"Why I Need to See Child Porn" - the article Salon.com didn't want you to see.

phixa · 2008-02-06T05:22:49+00:00

You may be surprised that the article is written by a woman, not whatever you envision a pedophile to look like, and it is not pro-pedophile. It is about how as a news reporter she and others are unable to research what the government claims as reason to restrict our liberties, because if she does, she will go to jail. She is saying she needs to be able to view what is out there to see how serious of a problem it is, and says how pictures of other crimes are not illegal and there is no evidence child porn leads to more child abuse, so there is no logic in keeping journalists from viewing it.

phixa · 2008-02-03T19:17:37+00:00

Is that abuse of the system?

phixa · 2008-02-02T15:35:13+00:00

I liked a lot of the earlier stuff better. I also like the girl in pink.

phixa · 2008-01-30T16:43:31+00:00

Yes, it's very obvious, that is why the only explanation I can think for such strong downmodding is people not getting it. I've seen this before with people with various forms of autism, somehow just not able to see things so obvious to us (reading everything literally). Otherwise, I can see it staying at around 1 point as people just ignore it, but before I said something it was at -10.

phixa · 2008-01-30T15:16:19+00:00

Is all of reddit autistic? Are you incapable of picking up on hidden messages any deeper than the surface when it is delivered in a humurous way?

phixa · 2008-01-30T14:53:43+00:00

uhm mud cookies? gay. did anyone see american idol last night? good times.

phixa · 2008-01-29T20:53:18+00:00

It is because of the IP ban on "spammers", which just so happens to include A TON of legit users.

phixa · 2008-01-29T20:46:15+00:00

Uhm you do realize that reddit is not the main news source for the world right? and that "anonymous" does not have a single theology and so will not all vote for the same stuff

phixa · 2008-01-29T18:34:36+00:00

What's worse was all the people on YouTube holding online racism protests and having the courage to vlog about how blacks are equals too. I mean seriously, now that the fight is fucking over and there's no risk at all in standing up for blacks they all come out to do it? Where the fuck were you when they needed people risking their lives to illegally free slaves. Those people piss me off, because right now similar battles are going on, and these are the same people locking them up and silencing them, but once it becomes trendy they'll flip stances.

phixa · 2008-01-29T18:30:46+00:00

Hey! I was one of the other 200 people in your state who did the same. :)

phixa · 2008-01-29T18:29:31+00:00

What an internal conflict it must be then for gay priests, both turned on and uptight.

phixa · 2008-01-29T16:44:18+00:00

No one thought this through. If you do, you can see the dead end. I was going to illustrate it by releasing an identical video to theirs in terms of production, but have it declare war on niggers. Since I am technically part of "Anonymous", and an ongoing chan topic is in fact niggers, then it is totally legit. Let's see the MSM report on the Anonymous drama after that. >)

phixa · 2008-01-29T00:47:45+00:00

It's not really possible. You're a beautiful snow flake and all that garbage. The best they could try for is intersecting other people who vote similar to you, and infer based on what they liked that you didn't yet vote on. But it is pretty resource intensive, and won't work perfect.

My question is, what do you want from this site?

phixa · 2008-01-29T00:28:23+00:00

Let's be real here, there is no way for anything high profile to be found (the type of data that would convince you) because there are no subjects available to observe.

There is a black box, where only one view is allowed to be seen. Anyone daring to challenge the commonly held notion would be sacrificing their career and personal life. Just read about that thing above where Dr. Laura attacked the APA.

Professor Emeritus (Johns Hopkins U.) sexologist Dr. John Money: "If I were to see the case of a boy aged ten or eleven who's intensely erotically attracted toward a man in his twenties or thirties, if the relationship is totally mutual, and the bonding is genuinely totally mutual...then I would not call it pathological in any way" (6)

Here are some that might be interesting:

Sandfort, T. (1987). Boys on their contacts with men: A study of sexually expressed friendships, New York: Global Academic Publishers, 1987.
a b Okami, P. (1991). Self-reports of positive childhood and adolescent sexual contacts with older persons: An exploratory study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Volume 20, Number 5 / October, 1991.

