Originally Posted by JasonGillespie
I respect your comments in reference to the use or misuse of statistics as they are related to the topic at hand. My wife has a math degree and statistics is her area of focus so I know the ways they can be skewed.
Thanks, then you know how statistics can be skewed and misleading, that was one of my points- information being used improperly and out of context, and then people cite these as broad facts to paint a very broad picture that covers everyone and everything.
The information is out there however. There are too many empirical instances where this has been reported for it to be a worldwide conspiracy to mislead the public.
I did not say NO pedophiles use this material and that it's a lie, I don't see it as any more than a minor side issue, these guys WILL do this to children with or without the visuals. Some of the more violent ones will simply kidnap- that happened here with the late Jessica Gage kidnapped by a friend of the family they knew.
"When they do use.."
When they do use props, porn is one of the top ones nowadays. The world has changed since you were a kid...heck since I was a kid. The internet and technology have seen to that. Don't confuse today's tech savvy predator
pretty well says it- that a percentage use it, another percentage DOESN'T, (I don't know the percentages, does it matter what the actual figure is?) both will do the act with or without it which was another point I made. Eliminating all nudes and porn will not stop the act and to think in any way it would is not reality.
I am not 75 or 80 with a childhood left 3/4 of a century behind me in the days when there were trolly cars and 5 cent sandwiches!
The 1970's and 1980's is the time frame of what I had in mind, and I don't think these people have changed all that much in so short a period of time.
We have the internet now which makes access easier and wider but before the net public parks, schools, playgrounds, Cub scout events, sporting events etc etc were quite well populated with these people. I certainly ran into many in the park, and by school in a book store, the library, on an airplane, walking down the street, sitting on a bench in front of a nursing home and so on.
I would believe however that the porn would be of more use to the male trying to convince a FEMALE child, but most 13-14-15 year old boys probably wouldn't need much beyond the talking/friendship scenario.
Of the 45 lines of article you posted, most of the statements are redundent of one another or offer the same ideas, however, line 11 shows proof that the visual material doesn't even HAVE to be nude, and can consist of such normal everyday inoculous items as your local K-Mart catalogues and sales circulars- I have read of that in the news. So If the X rated material is not handy, a K-Mart catalogue would be a suitable substitute;
11. Child molesters or pedophiles cut pictures of children out of magazines, newspapers, books and other publications which they use as a means of fantasy relationship.
I'm not sure we as a society can just lock up children from public view, prevent all pictures from ever being taken of them, or seal them in bubble-wrap. Where does it end? ban statues, paintings, revealing clothes- those short bathing suits have to go as they show the kid's legs, no more kids in K-Mart catalogues, no more young girls in mini skirts or strapless blouses, no more perfume, eye shadow, or especially MAKEUP! etc etc.
People can sexualize and eroticize ANYTHING, objects as well. It's still up to the parents to take charge and do their job with their own kids- not me, not you, not the Government, not the FCC, media or other censorship.
As Iona pointed out, she
monitors and controls what her child sees according to his age, I suspect she keeps close physical watch on him as well.
If a parent finds a porn image on the kids computer etc., instead of reacting like a histerical nincompoop and creating a scene which leads the kid to think bodies are grotesque and sex is filthy- THAT is the time to sit the kid down and explain things, explain WHY the material is degrading and harmful to women, how shady companies rake in millions of dollars from idiots who pay for this over priced garbage and so on.
THAT is the time to explain the difference between degrading cesspool porn, Koon's photos, and an image of something like Michaelangel's David or Saint Gauden's Diana.