He did actually make this argument when he said pornographic material depicting minors being available would lower cases of sexual assault…
Just because the argument was implicit and not explicit does not mean it wasn’t made. That was not a straw man.
The other commenter was actually strawmanning my position incredibly heavily in another comment, but I noticed you didn’t call that one out.
Lemmy is rife with this pedophile apologia, especially concerning threads about child pornography material made with AI and about comic style child pornography material, and I have no problem with saying that that is absolutely disgusting.
Are pedophiles mentally ill humans that need help? Yes. Should they be pushed towards active pedophilia in any way, shape, or form? No. They should not. As psychologists studying sexual abuse prevention agree, even in the case of VCSAM.
A direct excerpt from the paper:
Should we be worried about escalation?
The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can
instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact
offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor
2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending
of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending.
12
One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual
gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne &
Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending
(Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient
over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might
commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized
to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level
of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images
as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan
& Sullivan 2010).
Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how
child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible
in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of
bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM
during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical
to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and
follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could
be explored in future research.
While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff
& Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found
that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were
quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children)
compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images
of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of
acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive
schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such
material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure
can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the
ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research
He did actually make this argument when he said pornographic material depicting minors being available would lower cases of sexual assault…
YOU added the “minors” part. The person you replied to isn’t talking about minors. They used the word “women” specifically. Ironic that you said this earlier:
You, on the other hand, are very good at making up arguments to put in my mouth.
Ahh yes I forgot to disregard all context of the argument. That’s my favorite tool in discourse, personally! Have anything to say to the rest of my comment? The actual important part?
Oh no, I know the game very well. In fact, I know the game well enough to know that the images you posted are not from this game. Genshin Impact is a completely separate franchise from Zenless Zone Zero. This is the character from the article, who is most assuredly not a child.
I’m not sure if you’re being an idiot on purpose, or if it’s an accident.
Nobody was making this argument, that’s a straw man you made up.
He did actually make this argument when he said pornographic material depicting minors being available would lower cases of sexual assault…
Just because the argument was implicit and not explicit does not mean it wasn’t made. That was not a straw man.
The other commenter was actually strawmanning my position incredibly heavily in another comment, but I noticed you didn’t call that one out.
Lemmy is rife with this pedophile apologia, especially concerning threads about child pornography material made with AI and about comic style child pornography material, and I have no problem with saying that that is absolutely disgusting.
Are pedophiles mentally ill humans that need help? Yes. Should they be pushed towards active pedophilia in any way, shape, or form? No. They should not. As psychologists studying sexual abuse prevention agree, even in the case of VCSAM.
A direct excerpt from the paper:
Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010). Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research. While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https://research.usc.edu.au/view/pdfCoverPage%3FinstCode%3D61USC_INST%26filePid%3D13161500130002621%26download%3Dtrue&hl=en&sa=X&ei=z9BkZ676Lb6_y9YP1YLqoQw&scisig=AFWwaeZERt0h_qC0HOcMzLh1ghdF&oi=scholarr
YOU added the “minors” part. The person you replied to isn’t talking about minors. They used the word “women” specifically. Ironic that you said this earlier:
Ahh yes I forgot to disregard all context of the argument. That’s my favorite tool in discourse, personally! Have anything to say to the rest of my comment? The actual important part?
Of course not…
What context? This isn’t about children at all and never was.
Oh… I guess you don’t know the game.
https://dguljqwnrjejm.cloudfront.net/images/Genshin_Impact_thumbn.width-1000.bgcolor-000.format-jpeg.jpg
https://assets.xboxservices.com/assets/cd/d0/cdd0d11b-dd3f-40f3-8720-41463983fd45.jpg?n=222910044_GLP-Page-Hero-1084_1920x1080.jpg
Those are the characters.
Another commenter pointed out that a selling feature of this game is the jiggle physics.
This is getting old though.
Oh no, I know the game very well. In fact, I know the game well enough to know that the images you posted are not from this game. Genshin Impact is a completely separate franchise from Zenless Zone Zero. This is the character from the article, who is most assuredly not a child.
I’m not sure if you’re being an idiot on purpose, or if it’s an accident.
Oh that’s totally my b. I got confused. I think the article may have mentioned genshin impact somewhere.
Anyway, I took a look and you’re right only half the cast is child-coded! Great! Now let’s get the other half too!
It didn’t. Just like nobody ever argued for sexualizing minors.
This isn’t the first thing you’ve just made up in this thread. I’m beginning to think that you’re acting in bad faith here.