Many people are curious Jason but I feel child pornography is a definite no-no, perhaps that's just me.
I absolutely agree. I've looked at plenty of "dark" stuff online, but I can certainly say with complete certainty that I've never had even the slightest inkling to seek out child pornography.
But I still think his point is a valid one though if you expand it to a wider field of things or 'content', if you will.
Dunno really, good "with TRAINERS!" headline for the Mail, I guess. Definitely not politically correct to even hint at the slightest measure of agreement with any of what he said, that's for sure!
His excuse that some men may click on a wrong link is just a non-story of course they may unintentionally click on a link that leads to a wrong site. People who do it intentionally are paedophiles
I think there's an argument that it shouldn't be illegal to view material featuring 16-18 since if they actually shagged someone of that age it would be perfectly legal so the notion of it being "child abuse" doesn't really wash. It's perfectly reasonable to ban the publication of it though.
Does watching zoophile pornography necessarily mean you must be a zoophile?
I invite you all to answer the question rather than avoid it.
I have answered you below as others have, I dont know where you going with this but if you are saying people have a curiosity to watch grown men sexual abuse children then they need to get help before that turns into something more than curiosity.
I absolutely agree. I've looked at plenty of "dark" stuff online, but I can certainly say with complete certainty that I've never had even the slightest inkling to seek out child pornography.
But I still think his point is a valid one though if you expand it to a wider field of things or 'content', if you will.
Child pornography viewing is just something that hasn't entered my head and know it never will - there's no curiousity there whatsoever only revulsion.
I was surprised to read " ...it emerged that in some cases those who viewed child porn online were at risk of receiving harsher sentences than those who committed physical acts against children ". That should be addressed asap I feel.
I kind of agree with Grisham that the US system in particular has become so paranoid about child abuse that it prosecutes unfairly in some cases. However my thought when saying that would be a youngster doing something stupid like sending nude photos of herself to her bf, then getting done for distribution of child pornography.
I don't agree with him that viewing child porn is somehow not worthy of punishment because you aren't the one hurting the child. It's a supply and demand industry. >:(
I have answered you below as others have, I dont know where you going with this but if you are saying people have a curiosity to watch grown men sexual abuse children then they need to get help before that turns into something more than curiosity.
Sounds like he's trying to make an excuse for a once respected pal of his who got caught out. That's the thing about child-porn/abuse people from all walks of life are perpetrators. I also hate it when some say that the viewer isn't abusing the child themselves and so where's the real harm. Ridiculous.
He definitely comes across as someone who thinks that adults watching underage people being sexual is okay. Not the same, but it kind of reminded me of the video where two men from P.I.E tried to defend men having sex with children.
I watch lesbian porn, it doesn't mean I'm a lesbian.
That's an interesting one, which I hadn't thought of! So by extension, does this all mean those who get a kick out of viewing images of gore, mutilation, murdered people etc. are likely to go on to commit gory assault and murder, so viewing them too should be made illegal? Perhaps it's heading that way?
Someone's bound to have done a study of this so I wonder what the research reveals?
Does watching zoophile pornography necessarily mean you must be a zoophile?
No it doesn't. And I do understand where you are coming from.
But isn't the point that viewing child pornography is illegal? So even if you just happened to be curious (which I am not entirely convinced anyone really could be but for the sake of argument, lets say somebody is) then you've still committed a crime by viewing it, whether you are a peadophile or not.
It does not really apply to this country. I doubt if there is anybody locked up in maximum security for over 10 years for looking looking at online child pornography and nothing else. We rarely dish out out that kind of sentence even to people who kill others.
When he talks about the 16 year olds I think he kind of has a point. After all, 16 is legal ageof consent in this country and is in some US States too. I know the law says that you have to be 18 to appear in this kind of thing and you could be prosecuted for viewing if one of the participants was 16 or 17. I'm not even arguing the legality of that here, but more the label. I wouldn't call someone who watched something like that a paedophile just as I wouldn't call someone who had sex with a 16 or 17 year old one either. They might be distasteful if much older themselves, but they're not paedophiles.
If there was no demand for child porn, it would not exist. There would be no child victims.
