The hidden demand

[Undercover]

If you go on any site that doesn't censor searches, you can look at what people are searching, and the top searches are almost all illegal. This shows that there's a clear, massive demand for this material. If it weren't for censorship, then all the top videos on any major porn site would all be CP

[quitterature]

I get what you're saying, but this could also be selective-attention and reactance/"the forbidden fruit effect."

Since you're specifically looking for CP in top searches for websites, you'll only regard the cases where this was true, compared to when it wasn't. This will create a bias where it would appear that CP is in "high demand."

It could also be reactance. This is when someone tells you to not do something, so you gain an increased curiosity to do it. In this case, since CP is taboo and illegal, some people may have a morbid curiosity and will search for it.

I don't believe CP would be popular [long-term] if it wasn't censored, but it would instead be similar to a popular fetish like feet. Remember that around ~5% of the human population are MAPs, so that alone would constrict the CP market-share (?) significantly.

[Not Forever]

I agree that there is a demand for such material, but I don’t think it’s necessarily among the most popular. I believe that people look for it precisely because it’s hard to find, so there has to be a more active and persistent search to try to obtain something, or something vaguely similar.

[Jim Burton]

Remember that around ~5% of the human population are MAPs, so that alone would constrict the CP market-share (?) significantly.

Much higher for all attraction to minors as opposed to children. Remember, a lot of unverifiable CP already circulates on "tube" sites.

[John_Doe]

This is when someone tells you to not do something, so you gain an increased curiosity to do it. In this case, since CP is taboo and illegal, some people may have a morbid curiosity and will search for it.

I don't believe CP would be popular [long-term] if it wasn't censored

I think that the interest in child porn is much higher than average people would admit or might realize but I also think that it would significantly reduce, ironically, if it was completely de-stigmatized and no longer novel or unusual (I don't think interest due to it being novel can be reduced to 'forbidden fruit' though, if that's an important distinction to make. I also think of attraction as a spectrum; instead of contrasting people who are only attracted to prepubescent children with people who aren't remotely attracted to them to any degree in an absolutist or black and white way consider that some people prefer prepubescent children but have some interest in adults, some people might not have a strong preference one way or the other, some people might have a weak or strong preference for adults or pubescent preteens/teens with little to no interest in prepubescent children, some people might generally not be very attracted to prepubescent children or adults but there rare exceptions whom they have strong feelings for, etc. I don't believe that there are teleiophiles who aren't attracted to pubescent and post-pubescent legal minors since they have features that make adults sexually attractive).

Remember, a lot of unverifiable CP already circulates on "tube" sites.

I have a hard time believing this. Some anti-porn people will claim that it's a common occurrence for videos to features under-aged performers (or women who are being 'trafficked') but they won't cite specific under-aged performers that they know of. It seems to be an attempt to discredit mainstream pornography or pornography on principle because somewhere out there a minor could slip through the cracks and be part of that industry so, to be on the safe side; since most people who are ok with porn on principle still oppose minors participating in it, we should condemn it all.

[Jim Burton]

That's not how porn works nowadays. Few participants sign contracts or submit ID to "producers" - they produce the content among themselves and share/upload it. This way, minors will be either faceless participants or unknown "actors" - it will be impossible to tell whether or not they are minors or young looking adults.

[aeterna91]

I'm curious about this. Could you give an example of a site where these searches can be seen?

(I assume no one will misinterpret this, but just in case: I think it's obvious that we're talking all the time about legal sites where you can't find CP but you can see the record of people who have tried unsuccessfully. I'm curious about how explicit are the searches they have made, if they were looking for teenagers or actual children... I'm not asking about sites where you can find CP in any way)

[John_Doe]

That's not how porn works nowadays. Few participants sign contracts or submit ID to "producers" - they produce the content among themselves and share/upload it. This way, minors will be either faceless participants or unknown "actors" - it will be impossible to tell whether or not they are minors or young looking adults.

You might be right. I still have a hard time believing that mainstream sites don't vet professional and well-known actors/actresses but I more or less see your point (I'll take your word for some of this).

Wouldn't there be some kind of law demanding that legal sites vet people they feature or even 'amateurs' who upload onto their site? Are you talking about mainstream sites or something like uploading videos on to kazaa or napster which were around when I was a teen or what?

[Jim Burton]

Pornhub did this a while back, so at least theoretically everyone has ID, but somehow I doubt it. There is a whole network of unvetted tube sites, so "legal" porn is now more of a two tier thing.