7 ms·

As wrong as it sounds, maybe it's for the better to have a forum where pedophiles can aggregate knowledge on how to safely (physically speaking) molest children

As wrong as it sounds, maybe it's for the better to have a forum where pedophiles can aggregate knowledge on how to safely (physically speaking) molest children. Also, I have to say that while I find the idea of sex with children repulsive, having a place where you can discuss the topic should be 100% ok. Child rape is awful, talking about child rape is unsettling, but having someone proactively monitor my communications is even more unsettling. It feels like a stranger offering me candy. Besides, for this particular problem, the best solution seems to be what we're already doing - tell as many children as possible that if someone tries to rape them, there are people who will listen and help.

fatbird 14y ago
You don't think that enabling them to discuss it, enables them to carry it out? Who's the more effective child predator: the one who does it alone, with little guidance or feedback from others; or the guy who spends time discussing it with a supportive peer group and perhaps carrying out predation with their help? The only value to such a forum is for monitoring and catching them. If by definition the forum isn't useful for that because it's TOR, then that's a giant negative for me in the existence of TOR. If the cost of assisting dissidents is that children get raped... then I don't know that we should be assisting dissidents this way.
- nowarninglabel 14y ago
  I'm not sure you have a basis to make the assumption that the forum leads to more predation. What if it works the opposite? We know that violent movies lead to lower violent crime rates, because the criminals who would be out committing violent crimes are instead enjoying going and seeing this movie. The same could be true of people who might otherwise act on their intentions for predation, but are instead satisfied by just living vicariously through others on the forums. I agree with you that I'd like nothing better than to round all these predators up, but it's only through rational thought and discussion that we can figure out the best way to do that.
  - ahelwer 14y ago
    The US DOJ has released this excellent memo on why child pornography is illegal, despite the lack of an "obvious" victim (you've probably seen arguments along those lines for why it should be legal if you read Slashdot or Reddit at all): [HUGE TRIGGER WARNING FOR DESCRIPTION OF ABUSE] http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/downloads/ReluctantRebellionResponse.pdf http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/downloads/ReluctantRebe... The basic reason why the "give them a safe outlet" arguments don't hold water is because it normalizes the behaviour as they discuss it with like-minded individuals, which leads to easier rationalization and more abuse.
    - guard-of-terra 14y ago
      Why doesn't it work the same way with violence? Violence on the screen does not "normalize the behaviour".
      - runn1ng 14y ago
        Actual videos of killed/shot people probably does, too.
        thinkingisfun 14y ago
        And even that would not be actual murder. I remember when I was rather fresh on the internet, ran into Stileproject of all things (don't google that if you don't know it, it can be summed up as porn and gore, plus "funny mutilation" and midgets), and ended up seeing a video of someone having their throat cut, while someone had a boot on their head - it was very real, in Russia by the sounds of it. Then there was a beheading, and of course stonings from them middle east. I was shocked, but I could also not not look, if that makes any sense. That was 12 years ago, and I still feel helpless and angry thinking of it, I still remember more of these videos than I care to. The idea of someone watching such videos, and actually laughing, chills me to the bone. But I'm under no delusion that that was not the primary reason for their circulation. Sometimes humanity sucks.. and I'm torn between my right to learn about the banal cruelty that actually exists in the world, and not wanting such things to be glorified.
rmc 14y ago
No. Free speech rights are limited.

fatbird 14y ago

You don't think that enabling them to discuss it, enables them to carry it out? Who's the more effective child predator: the one who does it alone, with little guidance or feedback from others; or the guy who spends time discussing it with a supportive peer group and perhaps carrying out predation with their help? The only value to such a forum is for monitoring and catching them. If by definition the forum isn't useful for that because it's TOR, then that's a giant negative for me in the existence of TOR. If the cost of assisting dissidents is that children get raped... then I don't know that we should be assisting dissidents this way.

nowarninglabel 14y ago
I'm not sure you have a basis to make the assumption that the forum leads to more predation. What if it works the opposite? We know that violent movies lead to lower violent crime rates, because the criminals who would be out committing violent crimes are instead enjoying going and seeing this movie. The same could be true of people who might otherwise act on their intentions for predation, but are instead satisfied by just living vicariously through others on the forums. I agree with you that I'd like nothing better than to round all these predators up, but it's only through rational thought and discussion that we can figure out the best way to do that.
- ahelwer 14y ago
  The US DOJ has released this excellent memo on why child pornography is illegal, despite the lack of an "obvious" victim (you've probably seen arguments along those lines for why it should be legal if you read Slashdot or Reddit at all): [HUGE TRIGGER WARNING FOR DESCRIPTION OF ABUSE] http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/downloads/ReluctantRebellionResponse.pdf http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/downloads/ReluctantRebe... The basic reason why the "give them a safe outlet" arguments don't hold water is because it normalizes the behaviour as they discuss it with like-minded individuals, which leads to easier rationalization and more abuse.
  - guard-of-terra 14y ago
    Why doesn't it work the same way with violence? Violence on the screen does not "normalize the behaviour".
    - runn1ng 14y ago
      Actual videos of killed/shot people probably does, too.
      - thinkingisfun 14y ago
        And even that would not be actual murder. I remember when I was rather fresh on the internet, ran into Stileproject of all things (don't google that if you don't know it, it can be summed up as porn and gore, plus "funny mutilation" and midgets), and ended up seeing a video of someone having their throat cut, while someone had a boot on their head - it was very real, in Russia by the sounds of it. Then there was a beheading, and of course stonings from them middle east. I was shocked, but I could also not not look, if that makes any sense. That was 12 years ago, and I still feel helpless and angry thinking of it, I still remember more of these videos than I care to. The idea of someone watching such videos, and actually laughing, chills me to the bone. But I'm under no delusion that that was not the primary reason for their circulation. Sometimes humanity sucks.. and I'm torn between my right to learn about the banal cruelty that actually exists in the world, and not wanting such things to be glorified.

rmc 14y ago

No. Free speech rights are limited.