Comment by lovenothate | Hacker News Reader

Comment by lovenothate | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I am a guy in my 20s who is attracted to children and I use freenet to download illegal pictures of them.

The most active forum on freenet for sharing these pictures is called "child-models-girls". Little girls pose for sets of pictures which are sold commercially and then shared for free on freenet/open-internet. Mostly they are wearing skimpy clothing or swimsuits, or sometimes they naked. 90% of the freenet store is probably pictures like this which are little different to what you used to see in clothing catalogues.

There is real cp too of course - pics and videos of girls/boys doing sexual things with themselves or with adults. I have no doubt the average HN reader would be shocked.

However.

> It's nasty stuff, too. This is not "merely offensive." Kids are abducted and murdered to make this stuff.

This is just not true. Only a tiny minority of people on freenet/similar-systems are looking for stuff where children are obviously being hurt. Most of us despise it. The truth is we like to see children happy because it makes us feel better about looking at these pictures.

> Think of the mechanics of an adult having sex with a six year old

The mechanics don't really work. Thats why 99% of pics/vids involve touching/licking/rubbing/etc only.

> In parts of the world children are more or less raised for the purpose. It's horrific.

This is wild conjecture.

I'm probably somewhere close to Dr. Kinsey on such issues: very libertarian and open-minded. I have no problem with pornography. I also don't necessarily judge people for having feelings. I appreciate the logical and honest post.

What I have to ask is whether the people in these photos, even the very "soft-core" ones, know that their pictures are being shared over the Internet and used like this. Did they give consent, and did they understand the full implications of that consent? Did they get paid? Did they sign a contract?

I think I'm opposed to this kind of thing because I'm a libertarian. I see it as exploitation and deceit and privacy violations levied against people who are too young to understand or that cannot defend themselves.

I've debated people on this topic once before, and it seems to me that there are a lot of cyber-libertarians that will go straight to the mat to defend privacy rights except here. Why don't eight year olds have privacy rights? What if your doctor photographed you, told you it was for medical purposes, and then posted the pics to a gay porn site? What if a TSA screener posted millimeter wave video of you (essentially naked) to YouTube? Isn't this a lot more invasive than Facebook selling your friend graph to a marketing company? Yet most people would find that very invasive and deceptive -- a violation of their rights -- if they hadn't given consent.

And no, the dark stuff is not wild conjecture. I understand that the majority of pedophiles wouldn't be into it, but it certainly does exist. Over at Reddit /r/onions I read a while ago about a forum that exists on the Tor darknet called "Violent Desires." There were lots of "I cannot un-see" kinds of comments, and many warnings about "do not go there... you do not want to know." Child trafficking is quite real as well. The world is absolutely filled with unbelievably dark stuff (in other areas too) that normal people sometimes have a hard time believing: torture ("extraordinary rendition"), blatant fraud to the tune of billions of dollars, human trafficking, slavery, off-the-books unethical human experimentation, and so on... My experience in other areas of life suggests to me that the reality is probably worse than I care to imagine.

An approach I've wondered about: what if we were to take only existing CP (previously seized by the government, let's say), for which the model is known, now of age, and consents to this (because they believe it's going to lead to fewer children being abused), and publish it as widely as possible. Continue to bring the full force of the law upon anyone producing new material. Obviously this wouldn't eliminate production entirely, but it seems like it should lower demand a great deal (because what difference does it make to the "user" if a picture was taken fifteen years ago) and at least make it impossible to produce CP for material profit.

My instinct is that this is, objectively speaking, morally good, but would still be unacceptable to the population at large.

I've always been quite surprised by how everyone reacts to child pornography. Is it bad per se?

Adult pornography isn't bad unless there's a real rape. I don't see why this wouldn't apply to minors.

Is it bad to take a picture of your chidren in its bath? No. (There's plenty of pictures of baby-me in the tub at my parent's house)

Is it bad to post it on the Internet? No.

Is it bad to wank to a picture of a child? No.

Is it bad to violate a child? Yes, as it his with adults.

In fact I think there's a giant stigma around paedophilia. Somehow, today it's okay to be gay (sexual deviation), but not okay to be a pedophile (another sexual deviation). Unless there's rape or abuse, these people should have the same respect as homosexuals.

"Did they give consent, and did they understand the full implications of that consent? Did they get paid? Did they sign a contract?"

Usually it is the responsability of the parents to support the child and take some decisions for him. They could loose this if they do something to endanger the child, but taking pictures of him without clothes does not constitue a danger in my book. In fact, it's pretty much as harmless as it can be.

"If god had wanted us to run around naked, we would have been born that way"

Why is the grandparent comment "dead"? It is an honest and constructive post that contributes to the discussion. Moderating him out of the conversation sends a certain sort of message, and I don't think it's a good one.

And to you, api, this is a very tactful response. I'd like to see more respectful posts like this between lovenothate and you, lmm, and some others in this thread. But it appears that's not welcome on HN?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com