4 ms·

So pedophiles obviously don't choose to be pedophiles. I'm certain it is a biological vagary. There should be a better way to treat people that are a certain wa

So pedophiles obviously don't choose to be pedophiles. I'm certain it is a biological vagary. There should be a better way to treat people that are a certain way because of biology and not choice. The other issue is I'm not sure if FBI did the right thing here. For whatever brief period this was state sponsored and sanctioned pedophile ring.

dogma1138 10y ago
It's really not clear why and how one does become a pedophile, that said the FBI was going after the producers and dealers of child pornography not the consumers. For the most part the consumers are being left out of major prosecutions, one can also make an argument that blocking all sources of CP might increase sexual assault cases involving children if the users cannot get their relief that way. But this overall isn't a clear cut case.
- 1_listerine_pls 10y ago
  > one can also make an argument that blocking all sources of CP might increase sexual assault cases... mmm... I don't see how one could argue that without actual data.
  - probably_wrong 10y ago
    The idea has been thrown around for a while, but of course, there's no way to get a definite truth on the matter. Here's one article[1] claiming a possible link between availability of porn and abuse. But I'm sure there must be at least one other study arguing the opposite. [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21116701 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21116701
- aerovistae 10y ago
  It's a chore sometimes not to break the vulgarity rules here. You do understand that child pornography is created by the rape of children? You're saying, "Well, it could be argued that if we stop letting these guys rape them, possibly more children might get raped. We should let it go." No.
  - dogma1138 10y ago
    And? the FBI did not create it, it redistribute it much of it I would assume is pretty darn old, wouldn't surprise me if things that originally were recorded on VHS is still around being sold and traded. I think that the entire argument flew over your head, the FBI isn't going after consumer it is going after the producers you know the ones in your case who are actually doing or arranging the raping.
  - gizmo686 10y ago
    s/rape/statutory rape/g In our current environment, this is mostly a pedantic distinction because almost all child porn is produced in an otherwise abusive environment. Also, the definition of child porn is far broader than what would be required to meet the definition of rape, which requires penetration. [0] The definition of child porn is also sufficiently broad to include any pornographic image that depicts an identifiable minor in a sexual act, whether or not said minor was actually ingaged in said act, or involved in the production in any way. The FBI also has a stash of already created child porn. Any harm resulting from the creation of said porn has already been done, and is therefore not a reason to not use it in order to reduce future harm. [0] Technically, many jurisdictions do not have any form of "statatury rape", but instead use other crimes like sexual abuse.
    - pavel_lishin 10y ago
      > s/rape/statutory rape/g We're not talking about a 25 year old filming his 17 year old girlfriend giving him head here. This is the kind of stuff where the people involved cannot consent. Your spellchecker is broken.
      - gizmo686 10y ago
        >We're not talking about a 25 year old filming his 17 year old girlfriend giving him head here. Yes we are. What you describe is child pornography. Depending on jurisdiction, the girlfriend cannot consent. Even in jurisdictions where she can consent, it is still child porn. Even in situations where the 17 year old is acting alone, it is child porn. Even in situations where the 17 year old draws a picture of herself masturbating, it is child porn. I guest you are correct, my comment should read: s/rape/depiction in a sexual manner/g Either way, my point is that we should be careful of the language we use, and recognize that child pornography is far broader than circumstances that would generally be considered "rape" are. My phrasing was sub-optimal due to my other problem with the conflation of statutory rape and normal rape.
sandworm101 10y ago
> state sponsored and sanctioned pedophile ring. A child pornography ring. I have yet to hear any evidence of FBI participation in physical abuse, new physical abuse. They seem to have allowed preexisting material to be re-shared. If anything new was uploaded during this time we would have heard about child abuse arrests. A "pedophile ring" has a very different connotation. Both are bad, but one is a very different type of evil.
meeper16 10y ago
My biology screams salamanders!
gph 10y ago
>I'm certain it is a biological vagary. There should be a better way to treat people that are a certain way because of biology and not choice But that brings up the entire question of how much anyone truly has a conscious choice in any of their actions. A lot of evidence is pointing to 'free will' being an illusion our conscious minds uphold to make us feel like we are in control.[0] In the end I doubt very much there is a specific set of genes that causes one to be a pedophile, just as there isn't a set of genes that makes someone a murderer or thief. There's perhaps at best some genes that may pre-dispose a person towards pedophilia (though I doubt it), but clearly a persons environment is going to be the biggest determiner. It's well known that most child abusers were abused themselves. So until we start looking on all criminals as people that need to be treated and cured of their condition, it doesn't make sense to treat pedophiles that way. [0] http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/theres-no-such-thing-as-free-will/480750/?single_page=true http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/theres-n...
- dkarapetyan 10y ago
  Studies in bonobos point to there being a very strong genetic component in fact. Bonobos and chimps being our closest relatives I think the biological evidence is more compelling than you think.
  - gph 10y ago
    Source? I'd be interested in reading about that.
    - dkarapetyan 10y ago
      I've lost the reference but it was a study of sexual behavior in bonobos and their "non-discriminatory" attitude and practices. Bonobos of course being famous for their sexual proclivities and chimps being famous for their violent proclivities. If you google relevant keywords I'm sure it will turn up.
      - gph 10y ago

dogma1138 10y ago

It's really not clear why and how one does become a pedophile, that said the FBI was going after the producers and dealers of child pornography not the consumers. For the most part the consumers are being left out of major prosecutions, one can also make an argument that blocking all sources of CP might increase sexual assault cases involving children if the users cannot get their relief that way. But this overall isn't a clear cut case.

