Newest Members
tammy m, TheConqueror, Bloom, JohnWC, KKumar
12423 Registered Users
Today's Birthdays
dphoenix1701 (37), jaywiz2009 (69), mato (57)
Who's Online
4 registered (finallyhere, tbkkfile, Sojourn Survivor, 1 invisible), 22 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
12423 Members
74 Forums
63802 Topics
445525 Posts

Max Online: 418 @ 07/02/12 07:29 AM
Twitter
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#84656 - 10/28/06 01:23 AM More research/child pornography
Ken Singer, LCSW Offline
Moderator Emeritus
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 08/24/00
Posts: 5780
Loc: Lambertville, NJ USA
Child pornography link to abuse of children unclear
Internet and child pornography

(SACRAMENTO, Calif.) – If someone downloads child pornography onto their computer, is that an indication they're a pedophile, or might become one in the future?

That question is gaining the attention of forensic psychiatrists as never before, thanks to recent legislation making possession of Internet child pornography a federal crime constituting an unlawful transmission of information across state lines.

"A large number of cases are going to court and attorneys are calling us, wanting to know what is the reason this person has child porn on their computer," said Dr. Humberto Temporini, a forensic psychiatrist at UC Davis Health System. The answer is often unclear – not least because Temporini and his colleagues are still in the process of developing a standardized way to evaluate the risk, or lack of it, posed by someone who collects kiddie porn on the Internet.

The stakes are high. Dr. Charles L. Scott, associate professor of clinical psychiatry at UC Davis Health System, described the challenge facing forensic psychiatrists this way: "How do you assess the possession of Internet child pornography without the risk of offending, without the risk that the person will actually go out and molest a child?"

Such questions will be addressed at a panel discussion Sunday at the Marriott hotel in downtown Chicago dubbed "Internet and Child Pornography: The Impact on Forensic Assessments." The panel, part of a four-day conference sponsored by the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, will be chaired by Temporini, an assistant clinical professor in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences. Scott, chief of the department's Division of Psychiatry and the Law, is part of the panel.

The AAPL conference, an annual event for forensic psychiatrists, seeks to cover the major issues facing the profession. Because Internet porn is still a relatively new phenomenon, Scott said there is a dearth of studies on its relationship to sexually criminal behavior. As a result, Scott will address the issue of Internet child pornography by taking a look backward.

According to Scott, two federally commissioned studies, one in 1970 and the other in the 1980s, failed to find a strong correlation between viewing erotica and acting out sexually. He said that the decriminalization of pictorial pornography in several northern European countries in the 1960s and 1970s was not accompanied by an increase in the frequency of rape. Case studies of sex offenders – which Scott describes as potentially limited because they depend on self-reporting – have also not shown a clear link between pornography and the commission of sexual crimes.

A study of 11 pedophiles found that the majority did not begin viewing child pornography "until after they had started their offending activity against children," Scott said. And in a 1991 study of 160 adolescent males charged or convicted of sex crimes, 70 percent reported that pornography played no role in their illegal activity.

Scott said the nature of the pornographic material is a key factor. Extreme porn depicting sadism, bestiality and the like may be "part and parcel" with sexually criminal behavior. But he said it's difficult to say that any type of pornography causes someone to commit a sexual crime.

"Now, does it foster such behavior or continue it?" asked Scott. "That hasn't really been studied."

Both Scott and Temporini said one thing is clear: The Internet has made it easier for large numbers of people to view child pornography.

"The ease of use and sense of privacy is greater," Scott said.

According to Temporini, people caught with child porn on their computers typically claim that the material was sent to them unsolicited.

"You can accept that if it's just one or two images," Temporini said. "But if it's 200 or they've created a special folder for the images, then such excuses aren't very believable."

One thing that muddies the water a bit, Temporini said, are so-called "vigilantes," people who collect child porn through the Internet as a way to flush out pedophiles. Temporini said forensic psychiatrists can determine a person's "pedophile interest" by subjecting them to a battery of tests regarding their sexual history and other issues. But he said it remains difficult to predict what someone possessing Internet pornography might do to a child.

"The tests don't tell us much about that," Temporini said.

###

UC Davis Health System is an integrated, academic health system encompassing UC Davis School of Medicine, the 577-bed acute-care hospital and clinical services of UC Davis Medical Center, and the 800-member physician group known as UC Davis Medical Group.


