- [WT] [Home] [Manage]
/ssh/ - Social Sciences & Humanities
A board for social sciences and humanities history, philosophy, anthropology, psychology...
[Return]
Posting mode: Reply
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Media ID
File 1
Password (for post and file deletion)
Extra [ Is Spoiler ]
  • Supported file types are: jpg,jpeg,png,gif
  • Maximum file size allowed is 4mb.
  • Blotter updated: 22/10/09
  • 22/10/09 - Trial board for crafts, hobbies and Do It Yourself!
Show/Hide  Show All
File: 184638.jpg - (20.6kb, 291x486, Kiss_(1873).jpg) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Anonymous 24/6/2009(Wed)03:12:22 No.84687  
Laws have been enacted to criminalize "obscene images of children, no matter how they are made," for inciting abuse. An argument is the claim that obscene fictional images portray children as sex objects, thereby contributing to child sexual abuse. This argument has been disputed by the claim that there is no scientific basis for that connection, and that restricting sexual expression in drawings or animated games and videos might actually increase the rate of sexual crime by eliminating a harmless outlet for desires that could motivate crime. This is exemplified in a case involving a man, from Virginia who, while arrested after viewing lolicon at a public library, asserted that he had quit collecting real child pornography and switched to lolicon.

Currently, countries that have made it illegal to possess (or create/distribute) sexual images of fictional characters who are described as or appear to be under eighteen years old include Canada, South Africa, Sweden and the Philippines. Legislation is in process to mirror this in the United Kingdom. At the upper edge, this encapsulates pornographic depictions of even seventeen-year olds together, or adults where the predominant impression conveyed is of a person under the age of 18.

Amor and Psique, children (L'Amour et Psyche, enfants) William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825–1905)
Expand All Images
>>
Anonymous 24/6/2009(Wed)03:16:39 No.84691
File: 185010.gif - (20.3kb, 245x130, PJ-AK807_pjMOVI_20070822174330.gif)
Another big problem is today paranoia about child abuse.
There are many cases of grandmas and parents being arrested because they took photos of children being children.
http://www.popphoto.com/Features/How-a-Photo-Can-Ruin-Your-Life

Now a father can't even hold his own child hand that he already is seem as a predator
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118782905698506010.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118903209653018615.html

Even play animal crossing makes you a perv
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2009/03/17/cybercop-no-good-reason-adults-own-animal-crossing

The sad thing is that all this paranoia is causing more damage in children lifes than protecting them.
>>
Anonymous 24/6/2009(Wed)03:20:50 No.84693
File: 171226.png - (256.86kb, 400x309, Supergirls.png)
Government was giving close consideration to the issues and options, and on 13 December 2006 UK Home Secretary John Reid announced that the Cabinet was discussing how to ban computer-generated images of child abuse — including cartoons and graphic illustrations of abuse — after pressure from children's charities. The Government published a consultation on 1 April 2007, announcing plans to create a new offence of possessing a computer generated picture, cartoon or drawing with a penalty of three years in prison and an unlimited fine. In May 2008, the Government announced plans to criminalise all non-realistic sexual images depicting under-18s. Home Secretary John Reid and Parliamentary under Secretary of State for Justice Maria Eagle both specifically cited Lolicon as something they want to ban under this new law. These plans form part of the Coroners and Justice Bill. The definition of a "child" in the bill includes depictions of 16 and 17 year olds who are over the age of consent in the UK, as well as any adults where the "predominant impression conveyed" is of a person under the age of 18. The bill will make it illegal to own any picture depicting under-18s participating in sexual activities, or depictions of sexual activity in the presence of someone under 18. The law has been condemned by a coalition of graphic artists, publishers and MPs, fearing it will criminalise graphic novels such as Lost Girls and Watchmen.
>>
Anonymous 27/6/2009(Sat)04:05:56 No.88280
Most of these laws are innocuous at best. It seems more like you have something to hide.
>>
Anonymous 27/6/2009(Sat)04:54:29 No.88311
>>88280
The question is more X is wrong, but the representation of X is not.
Murder is wrong, but representation of murder in books, comics and movies is not.
There are groups against any form of pornography too

Also, child abuse is really a problem, but paranoia is a problem too, see
>>84691

