Schools and lawmakers are grappling with how to address a new form of peer-on-peer image-based sexual abuse that disproportionately targets girls.
Schools and lawmakers are grappling with how to address a new form of peer-on-peer image-based sexual abuse that disproportionately targets girls.
Theres no other solution to this. Again, dont make porn of people without their consent. Its not hard. If thats hard for you, then you need to seek help.
I talk about things that are the same to dismiss that the question of difference even matters. They are both harmful, should both be discouraged, and one results in the creation of non-consentual porn of the victim which is provable and should be illegal.
We hate pedophiles because children cannot consent. Children do not have sexuality in the same way that adults do. Being attracted to children is an attraction to exploitation, to the desire to victimize someone. Thats abhorrent. It is not a sexual orientation that the pedophile has no choice in. They have protected and engaged with a sexual fantasy of being able to victimize a child. I would never speak to someone again if they told me they were a pedophile. Most people wouldn’t. Thats not a failure of society, it is socially necessary for such thoughts to be treated as unacceptable in all contexts. Pedophiles should be forcefully institutionalized and subject to extensive psychotherapy and monitoring.
Its the difference between writing about genocide of a fictional race and writing about genocide of a real race. The line between fiction and reality is of extreme moral relevance. Incidentally drawing something that happens to look like someone you’ve never seen and drawing someone you have seen is entirely different. Even if the output is the same. Because we recognize intent. We recognize context. You also keep asking what the harm is in creating porn of people without their consent, and ive already pointed out that its dehumanizing it is invasive it is exploitative it devalues women and girls and reduces them to their bodies, yet you still seem to have trouble empathizing with women and girls in this situation.
Do you like to make porn of people without their consent? Is that a passtime of yours? I can genuinely think of no other reason why you would be so incapable of empathizing with the victims in this situation. You sound like you need help, you might have a disorder that interferes with your ability to fully connect with and understand the emotional experiences of other people.
OK, so you only stop short of making a thought crime because you can’t prove it. That’s… consistent but extremely concerning. You have no business policing what people think about. Freedom of thought is a fundamental right and what goes on inside other people’s heads is no-one’s business but their own unless they choose otherwise.
This ought to be the trigger to realise that you’ve got something wrong in this worldview. Even if not, it’s my trigger to know that I’m not going to get anywhere, so this will be my last reply. If someone thinks that the only issue with thought crimes is in gathering evidence, our views on morality and the limits of authority are diametrically opposed and there is no point trying, but at least I understand. If it’s the thought you really want to control, then you wouldn’t have any issue with the person who makes something harmful by accident.
Disturbing that you can’t recognise how disturbing this language is. But sure: threaten people with being locked up for unchangeable yet not harmful aspects of their selves, just to make sure that they never seek help to keep from causing harm. Morality aside this can’t have any negative consequences.
Everything I have read suggests that paedophiles have no control over their attraction, only over their actions. Here’s a thought experiment which I doubt you’ll bother trying: could you decide to be attracted to children? I couldn’t. It seems to be exactly like a sexual orientation in that respect.
Your inability to engage with points of view different from your own is problematic. The victims in your narratives are always female, the perpetrators always male. Those who disagree with you are always evil perpetrators. I only say this now that I’m disengaging because there’s no point in being drawn on provocative nonsense while trying to sustain a conversation.