Comment on Rule 34 rule

• Gloomy@mander.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Because your not trying to fulfill the wish to murder a person by substituting it to computer character.

  At least some mass murderers and school shooters have played violent games in order to fulfill their violent phantasies, couldn’t do so in a long term and murdered real people instead.

  Same goes with pedophiles. They want to fuck a child, use fictional characters to fulfill the phanstasy, get used to it and then escalate to pictures of real children and eventually real children.

  The “video games cause violence” argument is wrong, because the cast majority of gamers don’t try to use games as a substitute action for violent behaviour.

  source

  • SpongyAneurism@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Do you have any real-world or professional experience with people suffering from pedophilia?

    I don’t, but I doubt that stance as being unfairly projecting some idea of how things have to work on those people.

    I for one can jerk off to the weirdest porn fantasy things, from the usual thinly-veiled step-siblings trope to rape play, weird power dynamics or tentacle porn (depictions of children not among them, I feel I have to mention that explicitly here), but I don’t have any desire to experience any of that in real life, because I absolutely know it would be wrong.

    I don’t see why that should neccessarily be different for them.

    source

    • Gloomy@mander.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      Do you have any real-world or professional experience with people suffering from pedophilia?

      I have been schooled on pedophilia in a professional context, during my undergrad and in a work-context. Yet I have not worked wotj pedophiles directly, nor have I had any contact to one, that I would be aware of.

      Looking at science both of our positions are reflected. As with so many things the answer is not a simple “yes” or “no”.

      If you want to take a bit of a deep dive, I recoment this study from 2023.

      It looked at both of our positions: FSM (Fantasy Sexual Material) leads to real sexual violence against children vs. FSM reduces the risk of said practice.

      Here is their summary of my position (FSM leads to sexual violence against children):

      When applying the motivation-facilitation model to the context of FSM use, it can be theorized as to why, for a subset of users, engaging with such material could become problematic and increase the likelihood of committing a child sexual offense (whether that be offline or online), while for others this is not the case. As pedohebephilia is thought to be a motivating factor towards sexual offending in Seto’s model [21], engaging with FSM relating to children could heighten sexual arousal and therefore act as a facilitator to increase offending likelihood. With abstinence from masturbation being self-reported as a risk-management technique by some people who are attracted to children [16], this is a recognized idea by some members of the community. Over time, engaging in CSEM (especially forms such as child-like sex dolls, which offer a more realistic sexual experience) may contribute to the development of offence-supportive beliefs and the adoption of implicit theories about the acceptability of engaging in sexual activity with children (or child-like targets). The combination of enhanced sexual arousal to children (a potential motivator of offending), coupled with the development of permission-giving beliefs (facilitators of offending), may subsequently increase the risk of abuse being committed by somebody with attractions to children.

      Here they are summarising your position, as I understand it (FSM helps to prevent sexual child abuse):

      Alternatively, FSM use could be seen as beneficial by the motivation-facilitation model and instead reduce the likelihood of offending. Rather than heightening arousal, FSM could act as a safe sexual outlet that allows for a feeling of release and sense of catharsis [84], which could reduce a motivation to seek out real children as a sexual partner. Engaging with FSM also avoids the problematic suppression of sexual interests, with such suppression being linked to increases in self-perceived risks for offending among those with attractions to children [15]. In contrast to Stevens and Wood [16], Houtepen and colleagues reported that engagement in masturbatory fantasies was a common coping mechanism used by some people experiencing attractions to children, avoiding the need to access CSEM due to an alternative outlet being identified [3•].

      They conclude that more research is needed:

      Given the present lack of understanding of FSM and how they are used, it is important to identify the factors associated with use and whether they are risk-enhancing or risk-reducing (i.e., protective). This knowledge could be beneficial to clinicians in the search for more effective methods to support people who are attracted to children when they are seeking help to manage their sexual interests. Nonetheless, Seto’s motivation-facilitation model provides a theoretical framework for thinking about this topic in a more nuanced way [21].

      So, there we are. A long post to say maybe.

      I suppose both of our positions might be viable and it can’t be said yet, under what circumstances each one of us might be right.

      source

      • SpongyAneurism@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        Thanks for putting the work in, to coin such a well-rounded response on a topic that is usually easily derailed.
        You seriously exceeded my expectations.

        I cannot read through that whole review right now, but it was an interesting read already for as far as I got, taking into account a lot of nuance to the topic, that one doesn’t usually find in public debates. (Or at least, I wouldn’t expect to find on a taboo topic like this. It’s not like that’s something I regularly discuss, just something I had thoughts about when reading comments under a random meme.

        I guess I have nothing to add. You clearly understood my meaning very well and as the paper states, there’s probably more research needed. I’d hypothesize, that engaging with such material can lead to both outcomes, just as it can for depictions of other illegal activities. The case might be warped however, because people who are exclusively attracted to children, have no way of acting out on that with a real person, whithout it being illegal and immoral, while people who are (also) attracted to adults have a plethora of possibilities. (And can live out some of their sexuality at least, even if they have trouble finding a partner that consensually takes part in their most extreme kinks)

        So yeah, complex issue. Thanks for your valuable contribution.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Denjin@lemmings.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Because as I said, people with an interest in CSAM tend to escalate in their behaviour. Most don’t jump straight into child pornography but start with less serious things like jailbait and non-sexualised images of children etc. It doesn’t take a huge leap to see the same pathway with images of fictional children.

  I’m not suggesting that everyone into this material will go on to abuse children or start to consume actual CSAM but there’s a non-zero amount of actual paedophiles who started their journey with this exact material.

  source

  • gmtom@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    It’s that the same with violence, people that want to commit acts of violence may start by acting out violence in video games?

    source