Top
#84657 - 10/28/06 03:45 AM Re: More research/child pornography
melliferal Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 11/03/05
Posts: 1159
It seems to me that child pornography doesn't do anything more to "convince" a pedophile to molest a child who isn't already keen on doing it. However, that is certainly beside the point when it comes to why CP should be illegal; and people who try to insist that it matters are just plain wrong.

I've heard some real idiots suggest deadpan (and without the slightest bit of supporting evidence) that, by providing an outlet for "release", child pornography can actually prevent pedos from abusing real children - and they say that, for this reason, the possession of "old images" of CP should be decriminalized. Asshats.

_________________________
Children cannot consent; they can only comply.

Oprah's resources for male survivors

Top
#84658 - 10/28/06 03:46 PM Re: More research/child pornography
Trish4850 Offline
BoD Liaison Emeritus
MaleSurvivor<

Registered: 10/15/05
Posts: 3280
Loc: New Jersey
Years ago, I was involved in a first degree murder trial. Our client was not the one to deliver the fatal blows, but she was certainly there and took part in the crime. Both she and her partner were found guilty of 1st degree murder. All of us on Linda's team were really hoping for 2nd degree murder since we knew how the deal went down. The jury didn't see it that way and we were all devastated - at the time. It took time for me to be away from the case before I realized how warped my way of thinking had become. The bottom line was, our client had willingly participated in the murder of an innocent man and she got what she deserved. Her "degree" of guilt in this scenario wasn't really that important.

My point is, unless the possession of those images exist on your computer because they were truly sent unsolicited, then you are guilty of having them, should be charged as such and the authorities are duty bound to look deeper into your activities to ensure that children are safe. The circulation of those images is a crime with a horrific domino effect for the child(ren) in them.

BTW, if such images are there and you don’t want them, I would fully expect that only a forensic computer guy could find them because as soon as the person who didn't ask for them, got them, they were deleted.

I agree with Melliferal that

Quote:
“It seems to me that child pornography doesn't do anything more to "convince" a pedophile to molest a child who isn't already keen on doing it
but someone possessing it deserves a much deeper look at as he/she could be in a phase of “acceleration” and simply working themselves up to do evil.

Just my own very unprofessional 2 cents.

ROCK ON.......Trish

_________________________
If you fall down 10 times, Stand up 11.

Top
#84659 - 10/28/06 05:05 PM Re: More research/child pornography
reality2k4 Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 07/06/04
Posts: 6838
Loc: Stuck between water, air, and ...
Ok, let us look a bit deeper into it all.
Possession of child porn is an offence, child abuse is also an offence.

The sad part is, that if you abuse a kid, you can get off with it, and sometimes never get put into the headlines to protect the child.
Having material proof however is not so easy to dodge.

The sad thing is, that the cops can say they are heavy on child abuse whilst doing very little to stop it.
The more they get as sex offenders on the register gives the public an uneasy but false picture of what the cops are doing.

Anybody looking at the rate of sex offenders would think the cops are pretty good at solving abuse agains kids, when they just go for the easy target and make figures.

Governments want figures to show the public, then the public think there is a sex offender on every corner because of the numbers the cops divulge.

The best way of collating data, is to put all the ones caught with images together, and study their pasts. It would give you a strong sample study.

What I am saying here is this. If you have 100 cases of child porn and just one has a past offence it gives you a sample, it could be any number but it is the only sample you can trust.

If I go back through many of the cases that come up in court, a very small percent involved abuse plus images, and in one case last week another one walked out of court over dates.

Serial pedophiles have been caught of past, notably JK who did not have any porn, but he had the kids for real, so he didnt need it.

Pedophiles would never fall into the trap of being caught with it, even if they had it.
They are masters at stopping kids telling on them leading to years of untold misery and an unsocial caucous of abused kids.

I think it is time that the sex offender register should be categorized, so that the public can see more easily what these figures really mean.

If the authorities really wanted to, they could put a heavy boot on those who distribute it, but they dont have the money,

ste

_________________________
Whoever stole the Sun, put it back and we'll drop all the charges!

Top
#84661 - 10/29/06 05:08 PM Re: More research/child pornography
reality2k4 Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 07/06/04
Posts: 6838
Loc: Stuck between water, air, and ...
The problem with the public is that they are extremely ignorant of fact.
I worked for years with them, and could not believe the things they did or thought.