People just want to find a scape goat for their problems. Violence? It's all fault of TV and games (there is no proof of that). Child abuse? It's all fault of comics and books (no proof too). They talk like if those problems were new.
One could say that sports lead to violence (hooligans) and church to pedophilia (pedo priests).
>>
Anonymous 29/6/2009(Mon)01:56:15 No.90213
>>88311
Paranoia over child abuse isn't a problem. It's a good thing. I wish more people were paranoid about things like crime, corruption and incompetence.
>>
Anonymous 29/6/2009(Mon)02:35:21 No.90250
File: 193388.jpg - (117.54kb, 600x530, demotivators-5237.jpg)
>>90213
When you are paranoic you will see it in everthing.
You will spend money that could be used to help people to protect people that are not in danger. You will see child abuse where there is none, will see a crime where there is none and incompetence where there is none.
Them innocent people will be arrested, normal workers will be fired one after another and families will be destroyed.

See this:
>>84691

Also, OMG!!! That guy has a beard! Shoot that terrorist down!

The Swine Flu Is a Bioterrorist Conspiracy In Which Illegal Aliens are Used to Infect the United States!

If you are adult and play animal crossing you are a pedophile.
>>
Anonymous 30/6/2009(Tue)03:45:12 No.92389
>>90250
Those are instances of hysteria, not paranoia. As humans we will always experience emotions, denying they exist is as harmful as always reacting to them, it is generally agreed that we need healthy methods of dealing with them such as having a drink with your bros when you are depressed or directing your anger towards exercise. But how do we deal with hate and disgust? Well they can be used to reinforce moral and ethical values developed by our most enlightened philosophers, it is not only justified to direct these feelings towards the criminals in society but necessary for our own psychological health.
>>
Anonymous 30/6/2009(Tue)03:51:41 No.92409
>>92389
Paranoia is a thought process characterized by excessive anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs concerning a perceived threat towards oneself. In the original Greek, παράνοια (paranoia) simply means madness (para = outside; nous = mind). Historically, this characterization was used to describe any delusional state.

It's paranoia.
>>
Teresa Blavatsky 01/7/2009(Wed)06:19:19 No.93858
>>92409
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paranoia
1. Psychiatry. a mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions and the projection of personal conflicts, which are ascribed to the supposed hostility of others, sometimes progressing to disturbances of consciousness and aggressive acts believed to be performed in self-defense or as a mission.
2. baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hysteria
1. an uncontrollable outburst of emotion or fear, often characterized by irrationality, laughter, weeping, etc.
2. Psychoanalysis. a psychoneurotic disorder characterized by violent emotional outbreaks, disturbances of sensory and motor functions, and various abnormal effects due to autosuggestion.

Of course if you have some kind of psychological disorder that's bad, but excessive suspicion never hurt anyone. If you act on it without examining further that's hysteria but there's nothing wrong with noticing something unusual about a hard drive full of photos of nude children passed off as "art". Crack out the undelete, find some child pornography and proceed to intimidate and blackmail the pedo's bank account dry before handing the evidence anonymously to the police.

If you aren't paranoid you miss out on opportunities like this, I for one will be paranoid.
>>
Friedrich House 02/7/2009(Thu)01:29:12 No.94116
File: Embedded Video
This is hysteria
>>
Friedrich House 02/7/2009(Thu)01:33:53 No.94118
File: Embedded Video
This is paranoia
>>
Friedrich House 02/7/2009(Thu)02:23:04 No.94146
As you said hysteria is an outburst, and paranoia sometimes progress to disturbance of consciousness and aggressive acts believed to be performed in self-defense or as a mission.

Excessive suspicion do hurt innocent people all the time, be it himself or others. Also the suspicion is based in fantasies and not real danger. It's like when someone kill his wife because in his mind she is cheating him.

It's really weird that you contradicts your own sources.
>>
Jaroslav Van Houten 02/7/2009(Thu)03:58:31 No.96599
>>97024

That can easily be worked around, if necessary.

