4 ms·

I disagree, and I think the problem is the framing. Call it rape porn, because it is. What would you think of someone trading files like "REAL video of ISIS sol

by api 11y ago

I disagree, and I think the problem is the framing. Call it rape porn, because it is. What would you think of someone trading files like "REAL video of ISIS soldiers gang raping and beheading girl!" Child porn, especially the "hard core" sort alluded to here, is in the same category. I do dislike the OP's guilt by association and vigilantism though. There's a reason we have a proper justice system. Imagine if someone like this was mistaken about one of those email addresses. You could sue him to hell but the damage might be done.

ThomPete 11y ago
There is a world of difference between desiring, watching, touching and actual penetration. We might find the people watching child porn disgusting but they are after all only watching and not necessarily doing anything resembling rape porn.
- nkurz 11y ago
  What do you feel is the important distinction between "touching" and "actual penetration"? I'd think they both would fall under the same category of "child molestation".
  - ThomPete 11y ago
    A kid touching a mans penis maybe barely aware that the man is getting aroused vs. a man penetrating a little kid. They both fall under the same category but they are two very different things. Also don't forget that a big part of the issue with pedophilia is actually society which because of the tabu and inability to distinguish between the different types of them ends up making the experience even worse and further adding to the problem. And again I am not in any way defending this behavior, I have kids myself. I just believe that the very thorny subject requires more careful thinking than just calling evil.
ikeboy 11y ago
The obvious counterpoint is that beheading videos are legal to watch. The last time this came up on HN that I remember, someone linked to these posts by Rick Falkvinge: https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-must-be-re-legalized-in-the-coming-decade/ https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-mu... https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-bad-as-you-think-theyre-much-much-worse/ https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-ba...
- e12e 11y ago
  I support the fight against child pornography - but I can't support making certain types of media illegal to possess or watch. For one (small) thing you get into the absurd case were the court will have to commit the same crime to verify a crime was committed.
  - ikeboy 11y ago
    > For one (small) thing you get into the absurd case were the court will have to commit the same crime to verify a crime was committed. That doesn't seem like a strong argument, because it applies to a lot of other things as well, like illegal drugs. (And if the court relies on witnesses to establish that drugs were possessed, they could technically do the same by cp.)
- CityUtopian 11y ago
  Another obvious counterpoint is that a child can upload - of their own free will - a sexually explicit video of themselves. Has the child raped themselves?
anonymoushn 11y ago
Haha, photographs of consensual sex between high school seniors is rape porn I guess. Good thing high schoolers never have sex, since it would be rape.
- api 11y ago
  I don't think that's what I was talking about.
CityUtopian 11y ago
The distinction may not be obvious to people without this terrible affliction, so I think it's worth stating: pain, suffering and adults forcing themselves on to children is of a completely different category to content in which the child does not appear to be in discomfort (choosing my words carefully so as to avoid a debate about consent...). All of the same social norms about what is reviled and what is considered depraved translate to the world of pedophilia, hebephilia, etc. For example, a child who is visibly upset or in discomfort is as equally distressing to pedophiles as it is to anybody else. It should not be assumed that viewing child porn is synonymous with deriving enjoyment from suffering. Anyone who considers themselves "normal" would be disgusted by a 21 year old being raped just as they would also be disgusted by a 40 year old being raped. The age of the victim is irrelevant.

by api 11y ago

ThomPete 11y ago

There is a world of difference between desiring, watching, touching and actual penetration. We might find the people watching child porn disgusting but they are after all only watching and not necessarily doing anything resembling rape porn.

nkurz 11y ago
What do you feel is the important distinction between "touching" and "actual penetration"? I'd think they both would fall under the same category of "child molestation".
- ThomPete 11y ago
  A kid touching a mans penis maybe barely aware that the man is getting aroused vs. a man penetrating a little kid. They both fall under the same category but they are two very different things. Also don't forget that a big part of the issue with pedophilia is actually society which because of the tabu and inability to distinguish between the different types of them ends up making the experience even worse and further adding to the problem. And again I am not in any way defending this behavior, I have kids myself. I just believe that the very thorny subject requires more careful thinking than just calling evil.

ikeboy 11y ago

The obvious counterpoint is that beheading videos are legal to watch. The last time this came up on HN that I remember, someone linked to these posts by Rick Falkvinge: https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-must-be-re-legalized-in-the-coming-decade/ https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-mu... https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-bad-as-you-think-theyre-much-much-worse/ https://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-ba...

e12e 11y ago
I support the fight against child pornography - but I can't support making certain types of media illegal to possess or watch. For one (small) thing you get into the absurd case were the court will have to commit the same crime to verify a crime was committed.
- ikeboy 11y ago
  > For one (small) thing you get into the absurd case were the court will have to commit the same crime to verify a crime was committed. That doesn't seem like a strong argument, because it applies to a lot of other things as well, like illegal drugs. (And if the court relies on witnesses to establish that drugs were possessed, they could technically do the same by cp.)
CityUtopian 11y ago
Another obvious counterpoint is that a child can upload - of their own free will - a sexually explicit video of themselves. Has the child raped themselves?

anonymoushn 11y ago

Haha, photographs of consensual sex between high school seniors is rape porn I guess. Good thing high schoolers never have sex, since it would be rape.

api 11y ago
I don't think that's what I was talking about.

CityUtopian 11y ago

The distinction may not be obvious to people without this terrible affliction, so I think it's worth stating: pain, suffering and adults forcing themselves on to children is of a completely different category to content in which the child does not appear to be in discomfort (choosing my words carefully so as to avoid a debate about consent...). All of the same social norms about what is reviled and what is considered depraved translate to the world of pedophilia, hebephilia, etc. For example, a child who is visibly upset or in discomfort is as equally distressing to pedophiles as it is to anybody else. It should not be assumed that viewing child porn is synonymous with deriving enjoyment from suffering. Anyone who considers themselves "normal" would be disgusted by a 21 year old being raped just as they would also be disgusted by a 40 year old being raped. The age of the victim is irrelevant.