I'm about to do a whole lot of devil's advocate here. Bear with me because this is more an exercise in logic when it comes to "just kill them" and the whole supply/demand dynamic for taboo material. I have said it many times (as this topic comes up oddly frequently) but the way we act about passive pedophilia is tantamount to a medical scientist thinking we should just shoot anyone with cancer, rather than studying the cancer.
It was just that one statement that bothered me. People don't "accidentally" watch child porn. They seek it out. The dark days of fringe sites like 4chan, you might see some shit you weren't expecting, but not anymore.
This is mostly true. It still pops up in places. But overall, this is correct. Limewire is a thing of the past.
But watching child porn adds demand for child porn.
Does it? Buying it would add demand. Watching it..... I'm not sure about that. But I also don't know if child porn is, by nature, behind a paywall. And the rest of my argument will rely on it not being the case. So if I'm wrong here, you can just ignore the rest and tell me I'm dumb.
The amount of that vile shit that exists only happens because of the demand.
This seems highly unlikely. The taboo nature of it and the addiction/obsession would make the demand. But since I don't know how much is paid for vs simply viewed, this is conjecture on both sides. There'd need to be a study on it.
Everyone who watches/pays for access to child porn is fueling and funding that particular supply.
This is conflation.
It fuels and funds the abuse of children. So yeah, we can argue that molesting and raping kids is worse than looking at pictures and videos, but looking at those pictures and videos directly results in more children being harmed.
And here you contradict your previous statement and then double-back on it.
So, fucking hang them anyway.
And I think this conclusion is flawed because of that conflation. I would assert that a person who views the item probably needs counselling to unearth why they have the destructive interest. I can't begin to pretend I know what level or how long, but some therapy would be necessary. And before you say "well why waste the money on therapy for these pos?" please keep in mind that pedophilia appears to be across all social spectrum, economic tier, educational level etc... etc...
The only "non-offending" pedophiles I want to get help and not be persecuted are truly non-offending pedophiles: No child porn. No interaction with children.
How would you be a pedophile who never looked at porn and was never around children? Seriously, I'm just asking how that would even work.
Once you cross the first line, I wouldn't cry about you catching a bullet.
This is that pitfall of society. I do get the initial reaction. It's like jumping at a jump-scare. And I don't think anyone has/can make an argument for pederast activity.... at least I can't think of a legit one. But if you ever take the moment to consider the situation, we would be much better served studying the affliction, especially in passive pedo interest. There has to be a reason it's so prevalent
Anyway, flame away, but sexual ethics was my favorite subject in university. Pushes people's ability to make avoid emotional arguments.