Edited at 18/8/2009(Tue)07:35:52
>>
Kurz Gautama 02/7/2009(Thu)05:56:30 No.97024
>>96599
In animals they start having sex as soon as they can get pregnant, in some species it start even sooner.
In modern culture this is a problem because early pregnancy disrupts with education system.
>>
Kurz Gautama 02/7/2009(Thu)06:25:18 No.97124
Offenders are more likely to be relatives or acquaintances of their victim than strangers. A 2006–2007 Idaho study of 430 cases found that 82% of juvenile sex offenders were known to the victims (acquaintances 46% or relatives 36%).

I think it would be better to spend money training people in schools (teachers and other staff) to look for abuse signs than make stupid laws.
>>
Gersonides Salamah 06/7/2009(Mon)12:52:31 No.101434
>>97124
Much agreed. Knowledge is always the better alternative to blind fear. However, I feel that both are necessary to the success to stop pedophiles from...pedo'ing. In contrary with my above statement, fear is also a fantastic way to stop a certain behaviour (as behavioural psychology has shown us, Skinner and the like). The laws are a baby step to get rid of unwanted behaviours, but as you said, true freedom from them in our country can only come from reform OUTSIDE of the government itself.

However, this law now raises censorship issues:
>APPEAR to be under 18

Many people of legal age APPEAR to be under 18, but are we going to take away their right to display their bodies as they wish? And what about kids who are underage but APPEAR to be of legal age? Since sexual gratification isn't coming from their extreme youth, shouldn't this be okay now, too?

In short, I'm not fan of these new subjective laws that are coming out...I feel that they could really bite us in the ass if the wrong person uses them the wrong way.
>>
Anonymous 07/7/2009(Tue)03:01:31 No.102514
File: SeriesBrokenDoll_ib4f.jpg - (605.08kb, 3216x2336, SeriesBrokenDoll.jpg)
>>101434
There is no way to tell the age of a person only in how he/she looks that's why we have documents.
Them they start to waste resources to protect drawings! It's like make a law against doll abuse.
Drawings and dolls are not humans and are not alive. Just because you don't like to look at something doesn't means that it should be illegal.

Also, 90% of cartoon and anime porn would become illegal since most characters are under 18 (super girl, Yoko from Gurren Lagann, Ichigo and Orihime from Bleach) and some non-pornographic works too (like Lost Girls and Watchmen)
>>
Anonymous 07/7/2009(Tue)03:02:24 No.102516
File: xin_030404190700244313566_ib4f.jpg - (76.33kb, 379x292, xin_030404190700244313566.jpg)
They are like a crazy guy shooting to all sides. Of course the crazy guy could shoot a bad guy, but he will shoot much more innocent people. Just look at this.
>>84691
>At Houston Intercontinental Airport, businessman Mitch Reifel was having a meal with his 5-year-old daughter when a policeman showed up to question him. A passerby had reported his interactions with the child seemed "suspicious."

>In Skokie, Ill., Steve Frederick says the director of his son's day-care center called him in to reprimand him for "inappropriately touching the children." "I was shocked," he says. "Whatever did she mean?" She was referring to him reading stories with his son and other kids on his lap. A parent had panicked when her child mentioned sitting on a man's lap.
>>
Kurz Steel 08/7/2009(Wed)07:46:12 No.106882
personally I think everything except real child porn, rape or murder should be totally legal to view and we need to stop this obsession with branding men paedophiles.
>>
Richard Fry 21/7/2009(Tue)07:49:35 No.130983
Pedophilia is an abomination that must be eradicated.
If I had my way pedophiles would be drawn and quartered.
But It would be sufficient enough if they were either surgicly castrated or locked up for life.
As for fictional drawings of children I would be fine if loli and shota were restricted, The question is how far to restrict it.
Children under 14 should not be depicted in sexual situations, however those between the ages of 14 and 17 I am on the fence.
There is also the question of implied shota/loli and fanfiction.
In one episode of South Park the character Ike, a kindergarten student, has an affair with his teacher who happens to be a hot woman. Would this episode become outlawed?
>>
Armand 21/7/2009(Tue)10:38:53 No.131138
>>106882
I agree with you, but I oppose the right of people, exept parents, to take sexually revealing pictures of children. Parents can take them if they wish but they should not be permited to publicly show them (expect with the permission of the child when he/she is an adult), make money of them or take them and use them for sexual gratification.

