9
   

Is it wrong to view child pornography?

NSFW Forums: Philosophy, Debate, Ethics, Addiction, Pornography
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:09 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:

. Further, I'm sickened by the thought that the mutually afflicted A-holes posting here and/or not posting here may have just used this forum to locate each other, and are exchanging heinous pictures or links by PM as we speak.


Actually, I was not aware that I had PM rights yet, but thanks for the tip...
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:11 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
dlowan wrote:
I thought you suspected (and assumed you had some reason to do so) that they were attempting to influence others via PM, and if so, and if their actions were deemed illegal, offensive, or violated TOS in some way, I simply wished anyone new to the board to know that they COULD discuss their concerns with the Mods.
Good of you to point that out, even though that isn't what I was suggesting. I would think the sickos would behave much like drug users… only more cautious still. M.O. identify each other with easily deniable cross purposes while probing for interest as they move closer to mutual understanding, culminating in acceptance into the sick subculture. Prior to this thread; it hadn’t occurred to me that A2K could be used for that purpose… and the thought sickens me.



Er.......there are plenty of sites for sickos to enjoy each other's company.

I must say I have a visceral cinge when I see so many threads about by Hawk and Agrote variously defending child abuse, rape etc. ....but I think your reaction over the top.
0 Replies
 
shewolfnm
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:12 pm
I agree. 10,000000%
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:16 pm
dlowan wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
dlowan wrote:
I thought you suspected (and assumed you had some reason to do so) that they were attempting to influence others via PM, and if so, and if their actions were deemed illegal, offensive, or violated TOS in some way, I simply wished anyone new to the board to know that they COULD discuss their concerns with the Mods.
Good of you to point that out, even though that isn't what I was suggesting. I would think the sickos would behave much like drug users… only more cautious still. M.O. identify each other with easily deniable cross purposes while probing for interest as they move closer to mutual understanding, culminating in acceptance into the sick subculture. Prior to this thread; it hadn’t occurred to me that A2K could be used for that purpose… and the thought sickens me.



Er.......there are plenty of sites for sickos to enjoy each other's company.

I must say I have a visceral cinge when I see so many threads about by Hawk and Agrote variously defending child abuse, rape etc. ....but I think your reaction over the top.
I know you do... just as I find yours entirely too compassionate.
0 Replies
 
shewolfnm
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:17 pm
shewolfnm wrote:
I agree. 10,000000%


My "I agree" is to your statement of seeing too many of those threads, posts, etc..

just to clarify!


( Im outta here now.. really.. )
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:26 pm
shewolfnm wrote:
shewolfnm wrote:
I agree. 10,000000%


My "I agree" is to your statement of seeing too many of those threads, posts, etc..

just to clarify!


( Im outta here now.. really.. )


Maybe this is because you don't want to think about the subjects, and because you want to support the conventional wisdom but logic and facts are not on your side?? The all to common emotional outbursts around here are a warning to all that the majority opinion is on shaky ground. Some of us want to talk it out and get to the bottom of the problem, and others just want the problem to go away...want those pointing at the problem to go away.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:28 pm
hawkeye10 wrote:
shewolfnm wrote:
shewolfnm wrote:
I agree. 10,000000%


My "I agree" is to your statement of seeing too many of those threads, posts, etc..

just to clarify!


( Im outta here now.. really.. )


Maybe this is because you don't want to think about the subjects, and because you want to support the conventional wisdom but logic and facts are not on your side?? The all to common emotional outbursts around here are a warning to all that the majority opinion is on shaky ground. Some of us want to talk it out and get to the bottom of the problem, and others just want the problem to go away...want those pointing at the problem to go away.


Only those who are part of the problem.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:32 pm
It's not an issue of "the problem going away." That would be naive to a fault. It's similar to expecting all the ills of the world to suddenly disappear; it ain't gonna happen.

There are some topics that go beyond acceptable levels of discourse. Most of us learn what is right or wrong by our own experiences, but such things as murder and child molestation is not a topic that will find common ground of acceptance no matter how anyone tries to rationalize it.

I personally find people who justify such things as abnormal.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:33 pm
Intrepid wrote:
hawkeye10 wrote:
shewolfnm wrote:
shewolfnm wrote:
I agree. 10,000000%


My "I agree" is to your statement of seeing too many of those threads, posts, etc..

just to clarify!


( Im outta here now.. really.. )


Maybe this is because you don't want to think about the subjects, and because you want to support the conventional wisdom but logic and facts are not on your side?? The all to common emotional outbursts around here are a warning to all that the majority opinion is on shaky ground. Some of us want to talk it out and get to the bottom of the problem, and others just want the problem to go away...want those pointing at the problem to go away.


Only those who are part of the problem.


You have no way to know if people you don't know (me for instance) are part of the problem. The fact that you think that you do know is for sure a problem.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:35 pm
hawkeye10 wrote:
shewolfnm wrote:
shewolfnm wrote:
I agree. 10,000000%


My "I agree" is to your statement of seeing too many of those threads, posts, etc..

just to clarify!


