According to Diamond, "in those three countries where child porn is legal the sex abuse against children is very low and it has gone down compared to when it was illegal."
Diamond said child pornography gives would-be abusers a different outlet to channel their desires.
"We think the perpetrator is more likely to use pornography to masturbate and not go after kids, so we think it's better for kids," said Diamond.
As part of his research Diamond also looked at countries that have recently made child pornography illegal and said the rate of child sex abuse there is rising.
According to Salon.com:
The study certainly raises interesting philosophical questions about promoting objectionable material to prevent real-world crimes -- but it's also majorly flawed. A couple of big-time caveats: Diamond's research finds a correlation between child pornography and sex abuse, which is not the same as causation; and in the Czech case, pornography in general (including kiddie porn) was legalized, not just kiddie porn. It's also worth noting that the observed drop is in reported child sex abuse. Beyond even those concerns, there is the fact that his research doesn't explicitly study the impact of faux child porn. I find it hard to believe that those who seek out child pornography -- and who are at risk for abusing actual children -- will be satisfied by "pretend" pictures. Imitation child porn that convincingly passes for the real thing might do the trick, but then how would we tell the difference between real abuse and simulated abuse?
Future treatment for pedophiles might involve a "prescription" for child pornography. Or a therapist directed trip to the playground, day care center or swimming pool locker room. A primary goal of the pedophile movement is the normalization and decriminalization of child sex abuse images and movies. Like medical marijuana, child pornography as "treatment" is the first step to making this material more acceptable and less stigmatized. As Salon.com recognizes, however, if child pornography is the cure, how terrible must be the disease??
Thanks for continuing to shed light on dark corners.
ReplyDeleteThis research seems to be completely in denial about the abuse of children which occurs to create Child Porn. I know it mentioned "simulated", but in a market driven business of any kind, the product that attracts the most clients will be the one most produced.
It seems like a specious piece of "research" in many ways.
Let's ask the kids. As a child who was used in child porno industry from infancy on up, I wonder where the researcher got his information. If is was from the consumers themselves, I know intimately that they are notorious liars. What do perverts want for birthdays, christmas, easter, raises, july4, etc. ?. More porn, more kids. What do they get as the pot for poker, the best jokes, the best lies, the best vacation stories, the best photos? Yeah, you are starting to get it. It takes a long time to produce porn. The costume person, (Brother Somebody or other) gets a blowjob, then the makeup person ( Father whathis name) get some to) then Bishop Bullshitter gets so turned on while the production is taking place, of course HE gets to stop it and a sodomy takes place, and then the Cardinal Cunt gets to fuck Little Bo Peep. Do you need to know more?
ReplyDeleteThe fact that correlation doesn't imply causation does not necessarily imply that the study is "majorly flawed". After all, Salon.com hasn't proven that there *isn't* a causative link, and in fact, it seems quite likely that there might well be.
ReplyDeleteIn my view, "treatment" for paedophiles comes down to how we, as a society, *treat* paedophiles. If you treat paedophiles (that is, those with a sexual attraction to children, not those who have abused children) with humanity, they will respond with respect. If you attempt to suppress and ostrasice sexuality, I'm sorry to say it, but you're only getting the trouble you're asking for.
Steve: What does the fact that children are abused to produce child porngoraphy have to do with the result? It may well be a fact that legalisation of child porn results in a reduced incidence of child abuse. That children are abused to produce the material does not change that fact. Whether you believe that Professor Diamond's conclusions are socially appropriate is, of course, another matter.
Just one other thing actually - the creation of child porngorpahy is barely "market driven". It is circulated within the context of a "gift economy", not a "market economy", in which market intuition does not apply.