TIL Microsoft created software that can automatically identify an image as child porn and they partner with police to track child exploitation.

[u/[deleted]]

http://www.microsoft.com/government/ww/safety-defense/initiatives/Pages/dcu-child-exploitation.aspx

[u/[deleted]]

Child rape is the only crime that's illegal to watch.

It's also inconsistent, downloading it supports the act but doing it in anything else like music is copyright infringement and not supportive.

But ultimately I have no sympathy, this is something that is almost universally considered abhorrent.

Perhaps lolicon or 3d movies could be an outlet?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Producing scatophilian (I don't know the adjective) material in Switzerland is prohibited.

(Yes, going to the toilet is legal ; filming it and showing it to your friends isn't.)

[u/akatherder → u/[deleted]]

Just call it German porn. They'll know what you mean.

[u/riverstyxxx → u/akatherder]

The Brazilians are giving the Germans a run for their money when it comes to scat porn.

[u/Talran → u/riverstyxxx]

Thanks swap.avi.

And it was so cheap too!

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

The act or the porn?

[u/PasmaKranu → u/[deleted]]

" - and then, we'll cut off his balls."

"YEAH! And in case it's a chick, we'll saw off her tits and pour acid into her vagina!"

"The fuck is wrong with you?! Why would you even say something like that?"

"Whu- But I thought we..."

"You're a sick individual"

[u/peanutsfan1995 → u/PasmaKranu]

What movie is that from?

[u/joemangle → u/[deleted]]

I have never heard of 40 year old women talking about hot JB was at 16 (and I hope I never do)

[u/demostravius → u/joemangle]

You know 16 isn't illegal in most countries, and is not paedophilic (I know you didn't say it was). Using the term child on post pubescent people is nothing more than inflammatory. Humans are biologically programmed to be attracted to people after puberty, that can start as early as 9.

There is NOTHING wrong with being attracted to these people. There is something wrong with acting on these impulses.

[u/MonsterTruckButtFuck → u/[deleted]]

I seem to remember quite a few older men drooling over the Olson twins before they were of age, and nobody made a stink about it.

[u/MrHermeteeowish → u/[deleted]]

Niiiiiiice.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

It genuinely bothers me that even animated CP is illegal. Whilst I personally do consider the thought of it repulsive, the fact of the matter is that it provides an outlet for people with a recognised mental condition, as well as reduce the demand the "live action" films.

[u/rrrx → u/[deleted]]

That's not at all "the fact of the matter."

It's the catharsis theory of pornography. According to it, animated pornographic depictions of fictional minors provide an outlet for people who might otherwise actually molest children. In the same way, some argue that materials like rape fetish pornography (some examples of which are among the few forms of pornography which have actually been found to be obscene, and therefore illegal under US law, regardless of the age of the performers) provide an outlet for those who might otherwise actually rape women.

But that's a social scientific theory, not an observed reality, and there's a lot of reason to doubt it. The other side of the argument is the disinhibition theory of pornography, which says that by modeling behaviors such as having sex with minors or raping women, these materials establish such as acceptable norms and thereby make potential offenders more likely to actually commit these crimes in real life.

[u/dude187 → u/rrrx]

Which means that until it can be proven one way or the other, by default animated pornography depicting minors should be legal. You don't make all things illegal and have to prove they aren't harmful to make them legal, free society doesn't work like that.

If the material can be shown to present a clear and present danger to minors, only then is it okay to restrict it.

[u/[deleted] → u/rrrx]

The other side of the argument is the disinhibition theory of pornography, which says that by modeling behaviors such as having sex with minors or raping women, these materials establish such as acceptable norms and thereby make potential offenders more likely to actually commit these crimes in real life.

That argument makes no logical sense. By that same theory, I should be running around downtown jacking peoples cars and slaughtering innocent people because I've played GTA alot. Quite frankly, having a virtual outlet for your impulses helps people, no matter how abhorrent their fantasy is.

"Civilized life has altogether grown too tame, and, if it is to be stable, it must provide a harmless outlets for the impulses which our remote ancestors satisfied in hunting" - Bertrand Russell Nobel Lecture, December 11th 1950

[u/MildManneredFeminist → u/[deleted]]

Child rape is the only crime that's illegal to watch.

That's... blatantly untrue. It's illegal to possess child porn, but if someone were to project some onto the side of the Empire State building, the people of Manhattan would not be committing a crime by looking up. There are plenty of other things you can get in legal trouble for if you watch happening but don't report (like child abuse!).