It’s all one conversation that got long

I comment on stuff I take issue with and unfortunately there’s a lot of bad discussion on this topic here. I’m also scripting a youtube video on the topic because it’s underadressed, so I’ve already done some research and it hurts seeing ignorant people talk about it

Not linking sources to two people not doing the same. I’ve done my research a while ago and I will not waste 30 minutes of my life aggregating links for you.

As I said, I’m aware that research on drawn csam as a ‘therapeutic’ tool doesn’t exist and I’ll gladly defer to a psychologist suggesting it to an existing pedophile as an outlet.

The reason validifying it publicly is dangerous is because: a) People who use it as an outlet might think they are not still likely a danger to others and morally obligated to seek help if at all possible (it’s fine if a psych suggests it, it’s not a replacement for a psych) b) People without preexisting harmful instincts, especially young people, can think it harmless to abuse drawn csam and condition their brain into sexual attraction to elements of csam. That’s bad. Very, very bad.

As far as laws go, you’re aware how little science can feasibly be ethically conducted on csam, right? Given how confident you are in your statement that csam and drawn csam are different in the effects on the person consumimg them (obv one is horribly unethical to produce), where’s that coming from? I know for a fact (if nothing’s changed in the past few years) there’s no study even distinguishing between the two.

I’m always going to err on the side of kids’ safety over people’s ability to watch children get rd,* so given there’s no study comparing the effects of drawn and recorded csam, I’m all for it being illegal until someone proves there’s any reason to be skeptical of it’s harmfulness. The illegality should of course exclude uses suggested by psychologists like trauma processing and use as an outlet.

Absolutely not. Available research suggests there is commonly psychological modelling in relation to consumed pornographic content.

It can maybe be a less harmful outlet for people who have the predisposition in the first place, but it seems by all means you can, especially when young, teach your brain to be aroused by neoteny and the subsequent, more sinister things. Given how terrifying the sparce correlative data between CSA material abuse and actual abusive acts is, this is an unacceptably uneducated statement, validifying the instincts of people who should instead be seeking psychological aid.

As for the ‘this sounds like the video games cause violence argument’… I’m worried how some people fail to understand the logic behind an argument and use it’s result to draw parallels to things they find similar

The reason the ‘video games cause violence’ argument is dumb is because the data predominantly shows they don’t. It would be perfectly valid otherwise, so some argument ‘sounding like it’ is NOT A FUCKING REBUTTAL. The fact that even came to mind for you worries me. Please reformulate the way you form your opinions if you plan to share them in online spaces where they can influence others

like/hate hate, the default association of femininity with submission has to go

I’m European too, and in my country at least, I found no option to form a legal process against the pedophile.

The moron I was talking about had admitted to consuming CSAM in a group of people, I have no clue if he’d done anything else or has since, and knowing I failed to do anything about him I don’t want to think about it too much.

The ‘putting words in my mouth’ was reffering to your insistence I’d made a general claim of ‘killing pedos is moral’ and not that ‘it would be a solution if they refuse help and that seems likely to me, having dealt with one and tried to convince them to seek it’.

Comparing concerns of pedos to those of drag queens in any way whatsoever rubs me the wrong way on its own, and even then it’s not the same, given pedophiles are actually a threat to children. Being concerned about your neighbour spontaneously exploding is dumb, fearing the same from a person who just drank 5 liters of 100% nitroglycerin before climbing on a trampoline is actually ok, methinks (best analogy ever, I know). I think it is absolutely on an otherwise mentally healthy pedophile to overcome their ‘fear’ and seek help, so much so I don’t care what happens to them if they refuse to.

Again, I am willing to defer to experience where quantitative data is definetively unachievable to make my assumptions. I’m not writing a paper about it, but I’ll gladly state it with confidence in conversation when I think I have more insight than the majority of people. When my parents told me not to stick my fingers in an outlet as a kid I listened, even though there were no studies proving 230 Volts kill 5 year olds… and the existence of reliable scientific data on these two topics is about equally unlikely.

No, my argument was, as I said: a) if you cannot get a pedo to rehab, a bullet is better than letting them endanger others b) Those situations seem significantly more likely than pedos willingly participating in therapy - I listed an anecdote as an example because I thought the analysis as to why this is relatively intuitive. I can write it out if you disagree.

Hence a bullet is the more likely solution, not a universal one.

That’s what I said, and I stand by it. And I stand by the example provided because I don’t think analysis is needed for why a pedo is more likely to reject help than accept it and quantitative data on the subject is inexistent and unachievable.

Adding imprisonment to the mix is a valid complaint but doesn’t change much, given how hard it is to even gather enough to allow police intervention, even when dealing with a self-admitted pedophile like I was.

The reason I assumed your conclusion is because of the context of the thread. Sorry for misunderstanding. Your stubborness on putting words in my mouth makes me a little more comfortable about it tho.

Anexdotal & qualitative evidence is absolutely preferable to no evidence. And there are areas where quantitative evidence is impossible to gather and/or, in individual cases, inapplicable.

I assummed from context that your conclusion was that killing a pedo isn’t the answer. Sorry if the assumption was wrong but I think it’s reasonable. In that case, the fact that you didn’t even bother to provide analysis for that conclusion is NOT A POSITIVE. You can’t assert something, then when asked for data to back it up say ‘I didn’t make a proper argument do I don’t need data’.

My suggestion in the first place was: if you cannnot get a danger to children to seek help and/or can’t get them locked up a bullet can very well and often be a justifiable course of action. I think you assummed I was drawing a universal moral prescription of how to deal with all cases and I see how, but I wasn’t.

All I’m saying is that in many cases, a bullet for those who aren’t willing to rehab is a valid way out, and there are a lot of those people.

Sorry for the lengthy ass comment, didn’t see a way to shorten what I said while keepin the substance. When I have time I’d rather avoid empty snide quips like those you’ve been making

Don’t call me a guy. And if you don’t cite a study, anecdotes are still legitimately a better bet than pulling shit out of your arse

Go on, genuinely willing to have my mind changed. Something tells me you haven’t googled any literature on the topic until now tho.

change your name. Assuming you aren’t underage so that psychotic pedo fuck would’t be interested.

No. Flat out no. There is no competition and they’re literally providing what they are capable of to take care of the others’ need. Mutual aid is not a marketplace and the fact you instinctually thought of it that way tells me you need a book on capitalist realism.

The continued life & growth of people in a community helping each other is the exact motivation that usually makes the profit incentive useless

I’ve tried to get a pedophile to see a therapist. I can tell you from a pure harm reduction perspective a bullet is much more likely to be the solution.

unfortunately for a lot of minorities