I do think it is wrong to criminalise those with images, it leads to them losing jobs and careers etc., when all they had was a few pictures.

Then the cops and authorities would have to really explain their massive budgets on tackling abuse which amounts to little in return.

I dont even come across CP because my web habits and browser settings make it almost impossible, but not your average household who dont know how to set up a system like mine.

ste

_________________________
Whoever stole the Sun, put it back and we'll drop all the charges!

Top
#84662 - 10/29/06 07:35 PM Re: More research/child pornography
melliferal Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 11/03/05
Posts: 1159
I'm not so sure I can agree. The fact that there are people out there who wish to procure such photos to aid in their fantasizing is often the primary, if not the sole, reason child pornography is produced for trade. And of course, children must necessarily be abused to create the material. As such, I think the "end user" certainly shares responsibility.

_________________________
Children cannot consent; they can only comply.

Oprah's resources for male survivors

Top
#84663 - 10/29/06 08:30 PM Re: More research/child pornography
reality2k4 Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 07/06/04
Posts: 6838
Loc: Stuck between water, air, and ...
I totally agree that paying for it, makes you complicit, and so does distribution.
What Ken is looking at, is if there is a connection between fantasy and reality.

Probation services would have better information on whether someone who had CP further went on to abuse, but I have found only a few cases were that became true.

We could use the analogy that anyone who watches snuff movies are future murderers when apparently the millions who do, never go on to murder.

Its a smoke screen for authorities to show they are doing a good job.
I see a serial pedo like Denning get four years, after being found guilty of serious abuse on multiple occasions a joke.

He will be out next year to carry on his reign of terror on kids.
Then you see someone who abuses once and gets life meaning life.

Why are they letting him out along with JK, when they are in their own words 'innocent'!
Authorities should focus their attention on these ppl, because there is no doubt they carry on clandestinely.

Keep these prolific monsters behind bars, they love it,

ste

_________________________
Whoever stole the Sun, put it back and we'll drop all the charges!

Top
#84664 - 10/30/06 03:24 AM Re: More research/child pornography
roadrunner Offline
Administrator Emeritus
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 05/02/05
Posts: 22045
Loc: Carlisle, PA
I'm replying to the point made by Trish:

Quote:
My point is, unless the possession of those images exist on your computer because they were truly sent unsolicited, then you are guilty of having them, should be charged as such and the authorities are duty bound to look deeper into your activities to ensure that children are safe.
That reminds me of a situation I had a few years ago at the University of Hamburg. I was having PC trouble of various kinds, so I called in our IT guru. Later that day he comes back and asks me if I had downloaded this and that song at 3:00 am, and when I laughed and said no, he asked me if I had recently gone home without turning off my PC. I then remembered that one morning I had come in and was surprised to see my PC still on.

Anyway, what had happened was that someone within the university system had detected that my PC was still on, so he hacked into it and was using it to store music files that he was selling illegally. That is, if a transaction had ever been detected, it would have been traced back to my PC and not his!

Something to think about where porn is concerned. Surely a dealer in illegal porn isn't doing to peddle the stuff from a site or PC that can easily be traced back.

Much love,
Larry

_________________________
Nobody living can ever stop me
As I go walking my freedom highway.
Nobody living can make me turn back:
This land was made for you and me.
(Woody Guthrie)

Top
#84665 - 10/30/06 07:07 AM Re: More research/child pornography
healing_inside Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 03/28/05
Posts: 2005
I would like to chime in here for a moment and mention something that Trish says:

"BTW, if such images are there and you don’t want them, I would fully expect that only a forensic computer guy could find them because as soon as the person who didn't ask for them, got them, they were deleted."

I am studing computer forensic's in college. The software to detect this and other types of evidence is pretty amazing.

It can not only retrieve the deleted files from your hard drive, but it can tell how long after it was downloaded to when it was deleted...

The proof is in the pudding

_________________________
I can't come to the phone right now, I am out living my life

*** WoR Retreat Alumni - Alta 2005 ***

Top
#84666 - 10/30/06 10:29 AM Re: More research/child pornography
reality2k4 Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 07/06/04
Posts: 6838
Loc: Stuck between water, air, and ...
Larry and all, it is possible for a hacker to store anything on any unprotected computer, anywhere in the world.

Computer related crime is almost impossible to take to a Court, reason being, from the judge to the jury, they could not understand the jargon surrounding such cases.

