MAP Forum

mrlolicon93 wrote: Sat Dec 14, 2024 3:56 am

NotTrueToMyself wrote: Sat Dec 14, 2024 3:54 am

mrlolicon93 wrote: Sat Dec 14, 2024 3:36 am


This is true and most actual CSAM (Child/adult sex content) is made in third world countries with laxed laws like Thailand or The Philippines.

And the laws are completely screwed up. If a child takes a picture of themselves that is considered CSAM they will be charged with production of CSAM and if they send it to their boyfriend/girlfriend, they will be charged with distribution and production of CSAM and the person they sent it will be charged with possession. So a horny minor takes a picture of themself and is now a sex offender for life. Talk about twisted.

I completely agree with you.

The biggest blow to their arguments about consent is the fact that they charge children with crimes. Necessary requirements of committing a crime are both intent and understanding that what you are doing is wrong. It’s why regularly people with Down syndrome are declared incompetent to stand trial. They are considered incapable of understanding that what they did was wrong.

So if a child (in many areas) are incapable of understanding and providing informed consent they would also be completely incapable of understanding they are committing a crime. It’s a double standard. They are expected to understand the violation of someone else’s person but they are considered incapable of understanding what would be a violation of their own person.i

NotTrueToMyself wrote: Sat Dec 14, 2024 2:55 am Actually research currently shows that most CSAM is made by minors with minors, these days. It’s only deemed SAM becasue of the ages.

All the more reason not to have draconian laws about it. If minors want to be looked at sexually and MAPs want to look at them, where is the abuse? If a minor is an exhibitionist, can they be said to be being exploited? However my concern is that people aren't ready to face that. I will add the caveat that child actors are often exploited by their parents, so I have reservations about sex work for similar reasons.

Generally, I try put myself in the shoes of an anti, and work out what I might change my mind about under the right conditions; i.e. start from the perspective that what antis believe is prima facie true. The danger if you try to rip the band-aid off, is that they go further down the path of cognitive dissonance.
That's what's happened in recent years with viewing teenagers as children; rather than acknowledge the obvious fact that teenagers are sexual, people start saying the age of consent should be raised to 25, because they are unwilling to give ground to people that think statutory rape can be a victimless crime. If you try to challenge people too forcefully and it can backfire, making the person become more extreme. They'd rather double down than admit they were wrong.

With that in mind, I'd say there's the objective truth about AMSC etc. which is that the harm is massively over stated (think of Rind et al.), and then there's the strategic positions you can take in order move society away from it's prejudice/irrational fears.

I think it would provide a healthy and harmless outlet.

I'm not sure and I have mixed feelings about pornography as a whole, but I absolutely don't think anyone should be prosecuted for simple possession of any type of media.

Sometimes I think regular pornography hurts minors more than CP, since minors try to imitate extreme content without the proper preparations and the people who actually abuse children sexually will also imitate such practices without either the proper preparations nor consideration for the child's limitations (particularly the physical one).

One thing I always thought about as well is that children who appear in such media will hardly be recognizable after becoming adults, whereas many adult pornographic performers likely regret having done porn and they will get constantly recognized on the streets, etc, especially if it was mainstream porn. So, in a way, adult pornography can be way more traumatic than CP, especially self-made CP.

NotTrueToMyself wrote: Fri Nov 22, 2024 1:51 am Most studies about AMSC have only half the picture. Many of the loving relationships where no one is hurt and the AAM goes on to lead a healthy productive life don’t report. And when they do, the study is vilified and attacked.

Those studies have so many biases and lack of important controls that it's like someone asked you to drink 20 different substances, you feel ill after drinking them all and then they conclude one particular substance out of these is poisonous.

Most people who actually abuse children sexually also practice all other kinds of abuses; physical, psychological, verbal, negligence, you name it. No wonder the child can get traumatized...

Batmanthecute wrote: Fri Nov 22, 2024 2:13 am I've heard some Maps say that loli manga and anime helps with taming their desires by giving them an outlet. It intensified my urges when I was watching loli anime so I feel like legal CP would cause an outbreak but then again, so what? Rape is bad no matter what but if society sees two six teen-year-olds having sex as healthy and natural then how would an adult and a teen be any different?

May Japan be blessed for those kinds of anime and especially manga! They have an immensely positive psychological effect on me, especially the purely romantic ones, but even the naughty ones. Some of them also contain criticism and points of view which would unfortunately be impossible in any western media nowadays.

And yeah, it makes no sense whatsoever that a 16 yo can have sex with another 16 with no worries but if the person is slightly older then it's a heinous crime with traumatic consequences...

NotTrueToMyself wrote: Sat Dec 14, 2024 2:55 am And the laws are completely screwed up. If a child takes a picture of themselves that is considered CSAM they will be charged with production of CSAM and if they send it to their boyfriend/girlfriend, they will be charged with distribution and production of CSAM and the person they sent it will be charged with possession. So a horny minor takes a picture of themself and is now a sex offender for life. Talk about twisted.

NotTrueToMyself wrote: Sat Dec 14, 2024 3:54 am The biggest blow to their arguments about consent is the fact that they charge children with crimes. Necessary requirements of committing a crime are both intent and understanding that what you are doing is wrong. It’s why regularly people with Down syndrome are declared incompetent to stand trial. They are considered incapable of understanding that what they did was wrong.

So if a child (in many areas) are incapable of understanding and providing informed consent they would also be completely incapable of understanding they are committing a crime. It’s a double standard. They are expected to understand the violation of someone else’s person but they are considered incapable of understanding what would be a violation of their own person.i

Yeah those laws are simply insane. There are so many double standards and things that are never applied for anything else, just for things related to underage sexuality.

The best way to prevent pedophiles from offending is to not make AMSC an offense in the first place.

NotTrueToMyself wrote: Sat Dec 14, 2024 4:05 am

mrlolicon93 wrote: Sat Dec 14, 2024 3:56 am

NotTrueToMyself wrote: Sat Dec 14, 2024 3:54 am

And the laws are completely screwed up. If a child takes a picture of themselves that is considered CSAM they will be charged with production of CSAM and if they send it to their boyfriend/girlfriend, they will be charged with distribution and production of CSAM and the person they sent it will be charged with possession. So a horny minor takes a picture of themself and is now a sex offender for life. Talk about twisted.

I completely agree with you.

The biggest blow to their arguments about consent is the fact that they charge children with crimes. Necessary requirements of committing a crime are both intent and understanding that what you are doing is wrong. It’s why regularly people with Down syndrome are declared incompetent to stand trial. They are considered incapable of understanding that what they did was wrong.

So if a child (in many areas) are incapable of understanding and providing informed consent they would also be completely incapable of understanding they are committing a crime. It’s a double standard. They are expected to understand the violation of someone else’s person but they are considered incapable of understanding what would be a violation of their own person.i

My views exactly. Theres NO MINIMUM AGE to go to juvinille hall in America. A six year old is old enough to understand abuse and consent to be incarcerated but not old enough to understand abuse and consent when it comes to base physical pleasures