zlacker

It is probably the getting off on seeing those pictures that triggers the visceral response. If I make a movie of a child getting dismembered, I do not have the goal to create a sexual reaction in the audience. In contrast if I make fictional CP, I have the inherent goal in sexually exciting a certain category of people.

>>almata+(OP)
Sure, but when has repressing urges led to anything good? I don't think CP will turn anyone into a pedophile, might as well let people satisfy their urges in a non-harmful way.

>>stavro+Z2
> Sure, but when has repressing urges led to anything good?

I mean we all repress certain behaviors to a certain extent. Some level of repression is healthy. I might have the urge to eat 5KG of ice cream every day but I keep it under control.

> I don't think CP will turn anyone into a pedophile, might as well let people satisfy their urges in a non-harmful way.

If need CP to get off you are a pedophile by definition because you are sexually attracted to children. I guess you meant watching CP will not automatically turn him into a child molester.

It is not that I agree with this new law. I do not see how it is enforceable. But I do see why people have a very negative view of it.

>>almata+35
> If need CP to get off you are a pedophile by definition because you are sexually attracted to children. I guess you meant watching CP will not automatically turn him into a child molester.

No, I meant a pedophile. It's not like people aren't attracted to children just because they haven't seen a CP video, therefore allowing fictional CP should be OK (it won't convert anyone into a pedophile).

I guess there's an argument to be made that a pedophile watching CP might be tempted to become a child molester, but then we should debate that, not issue blanket bans on fictional CP.

>>stavro+M6
> it won't convert anyone into a pedophile

Thanks for clarifying, I misunderstood your earlier point then.

>>almata+(OP)
so what was the goal of your child dismemberment movie?