It is bad enough that paedophiles access child porn, but it is just as bad, if not worse when 'curious' people (who cannot see that by accessing porn they are creating a larger demand) source it out.
People who want to watch children being sexually abused are paedophiles.
The problem with focusing on the people watching the content though, is how can we be certain about who is and isn't watching it without tracking everybody's internet use?
I think the focus should be on the people who create and spread child porn and an internet regulator that has the power to block all child porn websites, and that people can call about specific websites without fear of prosecution so those websites can be blocked.
Yes or no...do you think everyone who watches zoophile porn is a zoophile?
No. But, come on, anyone who seeks out and watches child porn for entertainment is a paedophile or has paedophile tendencies, yes. Nobody who doesn't would want to watch such disgusting abuse merely because they are 'curious', regardless of what they might tell themselves.
Comments
why would anyone have a 'curiosity' to watch a child being sexually abused by an adult
Your comparison makes no sense
I absolutely agree. I've looked at plenty of "dark" stuff online, but I can certainly say with complete certainty that I've never had even the slightest inkling to seek out child pornography.
But I still think his point is a valid one though if you expand it to a wider field of things or 'content', if you will.
Dunno really, good "with TRAINERS!" headline for the Mail, I guess. Definitely not politically correct to even hint at the slightest measure of agreement with any of what he said, that's for sure!
What do you think, Brookie?
I think it's quite obvious what his point is. People are either playing dumb and pretending to be offended or are just plain dumb.
If you enjoy watching zoo porn yes it does.
I have answered you below as others have, I dont know where you going with this but if you are saying people have a curiosity to watch grown men sexual abuse children then they need to get help before that turns into something more than curiosity.
Seriously no one can be curious about this
Child pornography viewing is just something that hasn't entered my head and know it never will - there's no curiousity there whatsoever only revulsion.
I was surprised to read " ...it emerged that in some cases those who viewed child porn online were at risk of receiving harsher sentences than those who committed physical acts against children ". That should be addressed asap I feel.
I kind of agree with Grisham that the US system in particular has become so paranoid about child abuse that it prosecutes unfairly in some cases. However my thought when saying that would be a youngster doing something stupid like sending nude photos of herself to her bf, then getting done for distribution of child pornography.
I don't agree with him that viewing child porn is somehow not worthy of punishment because you aren't the one hurting the child. It's a supply and demand industry. >:(
Yes or no...do you think everyone who watches zoophile porn is a zoophile?
I think it's crystal clear where I'm going.
He definitely comes across as someone who thinks that adults watching underage people being sexual is okay. Not the same, but it kind of reminded me of the video where two men from P.I.E tried to defend men having sex with children.
That's an interesting one, which I hadn't thought of! So by extension, does this all mean those who get a kick out of viewing images of gore, mutilation, murdered people etc. are likely to go on to commit gory assault and murder, so viewing them too should be made illegal? Perhaps it's heading that way?
Someone's bound to have done a study of this so I wonder what the research reveals?
No it doesn't. And I do understand where you are coming from.
But isn't the point that viewing child pornography is illegal? So even if you just happened to be curious (which I am not entirely convinced anyone really could be but for the sake of argument, lets say somebody is) then you've still committed a crime by viewing it, whether you are a peadophile or not.
If someone choose to watch zoo porn, yes they have a sexual interest in animals.
If someone seeks out child porn, what does that make them in your eyes?
It is bad enough that paedophiles access child porn, but it is just as bad, if not worse when 'curious' people (who cannot see that by accessing porn they are creating a larger demand) source it out.
I've chosen to watch bestiality videos in the past. Does that mean I have a sexual interest in animals ?
The problem with focusing on the people watching the content though, is how can we be certain about who is and isn't watching it without tracking everybody's internet use?
I think the focus should be on the people who create and spread child porn and an internet regulator that has the power to block all child porn websites, and that people can call about specific websites without fear of prosecution so those websites can be blocked.
No. But, come on, anyone who seeks out and watches child porn for entertainment is a paedophile or has paedophile tendencies, yes. Nobody who doesn't would want to watch such disgusting abuse merely because they are 'curious', regardless of what they might tell themselves.