Enjoyment. To a point, children can derive pleasure–however, I would define this as ‘sensual’ pleasure, not ‘sexual’. Sexuality is more than just physical sensation–for pleasure to be sexual, emotional and mental sexuality must be fully mature. This is why we describe children as ‘innocent’–they may derive self-pleasure, but it is wholly on a simple, physical level. This does not mean that another person should provide them pleasure–this makes an innocent experience into a one-sided sexual one, which research tells us can be very damaging psychologically.
Older children are less likely to be harmed. Once more, this is based on the misconception that because teenagers tend to be, for want of a better word, ‘randy’, that they will find sexual interaction with an adult to be a positive experience. Of course, as you approach the age of 18 this becomes a grey area, but as a general rule, sexual experimentation between peers is healthy due to this experimentation being on an equal footing. Even if older children request it from an adult, it is up to the adult to be responsible and say ‘no’. Teenagers are not emotionally mature enough to sexually interact with adults–once again, studies have shown many negative effects that arise from such interactions. This is even true when teenagers seek out such interactions themselves.
Anyway I’ve written a lot here, even though I’ve tried to keep it as short as possible. If you have any questions or comments, please don’t hesitate but I’d appreciate it if you kept it civil. I will endeavour to answer everyone, but my time is always limited (when did life get so busy!).
You wrote a lot, most of it was drawing conclusions that cannot be drawn from the research mentioned as well as injecting your own moral beliefs on sexuality. Also mentioning your credentials means little as you can be lying very easily.
Fact: No research that controls for upbringing and social environment shows that consensual sexual contact between anyone is innately harmful. It does not exist. Thus, it is intellectually dishonest as a supposed researcher yourself to claim that consensual sexual contact between a child and adult (that you manipulatively label “child sexual victimization” regardless of what children themselves think) is always innately harmful to the child.
Fact: Much research done (including anthropological research) that attempts to control for the above mentioned factors actually shows that consensual sexual contact between an adult and child is not innately harmful and is beneficial to the child. I make the claim “beneficial” merely because if something is not psychologically harmful, but brings physical pleasure, then that is a benefit. It is also known that desired sexual stimulation releases oxytocin, a stress reducing bonding hormone. Another benefit. You can look at the Rind research as well as books such as “Harmful to Minors” and “The Trauma Myth” which outlines research themselves you can look up.
Fact: Regardless it is still imperative that paedosexuals avoid overt sexual contact with children. We do not live in a vacuum and regardless of how much explaining you do, no matter how loving and caring and respectful you are, people like this researcher here make a living off insisting all (or most) children are abused and harmed. Their paycheck and moral psyche relies on this. The child grows up in this society and more often than not will re-conceptualize what they previously enjoyed as abuse in some way.
Fact: The brain scan studies suffer some of the same flaws that most child sexual contact studies suffer. They are not culturally tolerant. Children and teens in most developed nations are heavily controlled, forced to interact mainly with peers and only with adults as authority figures, kept away from adult topics and activities, and rarely allowed to make many decisions. This impacts development of the frontal lobe causing delays in it’s growth. This is ignoring that brain scan studies are very sketchy to begin with. For this fact I suggest the research of Dr. Robert Epstein.
Hi Can you explain this?,
Thank you for your response, I’ll endeavour to reply to your points one by one.
“You wrote a lot, most of it was drawing conclusions that cannot be drawn from the research…”
MARKER
“…as well as injecting your own moral beliefs on sexuality.”
Where I’ve expressed my own opinion has been clearly indicated, but feel free to draw out specific examples which I can address for you.
“Also mentioning your credentials means little as you can be lying very easily.”
Thus is the eternal problem with anonymity!
“No research that controls for upbringing and social environment shows that consensual sexual contact between anyone is innately harmful.”
I think you misunderstood me, and perhaps I wasn’t clear enough on this. I realise that several posters in this thread has put forward the view that a child’s (including teenagers) expressed consent is equal to an adult’s consent–that is, it is informed and comes from an equal footing and sexual maturity.
I have put forth my disagreement with this view in my previous post–that a child cannot give informed consent equal to that of an adult.
To address your response to this, that is the reason why no such reputable and peer-reviewed research exists.
“…(that you manipulatively label “child sexual victimization” regardless of what children themselves think)…”
I use the term used in current discourse; I did endeavour to point out that I’m intentionally using that term. Therefore I disagree that I’m attempting to manipulate anyone, as manipulation (in my mind anyway) requires some sort of subversion–or to put it another way, I didn’t attempt to slip that in without flagging it.
