zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. stavro+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-02-15 18:24:14
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.
replies(1): >>almata+42
2. almata+42[view] [source] 2024-02-15 18:32:38
>>stavro+(OP)
> 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.

replies(1): >>stavro+N3
◧◩
3. stavro+N3[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-02-15 18:38:17
>>almata+42
> 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.

replies(1): >>almata+B7
◧◩◪
4. almata+B7[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-02-15 18:54:00
>>stavro+N3
> it won't convert anyone into a pedophile

Thanks for clarifying, I misunderstood your earlier point then.

[go to top]