'No prosecution for paedophiles watching child porn says law reform group'

[TriptychDebbie]

"Instead they are recommending a pilot scheme for those caught without a criminal record, which would focus on "improving life skills".

Another step towards normalising paedophilia

Sorry. Was so pissed off I forgot the link

www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/no-prosecution-paedophiles-watching-child-16408227?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

I’m not sure if paedophilia has increased significantly or not in the internet age or not. It’s not new of course but there do seem to be some people who have been drawn into it or drawn themselves into it who may not have done so previously but moving up the pervert curve or whatever.

I don’t say this to justify it and it’s immoral as much today as in the past but the police and authorities are in a bind because they’ve aware through the internet there there are 100s of thousands of potential people. One assessment was 170,000 possible dodgy accounts which may include multiple ones but they’ve probably missed others so who knows what the figure is which makes it not as unusual and rare that people think.

Obviously I’m not being helpful here but there is no way this country could deal with this level of sickos if it was possible to successfully convict them all without going on a massive prison building spree and no doubt some would complain (I wouldn’t). It’s also not really possible to cure or rehabilitate people as it’s an innate fetish. Obviously not all would grab people off the street but doubt anyone would be comfortable with these folk being amongst us and abuse on the internet is real abuse and happens largely because of these lot.

I’ve no answer. It’s scary. Whether there’s an epidemic or it’s always been just as prevalent who knows but it’s very difficult for any government to do anything about it without a huge change in philosophy and making a commitment to significantly increase the prison population

Caucho: so you're saying that paedophiles are so prolific that they should get a free pass because there's so many of them and it would take so many government resources to deal with them properly, so we may as well not even attempt??

Spit.

Not saying that and think we should be much harder but should also be much harder on many things. My own thoughts would probably increase the prison population five fold which would move us to the US model and far beyond the European one. And the US model is not successful. I don’t pretend to have the answers. All victims of crime want harsher punishments and many members of the public like myself want to but it’s been proven not to work. High crime penalties often correspond with high levels of crime perversely. I’m just being honest in that I think I should the government doesn’t want to know because they wouldn’t know what to do.

I also said I believe these people can’t be really be cured in terms of changing their mindset so you would have to advocate the death penalty or a whole life sentence without parole. That would ‘solve’ the problem of the 100s of thousands of existing offenders until the next ones come along. They will always exist so it becomes a case of what you do with them

We need to stop calling it child porn and call it child abuse images.

What would happen with criminal records checks with the people who were caught but not convicted?

It's not child porn, it's recorded child abuse.

Children are abused for these images to exist of course the ones buying it should be punished. I will give you that there are always going to be abusers but legalising this crap is only going to mean more children will be abused.

Maybe they could confiscate their assets, every single last one of their assets, including their tackle.

Regular porn is recorded abuse of women, so close to always that the exceptions are trivial. Porn is exploitative and abusive, and trying to say "we have to separate child porn by not even calling it porn to be sufficiently woke" is a whitewash job on porn, sure as can be.

When I was a child prostitute, I was a child prostitute. No pitying euphemism would have made it better. No "person first" language would have changed my situation. The men who raped me were rapists, but they'd have (and probably had many times) raped adult prostitutes as well, who were generally no more "consenting" to their abuse than I was.

We need to stop focusing on the names of things and pretending we're making change by calling the same old thing something new. Bravo, now all the woke will say "recorded images of abuse." Do you think that's going to stop men already going to subreddits like "strugglefucking" (formerly called "rape"), "inceststories," and "painal" for their adult entertainment needs? Do you think an extra reminder that these are abused individuals will do anything to their consciences, when they've doubtless been watching the abuse of women while pulling their puds for years?

If I heard correctly this has been rejected by the government though. Which is good as long as it continues.

innate???

One of the problems with the DBS system is that it shows that you haven’t been caught yet. Wasn’t Huntley passed as a non-threat, despite his worrying history?