“…You can look at the Rind research as well as books such as “Harmful to Minors” and “The Trauma Myth” which outlines research themselves you can look up.”
The Rind study, as well as those books, can be described as “controversial” at *best*. I have definitely looked into many of these studies and most (if not all) seem to feature bad methodology, faulty analysis or both. The Rind study is certainly a good effort, as any meta analysis is, however there was a series of failures in the assumptions and definitions it tested. I can’t remember off the top of my head, but I know a subsequent study attempted to replicate its findings by correcting these flaws, but the findings of *that* study only supported very general statements–for example, that not all child sexual victimisation resulted in damage that lasted a significant amount of the victims’ lives. This is true, naturally, as each individual has varying levels of coping skills.
If you like, I can spend some time doing a formal collation of these sources, but it wouldn’t be ready for this discussion. As far as I’m aware, there has been no reputable research that is contrary to my earlier statements–if you’re aware of anything else, send it my way.
“…people like this researcher here make a living off insisting all (or most) children are abused and harmed.”
I’m not entirely certain what to make of this statement… Please correct me if I’ve misunderstood, but you appear to be implying that the reason I work and study in this field is to make money–that there is some sort of financial motive behind what I do?
I realise you don’t know me, and that you may not be aware of this level of detail, but I’m certainly not doing this for profit! With my skills, I could easily move onto another field and make a significantly greater amount of money. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not poor, but this is pretty much a regular job–I dare say if you work in the private sector, you may actually earn more than I am right now!
No, I do what I do because I’ve followed the logic, done my research, thought through as many view points as possible. I don’t take these things lightly. I’ve read bad research on my ‘side’ of this discussion as well, but even factoring that in, the evidence indicates that child sexual victimisation causes harm.
“The child grows up in this society and more often than not will re-conceptualize what they previously enjoyed as abuse in some way.”
This statement is fairly notorious in that you cannot test it. It’s a little like saying that the Earth revolves around the sun because of God, but everyone else thinks it’s gravity because society believes in science.
“…This impacts development of the frontal lobe causing delays in it’s growth.”
This is a similar argument, however cultures around the world aren’t actually as homogenous as you seem to believe. Obviously I’m not an expert on the brain, but I believe that childhood brain development is significantly similar across cultures.
As for Dr. Epstein, I know of his ‘research’, though I haven’t studied it in depth. From what I understand, he takes results that can best be described as “indicative” and labels them “conclusive” for popular science media. However I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt, since I haven’t read as deeply into his work.
I hope I’ve addressed all of your points–as I said I’m always time-poor and I have other comments to address. Remind me if I haven’t.
“To address your response to this, that is the reason why no such reputable and peer-reviewed research exists.”
This is not addressing my criticism at all. Literally completely irrelevant to my criticism. Controlling for social attitudes and upbringing vs the legitimacy of the consent itself. If that’s the best you can do, only time is a factor in the acceptance of consented adult/child sexual interactions. Still, let me apply criticism to your view on the legitimacy of a child’s consent.
” I realise that several posters in this thread has put forward the view that a child’s (including teenagers) expressed consent is equal to an adult’s consent–that is, it is informed and comes from an equal footing and sexual maturity.”
First, I have never said that. A child’s consent, just as an adult’s, can be informed or misinformed, given the nature of children they will be generally less informed than an adult and generally a child’s sexuality is more immature than an adult’s but this is not true across the board. We don’t seem to actually have a disagreement here.
“I have put forth my disagreement with this view in my previous post–that a child cannot give informed consent equal to that of an adult.”
Look at it this way, through your own lens. A child can’t give informed consent to anything and their maturity and experience on most topics is not as advanced as compared to adults. That is not a reason to justify banning them from consenting to all kinds of interactions with adults. In fact, their consent is often ignored in most other areas.
This is also why most of your points are opinion, not research based. This is your opinion, like some parents say kids shouldn’t curse, and others don’t care, or some say they should be allowed to handle their own money, and some want them to, some say they can’t travel the subway system alone, and some say they can.
“To address your response to this, that is the reason why no such reputable and peer-reviewed research exists.”