I think that child porn that hurts(in any way) the child is wrong. Draw or computer generated picture/film hurts no one. Censoring things as lolicon because it might lead to child abuse, is the same as cencoring entertainment that contains crime(over speeding with a car), violence (killing) or consuming a product that is bad for health (tobacco) because it might lead to harm. A warning, like in tobacco pacs, might be added to the artificially generated child porn favorited by child sexoffenders, "CAUTION! This film contains artificially generated sexually suggestive acts or sex act(s) of minors or with a minor, and this might lead the viewer to commit statutory rape.".

Personally, I have no sexual interest in prepuberty minors but I have to admit that I find some 15-year-olds sexually attractive, in the case you were wondering if you were reading a writing of a pedophile.
>>
Sigmund Langley 22/7/2009(Wed)11:18:14 No.131986
File: 2r6ns4y_ib4f.jpg - (80.1kb, 713x570, 2r6ns4y.jpg)
>>131138
People say that fictional violence increase real violence and fictional sexual abuse increases real sexual abuse.

But it's the opposite.

With so many games like GTA and God Of War today youth crimes decreased instead of increase.
>>
Jaroslav Van Houten 25/7/2009(Sat)08:55:04 No.134331
The bottom line in every moral question is basically "Obey the Golden Rule".
>>
Sigmund Langley 26/7/2009(Sun)12:47:38 No.134404
>>134331
This is not that simple. not every person wants what you want for yourself.
>>
Kashmir Norris 27/7/2009(Mon)07:08:38 No.136111
>>134404
Ah, what is better than treating as you would like to be treated, is to treat as you have been!
>>
Anonymous 27/7/2009(Mon)08:00:09 No.136121
>>136111
So, If you were abused by someone them you abuse others or you abuse the one that abused you first?

Is it in a payback sense or is it in the sense of spread it?

You know, one abused you them you abuse more 10 people and them they abuse more 100, 1000, 10000...
>>
Kashmir Norris 28/7/2009(Tue)10:26:54 No.141825
>>136121
I don't believe in revenge. You should abuse people if they abused you, no matter who it is. I believe the the truest evil is personalization of society.

Edited at 28/7/2009(Tue)10:33:15
>>
Anonymous 29/7/2009(Wed)01:33:28 No.143411
>>141825
Some people were good to me, some were bad to me.
what should I do in your point of view??
>>
Kashmir Norris 30/7/2009(Thu)01:39:58 No.189982
>>143411
Do the difference. If they're equal, do nothing. You'll save energy and time compared to being bad or good to people.
>>
Maimonides Fry 30/7/2009(Thu)04:48:13 No.190204
This issue is far simpler than this thread is making it out to be.

The culture of america is suburban, puritanical, goody-goody, leave-it-to-beaver type culture.

The world outside of the USA is not. The Japanese have been depicting men having sex with boys in dirty comic books since the Edo period. (~1630 AD). The age of consent and age of majority varies wildly from nation to nation, even within Europe. Pedophilia is considered "sick" in America, while in Japan/India/Cambodia it is widely accepted.

America is an economic superpower. It is attempting to extrapolate its culture and laws to the larger world. This is failing. So it is attempting to control the material flowing into it from the internet. The MPAA does not control nor rate the internet.

Here is a list of means by which America is censoring the internet.

(1) ChillingEffects
(2) Interpol
(3) CIRCAMP
(4) ISPs block websites. Yes they do this in "modern western countries" not just in commie china!

Taken in conjunction, the search results you get from google are highly sanitized. Make no doubt about it.

When it comes to sexuality, pornography, prostitution and the like, the world depicted by mainstream media outlets is a completely fabricated fantasyland. Some of you are already aware of this.
>>
Hanni-Mari Keehl 02/8/2009(Sun)03:34:26 No.193372
I'm not sure about the age of consent, But it should be at least 14. And is pedophilia against international law?
>>
Karl Hobbes 02/8/2009(Sun)08:51:36 No.194245
Meant to say ISN'T pedophilia against international law, because kiddie porn sure is.
>>
Sigmund Langley 03/8/2009(Mon)01:57:13 No.194510
>>194245
1. In some countries people marry at 12 or even 8 years old. But CP is illegal anywhere.