Now idiots like this are saying that the first time you are caught you should get a slap on the wrist?

for womb. I'm sorry for what you've been through

I think you're wrong on the naming though. as we've seen with people being so mislead by the term 'transwomen' and using female pronouns for male people, language is important.

yes, we know that porn is as near as dammit always recorded abuse. But lots of people don't. they think porn is a fun thing to look at in their spare time. challenging the use of the word porn for recorded abuse makes those people think twice, which is a good thing. and just because we do it for images of the abuse of children, doesn't mean we can't do it for images of the abuse of adults too. as you eloquently point out, the age of the participant is often just an aggravating factor. It's all bloody abuse.

Is this really about no room in prisons?

What about massive fines?

What about naming and shaming with the man's photograph in the local paper?

What about taking this awful crime a little bit more seriously?

Massive fines: “i’ve got no money to pay it m’lud, especially now I’ve been sacked”

Named and shamed in local paper: who reads these nowadays?

As with so many things today, being 'progressive' means reverting back to the 1970s. We're creating a situation where a new generation of Jimmy Saviles can thrive unchecked by any kind of authority. Fuck this shit.

womb the word porn conveys something between 2 consenting adults, that both (/all) parties are enjoying equally.
Using it in relation to children is softening the reality of it so I do think it's important to challenge the phrase "child porn" when it's used and make it clear that it's "child abuse not porn" (same with animal porn/animal abuse) not because I think it'll stop men viewing it but just because language matters.

Sorry for your experiences, how awful.

Yes to calling it child abuse and I am sure that house arrest with a tag and being known in the community as a paedophile would be a good punishment.

There is always a practical side to any kind of law enfacement, if you create laws you can't enforce it creates a series of problems. One solution is to throw more money at enforcement, another to try and look more at prevention, there could be others as well. It's never wrong to think about that when you are talking about changes in laws though, if you are talking about suddenly having to incarcerate very large numbers of people that is something you have to figure out.

I tend to agree that changing the name is not the point, I do not think it is the same as changing words to mean their opposite. The word "porn" can be variously understood as innate abuse or not, and I expect man people might draw the line somewhere within the word, depictions where people are actually having sex they might see as abuse, Playboy type images they might not. You can have a discussion and seek to change people's perception and assessment without it being misunderstood or undermined by the language.

Typically if you change a name to reflect a particular POV and many people simply don't buy into that, they will simply find some other term or they will compensate in some other way. It's wasted energy, calling Playboy pictures "Abuseimages" will not in itself convince people. They will either create another term for the sort of images they think are ok, or they will not cooperate in the name change, and in both cases they will consider you to be manipulating them.
This is what is happening with the language of trans rights activism where people see what is really being pushed, they may feel obliged to use it as it is being policed but they don't believe it and it makes them cynical.

As far as what might work, I think you have to give people a sexual ethic. Increasingly many people don't have one, the closest is a version of consent, but that alone isn't enough because it doesn't tell us anything about what a healthy type of sexual expression means, either for individuals or a society.

We have largely lost the sense that ethics around sexuality are a good thing though, its often seen as prudish.

Named and shamed in local paper: who reads these nowadays?

I do.

It's how I discovered that my neighbour was dealing heroin from his home; his picture was on the front page.

But perhaps you're right, so I will change my rubbish idea just for you:

Maybe men should be named and shamed (with a photograph) in whatever people read these days to get their local news.

There.

I. Want. The. Problem. Of. Child. Rape. Taken. Seriously.

Publishing names prominently has been tried for prostitution in some places, does anyone know if it's very effective? I think people might react more strongly for child porn though, in fact it could be a problem as I can see people taking matters into their own hands.

So sorry for your experiences Womb

I really don't know what the answer is, but to give them a free pass is unacceptable. Even if they don't arrest them they should at least keep a checkable record of them that can be accessed by the public. At least that way people would be aware and be enabled to protect their own children.

And like a previous poster said, it's not child porn, it's recorded abuse.

Nonononono. What about the victims? No watchers, and they won’t be the ‘need’ ( 🤢) for these videos.

Womb

Will they go on sex offenders register? Would they be able to get jobs working with children? Would it show up on CRB checks etc?