I have to pose just one question here.
Why? Are the authorities doing nothing to ensnare the members of Nambla?

That is the question I would love to know the answer to, and my guess is that they are largely complicit with this group and others,

ste

_________________________
Whoever stole the Sun, put it back and we'll drop all the charges!

Top
#84667 - 11/23/06 01:18 AM Re: More research/child pornography
Lloydy Offline
Administrator Emeritus
MaleSurvivor
Registered: 04/17/02
Posts: 7071
Loc: England Shropshire
NAMBLA and other groups such as PIE ( recently ressurected I beieve ? ) are all clever enough to hide behind a veneer of respectability, by misquoting and editing to suit scientific papers and research etc, and by not openly breaking any laws.

They might well advocate changes in the law, and openly state why they want those changes. But they will be meticulous about appearing to keep with the present laws.
NAMBLA and PIE are dangerous, but the real offences take place much more secretly.

how can anyone advocate any degree of legalisation or relaxation in child porn laws?
For child porn to exist a child has to be abused.

But I have recently seen clear evidence of a line of thinking that can only be described as "not in my back yard" ( nimby ) thinking. And it can easily be applied to the issue of child porn as well.

On another ( nothing to do with csa ) site that I found there is a 'chat' forum where anything goes and one day a young man, early 20's, posted that he'd just visited a night club in a Eastern European city where he'd had picked up a 13yo girl for sex.

A huge argument broke out, as expected, with the decent people saying he was a 'fucking pedo'
Ohters however defended him and said they would do the same because it was "legal in that country" - it wasn't, they were ignorant of the facts. And when faced with documentary evidence of the facts changed their argument to "It's accepted over there" or "how else do they make a living?"

They all agreed that in their home country the age of consent was right ( 16yo ) and their children in particular should refrain from sex until they were married!

The hypocricy was olympic, the riot went on for weeks and turned very nasty and personal ( I no longer go there as I'm not welcome any more ! )
But the attitude of these people was shocking.

As long as it was "someone elses kid" and a "fucking foreigner", as one racist moron so delightfully said, then it's all right!

It would be something if it was just a few idiots, with some just jumping on the bandwagon, but this wasn't. They seemed to be reasonably educated people, and mainly young and married.

Attitudes are changing fast, the internet makes that change both possible and even faster.
And we can't afford the bigots to speak the loudest.

Dave

_________________________
Go confidently in the direction of your dreams! Live the life you've imagined. As you simplify your life, the laws of the universe will be simpler.
Henry David Thoreau

Top
#84668 - 11/23/06 12:57 PM Re: More research/child pornography
reality2k4 Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 07/06/04
Posts: 6838
Loc: Stuck between water, air, and ...
Then the Romanians come here and somehow it is 'legal' for them to be used because perps will pay them or force them into prostitution.

I was in non-tourist Spain and there was a brothel with young girls working there.
Would I use them? NO, but plenty of others would,

ste

_________________________
Whoever stole the Sun, put it back and we'll drop all the charges!

Top
#84669 - 11/23/06 02:59 PM Re: More research/child pornography
sis Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/06
Posts: 195
Loc: Arizona
The bottom line for me is that any normal person would llook at a grown up having sex or other sexual activity with a child and immediately want to throw up and if sent to my computer i would call the cops and make a report. to find out where it came from. Child abuse is illegal!! Some child was abused in order for them to be in child porn!!! anyone having these images on PC or magazines or anyother way are as guilty as the ones who abused the kids in it. Money and property more important than our kids?? if you get cought with stolen property, it is a crime, whether you commited the crime or not. Why isn't it guilt by association? are our kids not as important as someones property. Whether CP makes someone take thimgs to the next level is irrelevent. It destroys children. That's all we really need to know. It is still very sick to want to see images like cp whether you have actually acted on those fantasies or not. Anyway, sore subject for me. It is just discusting all the way around. light and luv,Sis


Top
#141276 - 02/12/07 03:22 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: healing_inside]
philobat Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 01/31/07
Posts: 293
Loc: California
first we must define what a pedophile is. The fact remains that many victims have used porn to re victimize themselves in "acting out" behaviors. This does not mean they are pedophiles. Often and until in the recovery process do victims understand this behavior as common. Trust issues have kept many victims from support groups, therapy and recovery leaving them alone in the dark world of shame and guilt attempting to make their experiences "okay".