2. Fictional pedophilia is as harmfull as fictional murder or fictional robbery. Just because a book/comic/movie/game character do something illegal doesn't means that the book/comic/movie/game is harmfull.
>>
Kashmir Norris 05/8/2009(Wed)08:10:22 No.199944
>>190204
I'm aware. <.< >.>
>>
Maaya Hume 16/8/2009(Sun)10:57:53 No.215120
>>130983
you cant punish people for something they cannot change, killing them for finding children attractive would be murder.
>>131138
I agree that nothing that hurts people should be allowed but the way society reacts to paedophilia is insane and dangerous. Most people do not see a distinction between paedophilia and child abuse.
>>
Sigmund Langley 16/8/2009(Sun)11:46:20 No.215151
>>215120
The point of all that is. You can punish people by what they do but don't by what they feel.

If I'm angry at my boss/teacher and want ot kill him but never harm him this doesn't means that I'm a dangerous murder.
>>
Jaroslav Van Houten 18/8/2009(Tue)07:37:51 No.217502
>>97024

That can easily be worked around, if necessary.


>>134404

I'm pretty sure that people want to be taken seriously, and that they also want to avoid pain and suffering. Those are basic instincts.

Edited at 18/8/2009(Tue)07:38:49
>>
Michael Hume 24/8/2009(Mon)07:03:14 No.226401
>>217502

What about masochists?
>>
Anonymous 24/8/2009(Mon)02:28:04 No.226631
"a sadist is just a masochist who follows the golden rule."

Generalizations are almost always flawed.
>>
Hanni-Mari Turkskevay 19/10/2009(Mon)12:34:30 No.319410
not being harmed in the process of creation doesnt mean the children wont have further social problems and issues in our society, a maturity with the feeling of a childhood taken away from them and other intimate issues such as discovering what they long thought to be normal ways of loving, distorted and frown uppon.

i guess the main issue here is to teach how to love as we know is better in our society, even if we believe in sex with children we have to take in mind the consecuences, an act of love is to save them this weight by not doing something that even in loves name would hurt them, like gentle fun and caring sex, incest, or sexualisation.

i guess is something like telling them santaclaus dosnt exist to early.

myself have found very touching CP videos, with completely comfortable children enjoying themselves and having fun, i dont condemm them as i would with a rape video. THOUGH i wouldnt do that to my children, nor any other for what is worth, for it is a pleasure to be learned by themselves, in its moment, is theyrs and not ours to take like that.

anyway, i really feel drown and cautivated by some videos,seems tender, joyful, etc..

there are families, cultures, and even sophisticated sistems in which pedofilia is practiced as a normal rule, i can enjoy videos from that enviroment, i dont enjoy imagining those girls having drugs issues, or severe bonding issues in their adult relationships...

i know i sound like those guys supporting using drugs from raids instead of burning them.

i would not sell em. nor use them as i dont use drugs, i just feel mesmerized by daphne playing around enjoying herself, its beautiful.
>>
Kashmir Tryggvassen 24/10/2009(Sat)06:56:17 No.329785
Somebody should report the IP of poster 319410 for possession of child pornography.
>>
Hanni-Mari Turkskevay 29/10/2009(Thu)11:28:49 No.340900
they already know, i could only redirect them to themseves.

i consider myself as part of a whole experiment here, about moral feedback, and social dinamics.

ive been offered the bait, and "by the mouth fishes die"... anyway, i feel like a nazi doctor working everyday on his case...

i can only but give what i can of my experience to science and humanitis.

consider this one of those resident evil diraries you fing lying around the place..

at 5 months of infection, morals have been blured...

although the basis of my beliefs and attitudes toward family and children stays respectful and not objective (as in sexual object), i feel the fragility of my nature infront of the discussing temptation ive been given.

yes i am a filthy piece of flesh etc etc.

i dont support exploitation. i try to understand freudian represion in a new angle. i WONT abuse.

and i appreciate your interest on my case, im going to therapy and comfronting myself in different pertinent levels.

seriously i see myself with the good guys.
the thing with corruption is that not everybody finds themselves in a position to be corrupt, hence the bragging about purity.

dark place ive been seduced to. will be ok, though.