As I said before, the two aren’t even related. There are plenty of tribes and cultures that still allow child sexuality and ample historical anthropological evidence. As well as gigabytes upon gigabytes of video and picture evidence (which admittedly would be weak) but the problem is no one will provide grant money for this research and the law makes much of it illegal. Did you know after the Rind research came out the government banned any research that didn’t conclude adult/child sexual contact was always harmful?
“I use the term used in current discourse; I did endeavour to point out that I’m intentionally using that term”
The term in current discourse is used precisely to manipulate people’s views. Which is why masturbation was once called “self-harm”. It’s meant to sway opinion without providing any actual research as well as tainting any future research done. You using it perpetuates this manipulation.
“The Rind study, as well as those books, can be described as “controversial” at *best*. I have definitely looked into many of these studies and most (if not all) seem to feature bad methodology, faulty analysis or both. The Rind study is certainly a good effort, as any meta analysis is, however there was a series of failures in the assumptions and definitions it tested.”
I, of course, welcome the criticism of all studies, whether they support my view or not. Rind has plenty of issues as you mentioned. What I find ironic is your inability to apply this criticism to the research you use for your opinions. Then when I state these valid criticisms you wave it off by bringing up an unrelated topic.
” As far as I’m aware, there has been no reputable research that is contrary to my earlier statements–if you’re aware of anything else, send it my way.”
I can’t provide research that proves that you conclusions drawn from the research are incorrect. My criticism still stands, no study that claims adult and child sexual contact is innately harmful has controlled for consent, upbringing and social environment. None. when studies such as Rind controlled for consent, they found that the damage actually was much less than previously thought.
“No, I do what I do because I’ve followed the logic, done my research, thought through as many view points as possible. I don’t take these things lightly. I’ve read bad research on my ‘side’ of this discussion as well, but even factoring that in, the evidence indicates that child sexual victimisation causes harm.”
Show me the study that shows consensual sexual contact is harmful to children. I too claim to follow logic, do research, and think through more than one view point. I am not a paedosexual so I don’t have any weight on that side and I used to agree with your viewpoint. However, there is no logic on that side, your side. If sex were to be innately harmful to children then we would do our best to prevent childhood masturbation and sexual exploration with peers, however the most up to date literature says this is good and healthy. Then everyone performs a 360 and says “but if an adult is involved, even if loving, respectful, and caring for the child’s consent it is harmful and innately harmful at that!”
That is not logic.
“This statement is fairly notorious in that you cannot test it.”
What? The whole “repressed memory” nonsense is evidence that this is possible. People have created memories, to suggest that altering memories to fit a social standard is not testable is kind of funny. “When I was a kid it felt funny and good and I didn’t think anything of it. Then I got older and realized it was abuse and I was manipulated and raped, now I have all these psychological problems” That’s called re-conceptualization right there.
“This is a similar argument”
Are you serious? When you don’t use a part of the brain, it does not develop as well. This is easily observable.
” From what I understand, he takes results that can best be described as “indicative” and labels them “conclusive” for popular science media. ”
That is EXACTLY what people do with the brains can studies.
Actually, you are not at all knowledgeable in the field of your choosing. Pedophilia is clearly a sexual orientation, usually from birth but occasionally occurring later in life.
http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2013/12/22/is_pedophilia_a_sexual_orientation.html
http://www.cbc.ca/ideas/episodes/2014/05/01/born-that-way/
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/05/21/paedophile-brains_n_5362659.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/14/local/la-me-pedophiles-20130115
Consensual sexual experiences with adults does not seem to do children any harm, as per Rind et al, but it also appears that such experiences may do children considerable good (just as is known to be the case among some of our closest non-human relatives – bonobos).
https://www.annabelleigh.net/messages/187669.htm
http://www.violence.de/
That said, some children who were not harmed by acts at the time have been harmed by social reactions after the fact:
http://newgon.com/wiki/Essay:The_Vagaries_and_Changes_of_Perception
In fact, pedophilia seems to be correlated with neoteny and self-domestication – evolutionary processes based on retention of juvenile traits that have caused humanity to become more intelligent, more cooperative, and more peaceful – in short, without attraction to juvenile traits there would be no human civilization.
The conclusion is clear: You, Actually, are the problem.
Hi Baldur,
Thanks for your response. You’ve linked me to a few articles, and I’ll attempt to read them all later on, but you’ll have to forgive me if I read only one for each point right now. I’m writing this in the small amount of free time I have these days!
“Pedophilia is clearly a sexual orientation, usually from birth but occasionally occurring later in life.”