It is very sad that even one victim becomes a perpetrator when society or watchdog groups label them a pedophile. So in thinking that is what they are they cross than line only to discover they are not, and now they have destroyed the life of an innocent as well as their chance of recovery.

Its is a very fine line, which is why I say use caution before labeling anyone anything.

No, I am not a perp, but I see where society can easily push someone with a foogy reality into a label.

Society creates many monsters through years of systematic abuse.

_philo


Top
#141278 - 02/12/07 03:40 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: philobat]
Nobbynobs Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 06/26/05
Posts: 1286
Loc: Toronto
I think it depends on the type of porn. If a survivor is looking at child porn, for whatever reason, then he has definitely crossed the line into being a molester. By looking at the porn, he makes himself a party to the crime of enslaving and abusing those children.

If is is looking at regular, legal porn, then I don't think there is any issue from a legal standpoint, although the survivor can get addicted to it.

_________________________
When you go up to the bell, ring it! Or don't go up to the bell.

- Mel Brooks

Top
#141282 - 02/12/07 03:54 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: philobat]
reality2k4 Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 07/06/04
Posts: 6838
Loc: Stuck between water, air, and ...
I was watching a program today, and a psyche doc said it could be due to revisiting trauma, and it may be the only way of a survivor to relate to lost fragments by looking at similar events.

Trauma, means that we cannot resolve past hurt alone without looking at similar events to revisit the hurt that caused the
trauma in the first place.

We live in an evil world where they subject kids to rape etc for someones weird kick, and those who pay for it are helping keep
enslaving kids into having no future.

Its funny how Governments cannot even track down the ones who make and distribute it.
Some cant be caught but thousands could be if they really wanted to,

ste


Top
#141283 - 02/12/07 03:58 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: reality2k4]
Nobbynobs Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 06/26/05
Posts: 1286
Loc: Toronto
Ste, could they use drawings or stories?

I was used in child porn and my perp used porn pictures of other kids to groom me, so I can't condone anyone using it; even if it is for good reasons, because of the poor kids that are being victimised. I will never forget the expressions on those kids' faces.

_________________________
When you go up to the bell, ring it! Or don't go up to the bell.

- Mel Brooks

Top
#141289 - 02/12/07 05:25 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: Nobbynobs]
philobat Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 01/31/07
Posts: 293
Loc: California
Well, finally nobby and I share a similar experience as I too was used in kiddie porn. While I do not condone it and when it was presented to me by an ex, I ended up i the PTSD unit of a psych hospital.

My point is, there was a connection to it that I did not understand at the time. I became erect and repulsed at the same time and it was awful to have to have had that experience all alone and without any understanding at the time. I had blocked the experience out of my memory (which is common among us survivors).

I did not when viewing the porn in question even see the expressions. My subconscious mind kicked in and I became the child again.

Thank God, I found a therapist that explained to me what had happened on both medical and psycho logic and emotional levels that helped me to understand and thus remember my actual experience of being exploited as a child and thrust into porn.

I did not seek out this porn, but was exposed to it by a very evil person.

Personally, I do not ever want to see any kind of materials that exploit children. However, I do not want to condemn or judge a victim who has a reaction to it and is not yet in recovery long enough to understand their connection to it.

It is terribly sad how this type of exploitation is used to entice and entrap people in order to catch them.

It seems to me given all the news articles and sting operations, that molesters and perpetrators and enablers seem to know each other. Their habits are far different from abuse victims that have gotten caught in the loop of self victimization and self torture.

This is why the term pedophile must be defined in less broad terms as it currently is. The current definition is an adult interested in having sex with children. And since many abuse victims could fall into this category, if only to re connect with the abuse, which is far more common than not, there is a very big possibility that this "tuna" net is catching a few dolphins and I for one find that totally unacceptable.

To make a comment on here defining a victim as a molester because they were aroused by child porn while trying to self abuse and re victimize is very dangerous and I seriously question the recovery of someone who has been around long enough to know the difference.

Self-gratification by abusing a child is very different than connecting to a repressed memory. However the current definition of a pedophile does not distinguish any difference. I see this as pious arrogance and it is this kind of arrogance that brings survivors to continue to suffer in silence.

This is clearly black and white/all or nothing thinking at its worst.

