• Syrc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, the article linked in that page (albeit horribly long due to useless info) does raise a point against current laws on viewing illegal material.

    But sharing it? Yeah that’s a bit of a stretch. Thinking that isn’t going to lead to more actual children being exploited is extremely naive.

    • Wollff@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thinking that isn’t going to lead to more actual children being exploited is extremely naive.

      That particular argument doesn’t hold water. We don’t generally subscribe to this kind of argument.

      The general principle behind the specific argument you bring up here is this: All expression which is likely to inspire someone toward illegal action should itself be illegal.

      CP is likely to inspire some people toward child abuse. Child abuse is illegal. Thus the distribution of CP should be illegal.

      We don’t do this anywhere else.

      Descriptions of non consesnual violence are likely to inspire some people toward non consensual violence. Non consensual violence is illegal. Thus the distribution of all descriptions of non consensual violence should be illegal.

      If we take this seriously, we have to ban action movies. And I am not even getting into the whole porn debate…

      No, the only valid reason for banning the distribution of child porn which I can think of, lies in the rights of the victims. The victims were abused, and their image was used without their consent. Without them even possibly being able to give consent to any of that, or the distribution that follows.

      So anyone who shares child porn, is guaranteed to share a piece of media which shows someone being subjected to a crime, while they couldn’t possibly give consent for that to be recorded, or shared publicly. Making it illegal to share someone being a victim of a crime, without them being able to consent to that being shared, is a reasoning which has far fewer problems than what you propose here.

      • Rodeo@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You raise a few valid points, but the problem with the action film thing is that it is fiction, and thus protected by free speech rights.

        That’s actually the main argument against lolicon being illegal: depictions of other crimes, including heinous ones like murder and rape, are not illegal.

        Ultimately it comes down to inconsistency in the law, and sensationalism makes it very difficult to discuss rationally.

      • Syrc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The general principle behind the specific argument you bring up here is this: All expression which is likely to inspire someone toward illegal action should itself be illegal

        To me it’s more like “All situations where committing illegal actions could bring a positive feedback to the perpetrator should be avoided”.

        Allowing CP to be shared, and thus sold/hosted on for-profit sites creates a market for it, and makes abusing children an actual profession. That’s not ok and already a talking point against the current, legal, porn industry.

        • orrk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          that line of reasoning sort of assumes that there can’t be a market for illegal things, something anyone should be able to realize is fundamentally untrue, examples; Drugs, Firearms, the very CP we are talking about, rape porn, snuff porn, etc… they all have markets even tho they are completely or partially (like the firearms, with only some falling into the category) illegal