I read the first article, and alarm bells immediately began sounding in my head when height and IQ start being mentioned as physical characteristics shared by a non-genetically similar population. A few shortcomings appear instantly: the studied population comprises of convicted sex offenders and many of them seem to have had head injuries, which the researcher somehow attributes to ‘clumsiness’ and then extrapolates that these similarities in the sample somehow means paedophilia is a sexual orientation from birth. I also wonder if the head injuries have any effect on white matter and IQ?
The article also states that “Pedophilia has been widely viewed as a psychological disorder triggered by early childhood trauma”. This isn’t actually true; childhood trauma can be one of many catalysts.
Of course, some good points are made–the current visceral reaction of society to paedophiles, including non-offending paedophiles, do not allow for adequate treatment and may actually worsen the problem.
However, the main theory isn’t very convincing, from a research perspective.
“Consensual sexual experiences with adults does not seem to do children any harm, as per Rind et al, but it also appears that such experiences may do children considerable good (just as is known to be the case among some of our closest non-human relatives – bonobos).”
Unfortunately, the first link does not work for me (a security error) and the second article discusses very outdated work and does not seem to be very reputable. Can you please send me a better source–I don’t want to comment without a more solid source. I have addressed Rind above.
“That said, some children who were not harmed by acts at the time have been harmed by social reactions after the fact…”
Actually, I don’t dispute that in some cases, the reactions of people around them have worsened or caused unnecessary harm to children. However, there is a statistically significant amount of victims (even with the dark figure of crime) who have been harmed by child sexual victimisation for this to have any bearing on our discussion.
As for the essay you linked, it features a sample of one, and the differences in the account could also be explained in a multitude of other ways.
“…in short, without attraction to juvenile traits there would be no human civilization.”
Again, I think this is well outside the scope of this discussion, and is not able to be tested–this is simply interpreting a theory.
I hope I’ve responded to all of your points–if not, remind me!
Here is his annabelleigh source:
In 1994 a study by Pilip Ney, Tak Fung, and Adele Wickett was published1 that seems to suggest some very interesting things about the possible positive effects of sexual experiences2 for children. Interestingly, and predictably, the authors do not seem to notice that this is a result of their own study and, if anything, seem to assume that the opposite is the case. But a careful examination of their own findings suggests a different set of facts.
The opening paragraph of the article (p. 705) announces the issue that they wish to study:
“Although there is a great deal of literature on the mistreatment of children, there is almost nothing on combinations of various types of abuse and neglect. Most writing in this area is about one form or another, as if different abuse or neglect incidents occurred singly. Clinicians know this is not the case. Clinically, it appears that physical, verbal, or sexual abuse seldom occur without some component of other mistreatment. Various forms of abuse are frequently combined with either physical or emotional neglect.”
They then go on to report the results of their study of 167 children and adolescents (both boys and girls) aged 7 to 18 who had reported3 having experienced more than one of the following: physical abuse, physical neglect, verbal abuse, emotional neglect, and sexual abuse.
Firstly, the authors assess how strongly correlated each form of abuse or neglect is with each other form. For each type of abuse or neglect, severity and frequency were highly correlated (ranging from .848 to .949) except for sexual abuse, which had a very low correlation (.100). This suggests already that sexual abuse is a very different thing from the other types of abuse or neglect. It suggests that comparisons or analogies to these other types of abuse may simply not apply. so viewing sexual abuse as we view physical abuse (and they often are seen as similar in important ways) could lead to great error.
Secondly, the authors produce a table that shows the effects each form of abuse or neglect had on the children when the effects were isolated and measured independently. The variables measured, based on the child’s own reports of how they felt, were:
Low enjoyment of living
My own future is bad
Poor chance of a happy marriage
Poor chance of having children
Poor chance of living to old age
Poor chance of developing into the person I could be.
Based on the results of this the authors were able to rate the different forms of abuse and neglect from worst to least effects on children in this order:
physical abuse
physical neglect
verbal abuse
emotional neglect
sexual abuse.
Their own conclusion was that of the five forms of abuse and neglect that sexual abuse was the least harmful on these measurements. In fact, of the six categories measured, sexual abuse produced a positive correlation with negative answers only to “poor chance of a happy marriage” and “poor chance of developing into the person I could be.” But even in each of these cases, several other forms of abuse or neglect had even higher correlations. In the category “my future is bad” the correlation for sexually abused children was a mere .03 while it ranged from .22 to .37 for the others. In other words, sexual abuse is dramatically less connected with children having a negative outlook on life than other abused or neglected children.