I attempted suicide because I got an erection, I ended up in a hospital- So again I ask you, haven't I suffered enough? Because I got an erection I thought I might be the very monster that ruined my life?

Jesus, grow up, people and tell survivors that it is normal to connect to pornography, but in doing so can lead to behaviors and self abuse that can take years to undo.

Have the courage to tell your fellows because you have recovery, that connecting to porn because it is exploitive and they have been exploited is common reaction- and that to continue to connect to pornography will keep you in a state of re victimization and self abuse that enforces depression, mental health problems and isolation.

These are the reasons to avoid pornography of any kind because it objectifies sex and people... especially children.

-Philobat

P.S. ste, you have an excellent point about the producers of pornography. A very excellent point. Magazines like "Barely Legal" which are sold in convenience stores further serve to propagate a major problem. More people are turned on by this than one can fathom. There would be no supply if there were no demand.





Edited by philobat (02/12/07 05:28 PM)

Top
#141294 - 02/12/07 07:21 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: philobat]
Nobbynobs Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 06/26/05
Posts: 1286
Loc: Toronto
Philo,

If you were used in porn too, then you have my sympathy. It adds a terrible new dimension to the exploitation and betrayal caused by the abuse. Sometimes I wonder where all those pictures of me have ended up. I just pray that they weren't used to groom other kids, but since that was my perp's MO, I'm sure that they were.

However, I can't agree with you that survivors who use child porn are innocent. The origins of child porn are widely known, and anyone who uses it, for whatever reasons, is wrong.

That said, I can understand where you're coming from. A lot of guys are drawn to child porn for reasons that I agree come from their abuse. I also agree that I don't think they are setting out to exploit children when they view this material. I think most of them come into contact with it, usually over the internet, and then they look at it and it triggers some sort of response.

The thing that makes me nervous is if these guys don't get treatment for their abuse, or if they start actively pursuing child porn, then they are drifting further from "Acting out" and closer to "abusing children." I can't condone that.

Either way, one thing to keep in mind is that child porn is illegal. Even if a survivor obtains child porn for "innocent" reasons, he will still get busted by the police if he is caught with it, and he will be branded a child molester by the public. This may or may not be fair, but it is widely known that possession of child porn is illegal, so any survivors who obtain it are knowingly breaking the law.

And I am horrified by the "Barely Legal" magazines and by the whole Britney Spears schoolgirl thing. It is a terrible paradox that on one hand our society abhors sex with children, and on the other it sexualises children.

I'd be interested in Ken Singer's opinion on this.



Edited by Nobbynobs (02/12/07 07:22 PM)
_________________________
When you go up to the bell, ring it! Or don't go up to the bell.

- Mel Brooks

Top
#141307 - 02/12/07 08:49 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: Nobbynobs]
melliferal Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 11/03/05
Posts: 1159
We do not, as a rule, make exception for survivors who go on to abuse children, excusing them because their own abuse has confused them into thinking sex with children is OK, or created some sort of compulsion or pathological behavior in them. I will never be able to concede that consumers of child pornography are doing something that can be considered innocuous based on "certain circumstances". People try to seperate mere "downloading and collecting" of child pornography from other types of child abuse, by virtue of the fact that "it's just pictures" - a line I've heard way too many times. People who even insist that producers of child pornography should be jailed argue for leniency for the consumers, because the producers interact with "real children", and consumers "only have pictures". It used to make me ill; now, it just makes me very, very angry.

Kiddy porn was the larger part of my abuse. I do not have an easy time of relating to many people even in this place, whose purpose is to deal specifically with sexual abuse. I was not molested, I was not raped. I was not beaten or subject to physical violence, or even the threat of such. I was strung along - "talked into" doing what I did, by adults, and with a couple of other kids. And the worst part, in my opinion, and one that it still saddens me to this day to admit, is that I didn't shed a single tear at the time. If you see any of those videos, you won't see an unhappy kid, doing something he'd obviously rather not be doing. No, the pain, guilt, shame, all that stuff didn't come until later, some time after the abuse ended. At the time, it was all just a big game. Let's ham it up for the camera.

