Swedish Courts: Imaginary Children Aren't Real

[Tradjus]

It's pretty damn hard to root for this guy, given the general extreme scuzziness of what he is defending. However, the point that imaginary children drawn on paper are definitely not real children is completely immutable.

 

[Woodsey]

If only the UK weren't so retarded - I'm sure you can get prosecuted for having images of someone who looks to be under 18, even if they are over 18.

 

[Shjade]

He was only charged for doing his job

This has rarely proven to be any kind of defense in the past. Kneebreakers employed by a loan shark are only doing their jobs, but it's still assault and battery.

 

[repeating integers]

I'd just like to say that this is my new favourite headline.

"Imaginary children aren't real"

 

[GameChanger]

It's probably his way of relief.
Drawing these pictures might help him focus on not molesting any actual children. Remember that pedophilia is not a choice either. I firmly believe that if they manage to control their urges than they should NOT be locked up in chambers for the way their brain chose to develop.

 

[Epona]

There was a time when men would marry girls who had just reached puberty. Those men would be called pedophiles today.

 

[Caligulove]

I agree, not be considered the same as possession of child porn and the punishment that goes along with it- however, I reserve the right to still think that its odd and creepy.

 

[Enthuril]

There was a time when men would marry girls who had just reached puberty. Those men would be called pedophiles today.

Isn't that technically ephebophilia(sp?)? I thought the hallmark of pedophilia was pre-pubescence...

It is, however the general public rarely makes a distinction. Which is sad within itself, because one is something that could actually be considered quite natural and part of our instincts and the other isn't.

 

[shrekfan246]

Don't like that kind of stuff, still glad the guy got off.

Hah!

What you did there.

I see it.

OT: Well, that sounds like a very illogical conclusion. Who would think that a drawing of something isn't real?

Mr. Sun agrees with me. He's quite clearly really the sun.

 

[Scorpid]

Yay personal freedoms win for today! Now let's all go take a bath...

 

[mtarzaim]

Hmm, several posts of people affirming that they agree with the ruling. Pffft, that's boring. I offer up a bounty of 57 internets to whomever can build a reasonably sane argument against the ruling.

Let me give it a shot:

1) This ruling may set precedence that anything animated, generated by computers or drawn is not child porn. However, as technology advances the ability to differentiate between CG, or highly realistic drawings (done via computers) may blur the line between real life child pornography and virtual to indistinguishable levels making it hard to rely on the "needs a victim" as a means of differentiating for law enforcement.

2) Virtual reality (I.E. Think virtual reality on the level of the holo decks of star treck) will also come into effect one day at which not only can it be realistic level, but truly can be assuredly virtual and thus the difference between real life child pornography and that of the digital world will be only in the lack of a real victim at which point the ability to know what you're seeing might even come into question.

Ok that's the best I can manage while staying sane..

*Edited for formatting

Good.

Now I wish your take on onna-hole stuff and augmented reality maid pron.
>

 

[l3o2828]

From the article, it does sound

Good. If anything, this can help pedophiles release their urges since society shuns them so much.
In case you don't know, pedophilia is not a choice. Having sex with a child is a choice.

I'm aware that most wants to do awful things to other people aren't choices, hence wants. On the other hand I'd need some proof that this helps them. It could be easily argued the other way. For example for angry people, 'releasing their anger' like people advise has been proven to often make them more angry people. Maybe we should be fighting our basic nature at all levels and this is a slippery slope

It is a well known psychological fact that realeasing ones urges is helpful to the psyche of the individual.
I could expand this thing, but frankly i see no reason too.

 

[Epona]

There was a time when men would marry girls who had just reached puberty. Those men would be called pedophiles today.

Isn't that technically ephebophilia(sp?)? I thought the hallmark of pedophilia was pre-pubescence...

I was under the impression that under 18 = pedophilia. Isn't that the way it is treated?

 

[Enthuril]

There was a time when men would marry girls who had just reached puberty. Those men would be called pedophiles today.

Isn't that technically ephebophilia(sp?)? I thought the hallmark of pedophilia was pre-pubescence...

I was under the impression that under 18 = pedophilia. Isn't that the way it is treated?

Legally, yes, but by definition no.

 

[Epona]

There was a time when men would marry girls who had just reached puberty. Those men would be called pedophiles today.

Isn't that technically ephebophilia(sp?)? I thought the hallmark of pedophilia was pre-pubescence...

I was under the impression that under 18 = pedophilia. Isn't that the way it is treated?

Legally, yes, but by definition no.

"Legally" is what counts. I think it would be less emotionally charged if people realized their own ancestors were likely guilty of what the law calls a pedophile today.

 

[BrotherRool]

From the article, it does sound

Good. If anything, this can help pedophiles release their urges since society shuns them so much.
In case you don't know, pedophilia is not a choice. Having sex with a child is a choice.

I'm aware that most wants to do awful things to other people aren't choices, hence wants. On the other hand I'd need some proof that this helps them. It could be easily argued the other way. For example for angry people, 'releasing their anger' like people advise has been proven to often make them more angry people. Maybe we should be fighting our basic nature at all levels and this is a slippery slope

It is a well known psychological fact that realeasing ones urges is helpful to the psyche of the individual.
I could expand this thing, but frankly i see no reason too.

Please do expand it, if you check over the last couple of pages we've been struggling to find some sort of scientific consensus on it. There have been a lot of studies that suggest exposure to pornography can increase likliehood of sexual assault or child molesting in certain types of people and 'encourage perversion' but equally there have been statistical studies on larger societies suggesting that more societal exposure to explicit materials reduces this. We've been unable to determine which is more accurate than the other and if you have a good source we'd love to see it

 

[keinechance]

Reality wins?

Is this a dream?