MP Seeking To Outlaw Written Accounts of Child Abuse 454
First time accepted submitter Anduril1986 writes "A UK Conservative MP is seeking to expand censorship in another 'think of the children' debate. The plan this time is to make it illegal to possess written accounts of child abuse. According to Sir Paul Beresford, the MP for Mole Valley such writing 'fuels the fantasies' of offenders and could lead to the physical abuse of children."
Why child porn possession laws are bad (Score:3, Interesting)
Read the links before you mod the post. The toxicity that exists around the subject impairs most people from having a serious discussion about the subject, and instead rely on the reaction they've been trained to have. Try to resist this reaction as you read the following two well-written articles:
http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/07/three-reasons-child-porn-must-be-re-legalized-in-the-coming-decade/ [falkvinge.net]
http://falkvinge.net/2012/09/11/child-porn-laws-arent-as-bad-as-you-think-theyre-much-much-worse/ [falkvinge.net]
Or for victims of child abuse (Score:4, Interesting)
You find that there are books of child abuse stories. These are not out there for pervy fantasies, they are out there to help other victims. They can read the accounts, understand they are not alone in what happened to them. Likewise writing about it can help people come to terms with it, to remember and cope with the past.
Are there pervs who get their kicks on it? Probably. But hey, people seem to get their kicks on all kinds of things. I've never got foot fetishists myself but there you go. However it is far more valuable for victims as a means for dealing with and understanding what happened to them. Victims of child abuse can feel like they alone in the world experienced this. Stories of other survivors can help them see that they are not alone.
"Illegal" article on gawker (Score:5, Interesting)
This article [gawker.com] was up the other day, it has a shocking description of how abuse happens and the thought process of the abuser. Was that necessary to the overall article? It certainly caused a bit of controversy. Overall however the article presents pedophiles not as a pure embodiment of evil but as sick people who need help and counseling. That is, distinguishing pedophiles from child molesters who have acted on that impulse. It seems that allowing people who have such a bent to get help and counseling without completely destroying their lives would be better to society overall than being out for their blood or driving them to suicide from despair. Strangely the description in the article while sickening did add a human angle to the problem and helped me personally to not jump to condemn someone who might be sexually stuck as a 12 year old in an adult's body. Just... get... help.
Linda Lovelace did a dog (Score:1, Interesting)
Remember Linda Lovelace? When Labour introduced the extreme porn bill, that made it a sex crime (something that would put you on a register and bar you for life from many jobs), part of the argument brought was the claim by Linda Lovelace. She claimed that she was always held at gunpoint and when you see her on a video she is being raped.
THIS IS A LIE, it was investigated by the FBI and found to be a lie. She simply regretted her career when she married a religious man.
Yet the evidence of it is largely illegal now to possess. You can't point to her claim and say it was a lie, because you'll be raided by the police and prosecuted for sex crimes. I can describe a video in which she had sex with a dog, and was clearly really enjoying it, but to have that video would land you in jail.
What if I can no longer describe it? What if the mere words discussion something are themselves a crime?
It seems that we've gone down the wrong road, conflating possession of evidence with the act itself, and now he's doing the logical thing of attacking even discussion of it.
Linda Lovelace did a dog, she enjoyed it, I can't point to the evidence, but I can say that people lied about it for their own aims, those lies resulted in a bad law being passed which is being abused by the police. Yet I can't show you the evidence because it is a crime to show the evidence.
Re:Does this surprise anyone? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Fool of an MP (Score:3, Interesting)
Exactly. Outlawing even references to pedophile activities is a clear first step of implementing a true thought police. Also, it will of course make both the prevention and post-abuse treatment close to impossible, thus having the opposite effect of making it significantly easier for pedophiles to do their evil stuff.
Impressive - This is stupidity squared!
I never would have considered that... (Score:5, Interesting)
Long, long ago, I was married to a woman who ridiculously accused me a cheating on her at every turn. At first I thought "cute jealousy" but it persisted. Then it became unreasonable and unrealistic... then disturbing. Turned out that she was a cheater. She was the one cheating and she simply projected her tendencies upon me. And that's when it occured to me how many people see things. Most people tend to see others as they see themselves.
Ben Folds did a song "Trusted" that goes like "It seems to me if you can't trust You can't be trusted" which neatly puts into words how I have come to understand certain bits of individual human behavior. A person who is suspicious of others is a person who is likely to take advantage of others... and on and on and on.
What I'm getting at is all these weird child porn related laws where stories and accounts and other things generated from the minds of people are to be banned, limited, prohibited and criminalized must surely arise from the minds of pedophiles. I realize it seems naive to see things as I do -- that pedophiles need help, and all that, but we are criminalizing thought here. And the legislation is surely coming from the minds of people who would think to think of these things because frankly, it never would have occurred to me that such things would become "erotic material" for someone else.
Surely these legislators are or are connected with pedophiles themselves.