Be all that as it may; the abusive aspect of child pornography does not end when the camera turns off. I cannot say for absolute certain that the videos I'm in are still circulating, or ever even entered circulation. But there's a very good chance, and that's more than enough. It's not even a matter of a "select group of buyers" these days - sure, those stories are the ones that make CNN; but the larger number of consumers of this stuff trade it for free online, the same way people illegally share music. This stuff is EVERYWHERE, and ANYBODY can get it whenever they want. Think about it - thousands of people all over the world are still watching me do those things, while my naive, smiling face convinces them that it's all just fine by me. Those of you who were shown child porn, and are haunted by the faces - imagine how confused you would've been made, if those faces showed kids apparently having a good old time. How many children out there have I managed to "seduce" in this way? How would that make YOU feel?

Well, that's my cross to bear. I am not responsible, and I do realize that. But it saddens me tremendously, even still. And my videos were made some 16 years ago, but it does not matter - anyone who watches them is grossly violating my privacy and sexually exploiting me, in the here and now. It's not just pictures. That is my face, and my body. I am a real person. I am not a figment of someone's fantasy.

So it is true, I hold, for ALL child pornography. People who download child pornography are sexually exploiting the children whose images appear on them. And there can never, ever be any excuse for sexually exploiting a child. Not even if you are a survivor.

My God - particularly not if you are a survivor!




Edited by melliferal (02/12/07 08:52 PM)
_________________________
Children cannot consent; they can only comply.

Oprah's resources for male survivors

Top
#141312 - 02/12/07 09:36 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: melliferal]
Nobbynobs Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 06/26/05
Posts: 1286
Loc: Toronto
Melliferal,

I know a woman who was in a similar situation as you. As a girl she was used in porn movies, although she was raped on-camera. But she says that she smiled all the way through it, because that's what she was told to do. I don't think she worries too much about the other kids who have seen the video these days, but I know that she struggled with that guilt for a very long time.

I'm with you. If I found out that someone had the child porn pictures of me, I could care less who they were. I'd want them charged.

_________________________
When you go up to the bell, ring it! Or don't go up to the bell.

- Mel Brooks

Top
#141319 - 02/12/07 10:32 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: Nobbynobs]
philobat Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 01/31/07
Posts: 293
Loc: California
Well, the point I was trying to make was, that as a victim of this myself, being shown it and not having a clear memory of it, and my reaction to it and the result which I suffered, was terrible.



My misgiving in this is that to label someone a pedophile or a child molester because they do not understand an attraction or a fascination that is connected to having been abused can create a monster rather than save a victim.

From what I have gathered, there are sexual deviants that will continue to exploit children and they have no conscious whatsoever or regard for children and it is those monsters who almost always come from relatively decent backgrounds and were never victimized themselves. Generally they are producers and distributors of this porn and they should be put away for life.

The porn video I did, happened when I was 15. I had run away from home and was living with people who could not afford to make the house payment and asked me to do it to save the house. It was horrible and awful and I was given drugs so I could forget. I too was far from happy yet appeared to be because I was told to.

Now I do not want anyone to watch it because I feel so ashamed and embarrassed. But I do not feel I am being abused by someone who is watching it some 2,000 miles away that I don't know.

I wish it did not exist, I wish the magazines did not exist. The reason I do not look at this crap is because I would probably end up in the hospital again if I ran into a picture of me or the video.

I feel sorry for victims that use porn and do not get help, but judging them and calling them a pedophile or a child molester isn't going to help them into recovery. And if they are a true pedophile or a child molester they are not going to get into recovery until they are caught and forced into it.

I wish to God this didn't exist.

There are many fellow victims out there that do not understand what they are doing, and yelling and calling them names will solve nothing.

-Philobat


Top
#141324 - 02/12/07 11:00 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: philobat]
melliferal Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 11/03/05
Posts: 1159
I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree here. To me, all people who victimize children in any way are deserving of contempt (of varying degrees, of course). I know too many abuse survivors who have not felt the need to go out and "regress" or "act out" by abusing more innocent children (despite a whole slew of often INCREDIBLY debilitating psychological injuries) to allow that exploiting kids is an acceptable expression or way of dealing with things.

And yes, I realize that we're all different, and that we all react differently. We all have problems, some of us have serious problems. Some of us do irresponsible, reckless, or even morally reprehensible things, as a result of our ongoing confusion and hurt subsequent to sexual abuse. I am willing to overlook and understand all manner of things - even things that shock or repulse my own sensibilities. But I have drawn a line, and that line is crossed when other children are hurt. Because to me, it doesn't matter if a perp is a "situational offender" (whatever), or a "real pedophile", or just a sociopathic murderer, a sexually aggressive teenager, or yes, even a confused survivor who is acting out. Those are all independent variables. To me, what matters is that a child gets hurt. That's all it takes.