thanks anyway.
>>
Hanni-Mari Turkskevay 29/10/2009(Thu)11:55:00 No.340938
i mean, not only about ruing my political career by planting and harvesting dark matter in this fertile soil of mine. God knows im fragile. And though there is a whole philosophical set to justify or even promote -at a given stage- this sort of moral, the real issue here is: for one thing the legal status. which is redundant, thrilling as it is, redundant to remember, when in my wildest assumptions the experiment is on more sophisticated correlations than pure: bait - Law breaking.

any way, this is not about thou what thou wilt, or nothing is true everything is permited...

in my own experiment in which i lack any objectivity, what i can discern by common sense is that, im just not grown into it. This is not what ive been thought to do, or appreciate.

i must be read pathetic trying to find something new years of social studies and psychology havent found about us.

the thing is, ive torn myself in since the beggining. is there anything such as policy of truth here?.

im seriously concerned about this thing, ive been seduced and now im on the new ground of what im not.

im quiting, im no anthropologist here, im just morbid.
>>
Hanni-Mari Turkskevay 02/11/2009(Mon)05:51:03 No.346969
after jolting to self conscious assessment of my moral and social construct and misquoting phrases such as "Nothing is true, everything is permissible" ( a doctrine that makes me shiver to imagine on praxis ), i have worked on the issue in general disregarding my own personal case, trying to find a deductive true taking as the rule the society in which Brooke Shields declares children must remain naive the longer they can, and abused children tend to have a bad time dealing with pederast uncles, and a world in which slavery has come to its peak in history.

Using a touchstone not only Catholic love imperatives, but the equivalent proposed by atheist humanities, i would try to aproach a consideration on lolicon.

"reality and representation" is a discussion to look and understand, the difference between the product of child abuse and the mere representation of it.

this way it seems almost encourage-able to promote lolicon among cp consumers, even when they dont buy it, distribute it nor encourage the production. ( case of random lurkers that run into it ).

legal as it is, lolicon is way more accessible than the CP perse. Hence the concept floats easily in that media.

My aproach was to treat child abuse, exploitation and "precos" sexuality disregarding the medium and representation, whether comic, film, literature etc. The objective of treating them all as the same case was to address the issue as a matter of culture and a problematic among families and societies, a problematic to be taken seriously in the name of the children and their integrity.

CP exist, will always just as exploitation, but it is submitted to consciousness and the more we spread the culture the more it will be restrain.

I have seen many cases, im not with the fbi, but i have done my research and i honestly understand the fragility of our spirit when it comes to corruption, so my honest question to loliconsumers is, and i ask it as a person who has consumed CP:

ARE YOU SURE YOU WILL MAKE IT THROUGH SENILE DEMENTIA WITHOUT ALL THOSE CP (LOLICON OR ANY CASE) IMPRINTS IN YOUR BRAIN STARTING YOU THOWARDS CHILD MOLESTATION OR ABUSE?.

when in senile dementia we are not the selfs we are used to be, we are an amorphic shiffting collection of mindstates and memories, no matter the media of CP representation, comic, literate, or plain documentary, it will come down to the same thing in our memory.

DO WE WANT TO BE THE CHILD MOLESTING GRANDPARENT? AVOIDED AND FROWN UPPON AMONG FAMILY?

cause that is easily the case when we bend enough the moral commands we are expected to imprint in our operative consciousness.

im very aware of this, im not afraid of abusing children, im afraid of corrupting my understanding of their nature and lose the opportunity to be a good parent, teacher, uncle,grandpa or whatever the case.

And further more, im afraid of losing my mind, and considering this practices as normal becoming the monster i morbidly contemplate now.

(please forgive my wanderings and dreadful english)
>>
Hanni-Mari Turkskevay 02/11/2009(Mon)06:37:59 No.346982
is that "social sciences & humanities" enough for this chan?

Last thought:

“Battle not with monsters lest ye become a monster and if you gaze into the abyss the abyss gazes into you.”

Friedrich Nietzsche

[ File Only] Password
3.14chan Google Search                                       



share.chan3 imageboard banner exchange
pichan 314chan 3.14chan πchan


The Chan Top List

[sci / ssh / geek / sug]