( Im outta here now.. really.. )


Maybe this is because you don't want to think about the subjects, and because you want to support the conventional wisdom but logic and facts are not on your side?? The all to common emotional outbursts around here are a warning to all that the majority opinion is on shaky ground.

Shocked Yeah, those speaking out against pedophilia, rape, and misogyny are on shaky ground. Rolling Eyes Talk about sick.
hawkeye10 wrote:
...others just want the problem to go away...want those pointing at the problem to go away.
Can't argue with that.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:38 pm
Hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
You have no way to know if people you don't know (me for instance) are part of the problem. The fact that you think that you do know is for sure a problem.


I make no inference as to who is and who is not "part of the problem". I speak in general terms and did not point specifically to you or anyone else.

Those who agree that such behaviour is acceptable are, in my opinion, at the bottom edge of society.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:41 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
It's not an issue of "the problem going away." That would be naive to a fault. It's similar to expecting all the ills of the world to suddenly disappear; it ain't gonna happen.

There are some topics that go beyond acceptable levels of discourse. Most of us learn what is right or wrong by our own experiences, but such things as murder and child molestation is not a topic that will find common ground of acceptance no matter how anyone tries to rationalize it.

I personally find people who justify such things as abnormal.


If you do something that does not in any way hurt a single other person do other people have the right to tell you that you are wrong?? the question goes not just to freedom, but to self determination and to where the boundary is between self and other and between the individual and society. Your distaste does not mean squat if you can't justify telling others what to do on some basis that is more compelling than the fact that you don't like something. We are not trying to screw with your day by talking about things that you hate, we rabble rousers are trying to talk about important matters here in this thread and other places.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:50 pm
hawkeye, I'm not sure if you read my post or not, but I'm not talking about anything that doesn't hurt other people in any way. My post mentioned murder and child molestation; they both harm other people.
0 Replies
 
shewolfnm
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 08:50 pm
hawkeye10 wrote:

Maybe this is because you don't want to think about the subjects, and because you want to support the conventional wisdom but logic and facts are not on your side?? The all to common emotional outbursts around here are a warning to all that the majority opinion is on shaky ground. Some of us want to talk it out and get to the bottom of the problem, and others just want the problem to go away...want those pointing at the problem to go away.



get your facts straight before you try to sling that closeminded crap at me.

Taken from the VERY FIRST PAGE

shewolfnm wrote:
Looking at the picture does not hurt the child.

What hurts the child was making that picture, how ever it was done.

Just like most of you perverts can look across the grocery store and see a child that you can later think about, your "looking" doesnt effect them.
No one knows what is in your mind and just looking out of the corner of your eye harms no one.
The parents will never know you just took an inventory of their child for your later pleasure. Though sometimes.. we do.. because you pervs are obvious.
But for the most part no one knows.

A.



Quote:
because you want to support the conventional wisdom but logic and facts are not on your side??


Read before you post.
I do NOT have a conventional thought on this subject. Not at all.
As i said before, LOOKING harms no one. ACTING harms. And when it comes to looking.. sorry.. I dont give a rats behind about it. And I am not going to get technical into who is making what porn because people make it all over the world, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
As they are found, they will be removed and shut down.. but I am not going to get in a huff over them. I can do nothing for the hidden studios that promote this unless I find one. Then I can report it and help shut it down. My responsibility and capability runs almost to a halt there.

what logic can NOT 'be on my side' ?

How would you consider that an emotional outburst? Or did you just not read anything and jumped to conclusions based on one post?

You obviously know little of what I think or what is behind my stance.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Fri 27 Jun, 2008 11:19 pm
hawkeye10 wrote:
shewolfnm wrote:
shewolfnm wrote:
I agree. 10,000000%


My "I agree" is to your statement of seeing too many of those threads, posts, etc..

just to clarify!


( Im outta here now.. really.. )


Maybe this is because you don't want to think about the subjects, and because you want to support the conventional wisdom but logic and facts are not on your side?? The all to common emotional outbursts around here are a warning to all that the majority opinion is on shaky ground. Some of us want to talk it out and get to the bottom of the problem, and others just want the problem to go away...want those pointing at the problem to go away.



Snort.

Do you seriously think you two are not trotting out material that is wearisomely familiar, and not used by every child abuser, rapist and justifier of meeting their own needs without regard to the rights and feelings of others?

No rapist is ever guilty...they use your justifications...."she asked for it", "she led me on", "a man has his needs", "I am allowed to have sex with her whether she wants me to or not...she's MINE...I can do what I want, we're nmarried"....or, your favourite I think "I was drunk". I have been hearing your words in prison and out since I was in my twenties. Often said with less linguistic finesse...the finesse being able to disguise the crudeness of the underlying belief...but the message and the underlying beliefs are the same.