Downloading child pornography hurts children. It hurts other survivors. Maybe not all of them - but enough of them, in my opinion, to matter.

In the depths of your struggle, I will swim oceans to hold you up. But when kids are hurt, it's over.



Edited by melliferal (02/12/07 11:02 PM)
_________________________
Children cannot consent; they can only comply.

Oprah's resources for male survivors

Top
#141331 - 02/12/07 11:41 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: melliferal]
Nobbynobs Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 06/26/05
Posts: 1286
Loc: Toronto
Well spoken Mel. I fully agree. Nobody on this planet should have any illusion about how child porn is produced. Children are enslaved for porn, and anyone who willingly obtains child porn is a child abuser. They are willingly participating in the victimisation of children, and that is wrong. Saying they are justified in doing it is tantamount to condoning child abuse.

For anyone who disagrees, let me ask this. What if you found someone spying on/taking pictures of your child, or a child in your neighbourhood? Would it matter to you if that person was a survivor?

_________________________
When you go up to the bell, ring it! Or don't go up to the bell.

- Mel Brooks

Top
#141397 - 02/13/07 01:05 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: Nobbynobs]
reality2k4 Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 07/06/04
Posts: 6838
Loc: Stuck between water, air, and ...
Scott, I was merely quoting what I heard on TV.
It started with the topic of women who want to be
raped, and he figures it was because they were abused
as kids.

He then went on to say that child porn is used by some
men abused as boys, to relive the terror and not for
sexual reasons.

He is a forensic psyche, so I guess he knows more than
I do,

ste


Top
#141407 - 02/13/07 01:58 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: reality2k4]
Nobbynobs Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 06/26/05
Posts: 1286
Loc: Toronto
Ste,

I can understand why a survivor would use child porn, I'm just not agreeing that it's acceptable just because the person is a survivor.

_________________________
When you go up to the bell, ring it! Or don't go up to the bell.

- Mel Brooks

Top
#141415 - 02/13/07 03:09 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: Nobbynobs]
reality2k4 Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 07/06/04
Posts: 6838
Loc: Stuck between water, air, and ...
Scott, it angers me to see the level of child porn available, and kids are still being abused for the warped minds who want to view it.

If people are paying or sharing hurt of kids, then they are indeed part of the abuse no question.

I did read an article on abusive images being used by the abused as a means of acting in.
Basically its like cutting or other forms of self defeating behaviour.

I dont come across it on the net because I pretty much use the same places all the time, but the newsgroups that I use are full
of it, even in groups designed for parents.

It is a material fact if someone is caught with it, rather than any motive they had.
That gives the cops an easy statistic to say they are doing things about it, when they are giving cautions for actual sexual offences against kids.

They should pay more attention in catching perps, then they can earn their statistics justly.

Just my 0.02 cents,

ste


Top
#141421 - 02/13/07 03:41 PM Re: More research/child pornography [Re: reality2k4]
philobat Offline
Member
MaleSurvivor

Registered: 01/31/07
Posts: 293
Loc: California
Well said ste, very well said.

I would like to add, that when a survivor has begun the recovery process and knows that "acting out" to porn is a side effect, and he/she continues this behavior, then they cross that line.

Many victims/survivors do not ever get treatment and end their lives by suicide, overdose, or accidental death. And its very sad.

A child abuser/molester/pedophile in my opinion is an adult who has made a conscious choice.

Very few of us become the monster. And to throw the baby out with the bath water is stupid and very narrow-minded.

I will agree to disagree on this thread. Much good information and opinions have resulted from this posting. A question was asked on this thread as to what I would do if a neighbor or someone I know was taking pictures or producing kiddie porn. My answer is I would probably put that person in the hospital or the morgue.

Please do not think I condone pornography because I dont, especially child porn.

I believe I made my point.



Edited by philobat (02/13/07 03:45 PM)

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >


Moderator:  Chase Eric, ModTeam 

I agree that my access and use of the MaleSurvivor discussion forums and chat room is subject to the terms of this Agreement. AND the sole discretion of MaleSurvivor.
I agree that my use of MaleSurvivor resources are AT-WILL, and that my posting privileges may be terminated at any time, and for any reason by MaleSurvivor.