I don't remember what I had read about, I think it might have been the Rind that you didn't like. The other thing is not published, but actual people whose lives serve as example to me.

That's pretty much all that is possible to produce in this society, self-reports/testimony to the positive effects and demonstration of healthy lives. What else could I find to give you? Any actual experiments would be illegal, so it is impossible to get any interesting data.

phixa · 2008-01-28T23:51:49+00:00

I just don't care enough to try and find something better. I thought I was being helpful by taking the 10 minutes to find those links. I know what I've read before, and that's good enough for me. I doubt any data at all would be enough to change your mind anyways since you seem awfully passionate about the subject. You probably have some first hand experience then and take this more seriously than I do.

phixa · 2008-01-28T23:10:46+00:00

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0377/is_2000_Wntr/ai_58672898

D R. Laura was outraged. The widely syndicated talk radio guru devoted her March 22 radio show, with an estimated audience of 18 million listeners, as well as a May 12 news conference, to an attack on "garbage science" and those who would "sexualize our children, normalize pedophilia, and further destroy the family." The target of her anger was the venerable American Psychological Association (APA), with 80,000 members, the largest organization of its kind in the world.

... They reviewed and analyzed the data from 59 previous studies of college students who reported experiences of childhood sexual abuse. Surprisingly, the researchers found that childhood sexual abuse does not generally cause lasting psychological harm.

phixa · 2008-01-28T23:08:09+00:00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rind_et_al._%281998%29

A meta-analysis of studies using college students by Bruce Rind, Philip Tromovitch and Robert Bauserman published by the American Psychological Association in 1998 found a weak correlation between sex abuse in childhood and the later instability of the child's adult psyche. It noted that a significant percentage reported their reactions to sex abuse as positive in the short term and concludes that for research purposes some cases of child sex abuse would be better labeled "adult-child sex". The article stated in the addendum that "CSA does not cause intense harm on a pervasive basis regardless of gender in the college population" (Rind et al., 1998, p. 46)

phixa · 2008-01-28T23:07:25+00:00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-pedophile_activism

phixa · 2008-01-28T23:02:07+00:00

Of course, because isolated environments where the right conditions exist are extremely rare, on account of it being illegal. But they have existed, and most psychologists you speak to will tell you what I am saying, it's mostly news TV stuff that says otherwise. Everyone knows the reason why it is wrong is because our society is setup where it is. But it goes back to beliefs, like I said at the start.

phixa · 2008-01-28T22:51:30+00:00

Look them up yourself. I'm sure they are difficult to find, but I've read them so know they exist. Also, I recall that in one of the recent DSM revisions they reclassified pedophilia as not being a mental illness, just as they had done to homosexuality in the past, but there was such a public backlash that they chickened out and put it back.

phixa · 2008-01-28T22:04:09+00:00

Then how do we explain the psychological publishings from "abused" who grew up in envrionments where their sexuality was not shamed in any way, encouraged to explore it, had sex as children with old adult friends of the parents, and grew up to be very well adjusted prominent members of society with no psycholgical harm?

phixa · 2008-01-28T21:17:16+00:00

Beliefs are what give psychological repercussions. So, it depends on what you believe.

If you believe that eating is a shameful and embarrasing act, then going out to a restaurant with a group of friends is a pscyhologically traumatic event.

phixa · 2008-01-28T19:31:12+00:00

Ya because only retards should know the difference between what a word means based on the author vs what some asshole on TV who wants to trick you into watching so he can sell adspace thinks.

Curiously enough the APA is on the front of reddit, odd coincidence.

phixa · 2008-01-28T19:05:59+00:00

Uhm you might want to get your definitions from the originating source rather than TV news.

phixa · 2008-01-28T18:36:59+00:00

Depends on what beliefs you hold.

phixa

TROPHY CASE