Thirdly, the authors produced tables to rank the 20 different possible ways4 that the forms of abuse and neglect could appear in combinations of two or three together. When looking at the top ten worst combinations, the authors note the following:
Verbal abuse appears seven times in the top ten combinations (including all of the six worst combinations).
Physical neglect appears six times in the top ten combinations (including combinations 1, 2, and 5).
Physical abuse appears five times in the top ten combinations (including the worst combination).
Emotional neglect appears five times in the top ten combinations (including the 3rd worst combination).
Sexual abuse appears only one time in the top ten combinations (and only the 8th worst combination at that, when combined with both verbal abuse and physical neglect).
These conclusions are striking, but not nearly as striking as the one conclusion that the authors of the report failed to make. Since they compared all possible combinations of two or three forms of abuse or neglect together, we can see in the rankings an amazing pattern: In every case without exception the combination of two of the forms of abuse or neglect had worse results if the pair did not include sexual abuse than the combination of the same two forms with sexual abuse added. To give an example, the combination of physical neglect and verbal abuse was the second worst combination of the twenty, but the combination of physical neglect, verbal abuse, and sexual abuse was only the eighth worst combination. This seems to suggest that the sexual abuse that these children were subject to over and above the two other forms of abuse/neglect made their situation better, not worse. The same thing is true for all six possible pairs that exclude sexual abuse – in each case adding sexual abuse to the equation improves the outcomes.
Now before we can conclude that sexual abuse is clearly beneficial to children suffering other forms of abuse or neglect, we need to be careful about possible misreadings of the data. Firstly, this is only one study, and so other studies need to be done to see if these results can be confirmed or not. Secondly, the results actually only show a correlation between children’s experiences of abuse/neglect and their outlook on their futures, so to assume that it proves causality could be mistaken. I will be making another post in the next few days that looks at exactly this error in scientific studies of sexual abuse. But in the absence of possible other explanations for why these results are as they are, they do suggest that it is possible that sexual abuse mitigates the effects of other forms of abuse/neglect that children experience.
How could this be possible? Well, the average pedophile has an answer that most scientists are not willing to consider. It just might be the case that these studies are including a lot of children as “sexually abused” who are engaged in freely chosen, enjoyable, and beneficial sexual relationships with adults. So if a child is being verbally abused and physically neglected by his or her parents, it should be no surprise that the child who has an adult friend with whom he or she is having a sexual relationship has a more positive outlook on his or her life than a child who does not.
Is it likely that some of these cases being called “sexual abuse” are really not abusive at all, but loving and beneficial relationships? One needs only read the only narrative they offer of a specific case. Here it is, in its entirety:
“Joe was brought for psychiatric evaluation because of violent altercations with his siblings, alternating with periods of morbid fascination with death. Over a 4-year period, he, together with his older brother and sister, had been sexually abused by their mother’s bisexual husband. this often occurred while the mother was having an affair with her husband’s lover. The mother had been sexually abused when she was very young and was frequently neglected by her mother. She was now physically and verbally violent toward her own children. Both the sexual and physical abuse had been preceded by periods of neglect when the mother was partying. Treatment required a number of hospitalizations. It was complicated by Joe’s attachment to his mother’s bisexual lover (that they both insisted was a father-son affection).”
One does not need to be a genius to read between the lines here, one only needs to believe that sexual relationships can be consensual and positive for children. The anecdote is clear: The mother neglected her son. The mother physically and verbally abused her son. The step-father had a sexual relationship with the boy that both called positive. This claim that the relationship was positive was seen as a complication to the boy’s treatment. But what they overlook is the real possibility that the step-father and his affection might have been exactly what the boy both wanted and needed.
If scientists doing this and other related research want to really understand the effects of sexual abuse, they will first need to separate the cases of real abuse from other consensual sexual experiences. I doubt highly that real sexual abuse has positive effects on a child’s life and outlook on it, but so long as researchers fail to separate the good sexual relationships from the abusive ones, studies might just show results like this again and again. While the scientists scratch their heads to try to understand how this could be, the pedophiles of the world will not be the least bit surprised by it. We have known (or should have known) all along that sexual relationships with adults can be beneficial for children.
__________
1 Ney, Philip, Tak Fung, and Adele Wickett (1994), “The Worst Combinations of Child Abuse and Neglect,” Child Abuse and Neglect, 18, 705-714.