1_listerine_pls 10y ago
> one can also make an argument that blocking all sources of CP might increase sexual assault cases... mmm... I don't see how one could argue that without actual data.
- probably_wrong 10y ago
  The idea has been thrown around for a while, but of course, there's no way to get a definite truth on the matter. Here's one article[1] claiming a possible link between availability of porn and abuse. But I'm sure there must be at least one other study arguing the opposite. [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21116701 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21116701
aerovistae 10y ago
It's a chore sometimes not to break the vulgarity rules here. You do understand that child pornography is created by the rape of children? You're saying, "Well, it could be argued that if we stop letting these guys rape them, possibly more children might get raped. We should let it go." No.
- dogma1138 10y ago
  And? the FBI did not create it, it redistribute it much of it I would assume is pretty darn old, wouldn't surprise me if things that originally were recorded on VHS is still around being sold and traded. I think that the entire argument flew over your head, the FBI isn't going after consumer it is going after the producers you know the ones in your case who are actually doing or arranging the raping.
- gizmo686 10y ago
  s/rape/statutory rape/g In our current environment, this is mostly a pedantic distinction because almost all child porn is produced in an otherwise abusive environment. Also, the definition of child porn is far broader than what would be required to meet the definition of rape, which requires penetration. [0] The definition of child porn is also sufficiently broad to include any pornographic image that depicts an identifiable minor in a sexual act, whether or not said minor was actually ingaged in said act, or involved in the production in any way. The FBI also has a stash of already created child porn. Any harm resulting from the creation of said porn has already been done, and is therefore not a reason to not use it in order to reduce future harm. [0] Technically, many jurisdictions do not have any form of "statatury rape", but instead use other crimes like sexual abuse.
  - pavel_lishin 10y ago
    > s/rape/statutory rape/g We're not talking about a 25 year old filming his 17 year old girlfriend giving him head here. This is the kind of stuff where the people involved cannot consent. Your spellchecker is broken.
    - gizmo686 10y ago
      >We're not talking about a 25 year old filming his 17 year old girlfriend giving him head here. Yes we are. What you describe is child pornography. Depending on jurisdiction, the girlfriend cannot consent. Even in jurisdictions where she can consent, it is still child porn. Even in situations where the 17 year old is acting alone, it is child porn. Even in situations where the 17 year old draws a picture of herself masturbating, it is child porn. I guest you are correct, my comment should read: s/rape/depiction in a sexual manner/g Either way, my point is that we should be careful of the language we use, and recognize that child pornography is far broader than circumstances that would generally be considered "rape" are. My phrasing was sub-optimal due to my other problem with the conflation of statutory rape and normal rape.

sandworm101 10y ago

> state sponsored and sanctioned pedophile ring. A child pornography ring. I have yet to hear any evidence of FBI participation in physical abuse, new physical abuse. They seem to have allowed preexisting material to be re-shared. If anything new was uploaded during this time we would have heard about child abuse arrests. A "pedophile ring" has a very different connotation. Both are bad, but one is a very different type of evil.

meeper16 10y ago

My biology screams salamanders!

gph 10y ago

>I'm certain it is a biological vagary. There should be a better way to treat people that are a certain way because of biology and not choice But that brings up the entire question of how much anyone truly has a conscious choice in any of their actions. A lot of evidence is pointing to 'free will' being an illusion our conscious minds uphold to make us feel like we are in control.[0] In the end I doubt very much there is a specific set of genes that causes one to be a pedophile, just as there isn't a set of genes that makes someone a murderer or thief. There's perhaps at best some genes that may pre-dispose a person towards pedophilia (though I doubt it), but clearly a persons environment is going to be the biggest determiner. It's well known that most child abusers were abused themselves. So until we start looking on all criminals as people that need to be treated and cured of their condition, it doesn't make sense to treat pedophiles that way. [0] http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/theres-no-such-thing-as-free-will/480750/?single_page=true http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/theres-n...

dkarapetyan 10y ago
Studies in bonobos point to there being a very strong genetic component in fact. Bonobos and chimps being our closest relatives I think the biological evidence is more compelling than you think.
- gph 10y ago
  Source? I'd be interested in reading about that.
  - dkarapetyan 10y ago
    I've lost the reference but it was a study of sexual behavior in bonobos and their "non-discriminatory" attitude and practices. Bonobos of course being famous for their sexual proclivities and chimps being famous for their violent proclivities. If you google relevant keywords I'm sure it will turn up.
    - gph 10y ago