Just as almost no child abuser ever thinks HE has done harm...or the ones enlightened enough to acknowledge harm think OTHER abusers do harm, (as on this thread..."if I don't BUY it I'm not like those \BAD paedophiles) or manage to slip in "but he/she tempted me". Or...YOUR common justification for child abuse "The law is just denying the joys of sex with an experienced man to young women for arbitrary reasons...I am a harbinger of joy and liberty!! All who resist me are closed-minded fools!"


The gutters are full of men ( and some women, sadly) saying the same things as fervently as you. Your arguments are as stale as abuse and violence itself.
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Sat 28 Jun, 2008 01:59 am
OCCOM BILL wrote:
The Mods don't read PMs.


As an aside to the ongoing discussion, that made me laugh, Bill! Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
agrote
 
  1  
Sat 28 Jun, 2008 02:52 am
I don't have time to respond to all these posts yet. But I do have a couple of things to say for now...

I have never once in this thread claimed that paedophilia is no more unusual than homosexuality. Obviously paedophilia is more unusual.

I accept that there is a difference of consent between the two forms of sexual desire. And yes, they are forms of sexual desire, as the Queen rightly pointed out... sexual desire doesn't mean legitimate sexual desire, it just means desire to have sex, and paedophiles do desire to have sex with children. Legitimate or not, the laws agaisnt paedophilia may be sustained largely by public hysteria. The laws against homosexuality were once sustained by public hysteria, so the possibility is fairly strong.

Yes yes yes, I know, homosexuality is between consentign adults. So what? Homosexuality also begins with 'H', whereas Paedophilia begins with 'P'. THese are weak arguments against the comparison I have made - which was not between the two forms of sexuality, but between the two forms of public hysteria. The British (and presumably the American) public were once hysterical about gay sex, and now they are hysterical about child porn. Even if their hysteria in the latter case is perfectly reasonable, it doesn't change the fact that the laws surrounding child porn are not necessarily based wholly on expert opinion. I trust expert opinion; I do not trust public hysteria. This is why I am sceptical about the laws against use of child porn.

Another point I want to make is that hawkeye and I differ quite strongly in our views about sexual ethics. I don't agree at all with his views on rape, and I am not convinced by the point he made earlier about run-away children preferring to work as prostitutes. Where I think hawkeye and I agree is on the point that a large number of the posts on this thread have had no bearing on the truth-value of the claims I have made. They are hysterical, disrespectful, insulting, and above all they contain some very weak and fallacious arguments. Not all of them are like this; joefromchicago, for example, has managed to argue agaisnt my position quite sensibly. But so many of you seem to have not bothered to read anything that I have written. Which is fine, but I don't think it entitles you to comment on what I have written.

Re: the allegation that I am PM-ing people to... what? I'm not even sure what the allegation is. But my PM inbox and sentbox are empty. I have one message in my archive which is from 2005. I am not on this forum for sinister purposes. I am here to debate sexual ethics.
0 Replies
 
agrote
 
  1  
Sat 28 Jun, 2008 03:07 am
dlowan wrote:
The gutters are full of men ( and some women, sadly) saying the same things as fervently as you. Your arguments are as stale as abuse and violence itself.


Abuse and violence are "stale"? That's a strange way to describe them. It almost makes it sound as if abuse and violence aren't awful things that need to be stamped out - which they are. Old pieces of bread are stale; violence is horrific.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Sat 28 Jun, 2008 03:12 am
agrote wrote:
dlowan wrote:
The gutters are full of men ( and some women, sadly) saying the same things as fervently as you. Your arguments are as stale as abuse and violence itself.


Abuse and violence are "stale"? That's a strange way to describe them. It almost makes it sound as if abuse and violence aren't awful things that need to be stamped out - which they are. Old pieces of bread are stale; violence is horrific.



Then why do you continue to support the use of it against children?

You actually acknowledged the effect upon child victims of knowing men are jerking off to photos of their violation.

It is your arguments that are stale.
0 Replies
 
agrote
 
  1  
Sat 28 Jun, 2008 03:19 am
dlowan wrote:
agrote wrote:
Old pieces of bread are stale; violence is horrific.



Then why do you continue to support the use of it against children?


I don't. Simple as that. Scan this entire thread and you won't find anything written by me in support of the use of violence agaisnt children.

Quote:
You actually acknowledged the effect upon child victims of knowing men are jerking off to photos of their violation.


This has got nothing to do with violence or abuse. The effect would be that victims of abuse might experience extra emotional distress upon discovering that paedophiles are using images of their abuse as pornography. Indirectly causing a child to get upset is not abuse, and it certainly isn't violence. I acknowledge that viewing child porn may in some cases have harmful consequences, but I never defended the use of violence against children. Ever. You're simply making this up.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
The Void and the Absolute Oneness of the Universe - Discussion by Relinquish
can we reconcile darkness in man with madness(lunacy) ? - Question by studentnorway
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
In the GRAND scheme of things, what matters? - Question by komr98
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
How can something come from nothing? - Question by ripple
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is it wrong to view child pornography?
  3. » Page 14
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/09/2025 at 08:56:18
▲ ▼