2 The article consistently uses the term “sexual abuse” which is defined on p.707 as “exposed, forced intercourse, incest, used for pornography, etc.” It should be noted that there is good reason to believe that the authors of the study would not consider a consensual relationship possible between a minor and an adult, and so any such relationships also are included as cases of “sexual abuse.”
3 The subjects were partly a clinical sample, partly a criminal sample, and partly a general population sample.
4 For the math buffs, that is 5P2+5P3=20 (or the combinations are PN+VA, PN+SA, PN+EN, PN+PA, VA+SA, VA+EN, VA+PA, SA+EN, SA+PA, EN+PA, SA+EN+PA, PA+EN+VA, PA+SA+VA, VA+EN+SA, PN+PA+EN, SA+PN+PA, PN+SA+EN, PA+PN+VA, EN+PN+VA, PN+SA+VA)
“Are there paedophile children?”
Let me answer that for you. YES. I was a paedophile child.
When I was 12, I only liked girls 8 and younger. I’ve always preferred AT LEAST 4 years younger. Now, I do have some attraction to adults, but it is pretty minimal. I still strongly prefer young girls. Pedosexuality is developed to the same degree that homosexuality is – NOT AT ALL.
“Let me answer that for you. YES. I was a paedophile child.
When I was 12, I only liked girls 8 and younger. I’ve always preferred AT LEAST 4 years younger. Now, I do have some attraction to adults, but it is pretty minimal. I still strongly prefer young girls. Pedosexuality is developed to the same degree that homosexuality is – NOT AT ALL.”
Thanks for your response, Bob.
You’ve misunderstood my initial post. I’m somewhat tired right now, so I’ll keep this brief–basically, with heterosexuality and homosexuality, there are non-sexual indications when a child is below the age of puberty. At 12 years of age you would have been going through puberty.
That said, I don’t know enough about your personal history to adequately comment on how or why you were attracted to 8 year old girls at that age, and why this attraction continues. I don’t want to offend you by questioning your perspective of your own life, but this isn’t really empirical evidence, it’s an anecdote.
Think of it like the difference between clear, multiple CCTV camera recordings, and eye-witness testimony. The former is fairly objective, and the latter is extremely unreliable and subjective.
Anyway, I hope I’ve adequately responded to you… if not, I’m happy to discuss further.
you sir, need to be put down. And the other part, speaking as some king of authoritive figure when you’re a child yourself. Someone put this animal down! I was sexually abused by an adult in a position of authority and I can tell you no good comes from it and to be honest, it took decades to realize how much that abomination hurt me and others, including one who hung himself. So OP, fuck you. You are worthless and NEED to be killed. Period. So please please do the world a favour and shoot yourself or jump off a bridge. Something you rabid animal…
I have every sympathy with your rage and pain and at a gut level I share your disgust with any kind of pedophilia but “An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind”. Dehumanization is never the way to go.
“…have sex with children and want to lead a good life. Please. We are people, too…
the hell you are. you are not human, you do not deserve to live, nor do you deserve to have money spent to imprision you. You are not human and not worth anything to anyone. You’re the worst of the worst and I’d kill you myself if you were not such a coward. Peace you child rapist!
Yeah you’re really smarter than me when you call me a “child rapist” when I explicitly said that I have NEVER done anything sexual to any child and I never will.
If anyone needs to be killed, it’s people like you. You spread hate. You hate innocent people. Yeah, child rapists are fucking disgusting scums.
But you’re a scum too. You’re the same as your abuser. Do you know why? You both want to harm innocent people.
So, this is a nice paradox – you’re more similar to your abuser than I am to him. Congratulations.
If you say to me that I need to be killed (when I haven’t done anything wrong or illegal), I don’t even feel sorry that you were abused.
And I don’t know if you can’t read or what but when you quote me then do it right.
I wrote
“…DON’T have sex with children and want to lead a good life…”
Do you know what does “DON’T” mean?
Police won’t stop these animals but after this I think I may begin. So, child fuckers, start looking over your shoulders a bit more often. Nobody cares if you’re killed. Not one bit…
The irony of your disgusting violent comments is that you don’t really care about children. Seventy years ago you would be making the same comments about homosexuals. You are just a violent and sick individual.
As a pedophile myself I would like to enter my opinion.
1. Pedosexuality is much like homosexuality. It’s something that people are born with and there’s nothing they can do to change it.
2. People are born as pedophiles. Children themselves and be pedophiles. I was a pedophile as a child. When I was 12, girls my own age were already too old for me.
3. Just as not all homosexuals are rapists, not all pedosexuals are rapists. Some homosexuals are rapists and some pedosexuals are rapists.
4. Children enjoy sexual activity – whether it be masturbation, oral sex with a friend, or consentual sex with a relative. I know this from the literally thousands of child porn videos I have watched where children are smiling, laughing, and cheerful. It is not shameful to them until the same is imposed upon them by society telling them they were a victim of something horrible.
5. There is a big difference between nonconsentual and consentual child sexual activity. Just as there is a big difference between adult nonconsentual/consentual sexual activity. There’s nothing inherently harmful with consentual activity in either case. Would you agree that child can agree to have oral sex with another child of the same age? Let me tell you, it happens all the time! If it’s not forced on them, the age of the other party doesn’t make any difference.
6. Calling a pedosexual names such as “scum” will not cause a pedosexual to lose the sexual attraction they were born with any more than calling a homosexual names will cause them to somehow become heterosexual.
7. Child porn most likely grealty reduces the rate of sexual violence against children. There are many thousands of exclusive pedophiles who have no sexual outlet except from online videos and images. If you take this away, what will they do? IMO, the rate of nonconsentual sexual activity would increase.
8. The idea that children are victimized over again every time an image or video is viewed is just fucking stupid.
9. Why the fuck is computer generated child porn illegal? This is literally trying to impose penalties for the THOUGHT CRIME of finding children sexually attractive.
Now I shall address the topic.. PAYING for child porn is highly likely to lead to nonconsentual sexual activity with children, AKA child SEXUAL ABUSE and thus, IT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL. Most likely though, this .onion is an ugly scam or a honey pot.
I agree with you in every sentence you wrote.
Many people can’t think for themselves and that’s why there are such violent desires towards every single (even non-offending) “pedosexual”.
I REALLY CAN’T BELIEVE so many people would want to kill for a thought “crime”.
But it’s true… and they call us sick.
Bob, do you seek counselling to help you abstain? Would you be scared to if you thought you couldn’t trust your therapist to keep thier side of the theraputic contract? Do you have regular friends that you can trust with your secret?
I do hear your pain that you are “created flawed and commanded to be whole” – glad it isn’t me having to go through that. I cant imagine what it must be like.
I have spoken to guys who have done jail and have to pluck up the courage to tell thier neighbors. In Australia it isn’t mandatory, but it is still the smart thing to do especially in small communities. “I wanted you to hear it from me first” kinda thing. Man that would take some guts! That way at least they have a chance someone might stand up to the baying mob in case word gets out. You would like to think your neighbor would apreciate your honesty and courage – “Hate the Sin and Love the Sinner” so to speak. Ultimately there has to be a place for forgiveness.
What kid of sick idiotic fucks are you? Kids do not have the mental or moral strength to make their own decisions so you are manipulating them and raping them. Do it with a grown up who consents. I have seen sick fucks across all cultures going after kids because they are weak and can’t defend or choose for themselves. I was abused as a kid by my teachers in school in a so called third world country. And I didn’t even know at that time that I was being abused. But, you will only know it when you realize that your innocence has been taken away from you. It took me 10 years to get over it and now that I have my own kid will do anything and everything to prevent it happening to him. By God’s grace or whatever both those fucks are now dead. So, wake up and stop taking the precious innocence that defines a kid’s childhood. Yes, in the olden days people used to get married @ 13 or give birth @ 14. But, times have changed with the change in our social structures and norms. You have to adapt but not prey on the helpless kids.
It’s tough to know what to do with offenders. I dont think jails are the best place for low level offenders. Jails should be reserved for offenders who need to be segregated from the community. Commuinty work would prevent them from accossiating en masse, with those worse than them and reamining in the commuinty would expose them to the norms and attitudes of the main stream. The worst outcome would be for a peadophile to be hounded and harrassed into a breakdown where they may not be able to maintain the discipline not to act out. As to the argument that CGI CP would provide a release for those afflicted to help them stay chaste; a tough argument to counter. I think in Texas CP will get you 20 years per image. That cant be rational.
The reality when it comes to sentencing is that more percieved leniance will start to lead to vigilantism. The sex offender category that really needs punishing at this time is the woman (generally) who plays the false rape card as a means of mischief. They generally face no sanction at all.