So the question I have it this: Does Reddit have some sort of powerful magnetic attraction to the pedophiles and pedophile defenders of the world, or is pedophilia and/or pedophile defense simply endemic amongst the young male tech geek demographic that’s so heavily overrepresented on Reddit?
This is a question that naturally sprung to my mind after reading a couple of recent posts in ShitRedditSays, documenting Reddit’s strange sympathy with the child porn enthusiasts of the world. A woman stands up on Reddit and declares herself a feminist? She’s a “bad person,” a “female supremacist,” an “utter piece of shit.” A man is jailed for possession of child porn? He’s being unjustly persecuted for a “victimless crime.”
Fxexular on ShitRedditSays has assembled a roundup of some the most disturbing comments in a thread devoted to the aforementioned man jailed for possession of CP. Amongst his finds:
Heavily upvoted comments comparing viewing of child porn to smoking weed and playing Grand Theft Auto.
A comment with 15 upvotes suggesting that the perp should only get “a stiff fine and a few weeks of community service … for a crime the judge himself probably committed half a dozen times on any given weekend.”
A comment with nearly two dozen upvotes lamenting that the child porn possessor is going to have his “life ruined over socially non-normative pictures. … this is a predictable outcome of a corrupt government which is obsessed with its own power.”
But these are just the tip of the pedo-defense iceberg. Take a look at the thread itself, where you will also find heavily upvoted comments from Redditors comparing the “persecution” of pedophiles to past persecution of gays and witches; an unintentionally ironic comment lamenting the cruel treatment of a perp who is “only 26” years old; and a comment making perhaps the strangest argument I think I may have ever seen anywhere about anything:
My core problem here, as a computer scientist, is that any photo he had is really a bunch of zeros and ones… which for anyone who is at all familiar with binary, is a number. Basically, by outlawing the storage of some form of data, we have said that it is illegal be in possession of certain numbers. Yes, these might be huge numbers that you don’t encounter in your daily life, but they are still simply numbers.
In a different thread on the same case, another Redditor gets 75 upvotes for comparing child-porn-possessing pedophiles with African-Americans in the era of the Civil Rights movement. Here’s the comment itself; here’s the ShitRedditSays thread discussing it. And here, for good measure, is the same commenter offering a Redditor who’s confessed to molesting his sister advice on how best to avoid prosecution.
Meanwhile, in an unrelated thread in Reddit’s Videos subreddit, pedophile (sorry, ephebophile) Redditors mount an all-out attack on a girl who had the temerity to complain about skeevy Redditors masturbating to pictures of herself she put in a private album on the internet when she was 14.
In ShitRedditSays, jamie11 collects together some of the creepiest comments, including these:
“Fuck yea she is developed AND judging by her smug smile, she is loving every second of this. Sure she says “OMG, so creepy herp derp” but in reality it is kind of a big EGO boost. EDIT: in b4 misogyny accusations!” [+7]
“She is an attention whore. She is really dumb. She will probably ultimately profit from this in the model/porn/coors girl industry.”[+10]
“Shes much hotter when shes quiet.” [+32]
The numbers in brackets indicate the numbers of upvotes.
Again, tip of the iceberg.
EDITED TO ADD: I hadn’t noticed before, but r/mensrights has its own discussion of the child porn case. It’s pretty much what you’d expect: Possessing child porn is just a “thought crime” that doesn’t hurt anyone.
The creepiest fellow of the lot is probably logrusmage, who offers this defense of the child porn possessors of the world:
consider that a majority of “kiddy porn” are pictures of sexually mature females taken by said females for boyfriends that got leaked on the internet or via text, where the female happens to be under the age of consent.
When someone points out that, um, the fact that these pictures are “leaked” means that the subjects of said pictures didn’t consent to them being put online (and, also, they are below the age of consent), logrusmage offers this rebuttal:
Consent is not needed for something that does not directly effect someone. Like looking at them. … Looking at a picture of someone does not require their consent.
Presumably he’d be fine if someone secretly filmed him picking his nose while taking a crap and put it up on r/creepydudespickingnosesonthecrapper.
Actually that’s a good argument for banning her – it’s possible that people not familar with the issues may assume that she does speak for most feminists. And I personally don’t have time to provide a point by point explanation of why what she’s saying is wrong, because there’s just too much wrong there. It would take all day.
Whatever: How can they not know? Try they aren’t adult. Try they lack the frame of reference. Try they haven’t attained emotional maturity.
And really… “Gee, you are starving… I could give you food for free, but really, I’d rather have a blowjob. No pressure, you can refuse, but in that case you starve/freeze/die of heatstroke”.
That’s extortion, not, “fair and square barter”.
I suppose you think someone pointing a gun at you and saying, “give me fifty dollars and I won’t shoot you” is just being a capitalist.
Because that’s the better analogy than “no one rides for free”.
To wit:
1)To gain maturity, youth require experience. And how can attain experience, if they are continually sheltered excessively? Nothing grows in the thick shade of a big tree, except fungus.
2)In my example, the offeror is not responsible for creating the conditions that caused the offeree to experience starvation or exposure to the elements, so your analogy fail for me.
Don’t hate the PLAYER , hate the GAME.
3) And btw, I do support contraception indeed.
4) Finally, your American Feminist definitions of “rape” are overbroad to the point of absurdity in the rest of the world outside of the US and the Anglosphere. That’s honestly not how the system works everywhere else. Well, again, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. But this is again why I mentioned in another thread why it’s increasingly becoming less advisable to have sex with real women nowadays, and increasingly becoming more advisable to just go “ghost” as they say.
Oh, and add the EU to that, since Julian Assange did get honey-potted after all in Sweden…
“To gain maturity, youth require experience. And how can attain experience, if they are continually sheltered excessively? Nothing grows in the thick shade of a big tree, except fungus.”
*kicks theoretical child out of house* “And don’t come back until you’ve had sex for food! THIS IS SPARTA!”
“In my example, the offeror is not responsible for creating the conditions that caused the offeree to experience starvation or exposure to the elements, so your analogy fail for me.”
You think exploiting homeless people for sex doesn’t make the situation even *worse*? WTF?
While being rape is definitely “an experience” I really don’t see how it’s a necessary one. In fact, I would go so far as to say I want to live in a world where it never happens to anyone ever.
So Whatever, you’re saying that if you rape someone it’s society’s fault for making it so easy to rape them. And you, of course, would bear no responsibility for a crime you committed.
Don’t hate the PLAYER , hate the GAME.
You’re not the PLAYER in the scenario you presented, you’re the fucking DM.
You mean the guy who is under trial for allegedly trying to fuck someone while they were sleeping, and not pulling out after they said stop, got hit from an ‘overbroad definition of rape’?
Get out. Unlike the two competitors ahead of you in our MBZ Worst Trolls list, I don’t think you’re sick in any way.
You know, I’m pretty sure this is in fact how it works in a lot of south america and asia, right?
Notice how the vile little MRA thinks that before was fine, back when women didn’t have a choice.
I don’t understand why “if you have sex with someone who doesn’t want sex, it’s rape” is such a difficult concept for some people to grasp…
All I can add to this conversation is ICK ICK ICK ICK. I just took a shower, people!
” I don’t understand why “if you have sex with someone who doesn’t want sex, it’s rape” is such a difficult concept for some people to grasp…”
So, I suppose prostitution is rape then, since obviously prostitutes, as a general rule, don’t want to have sex with their customers. In my opinion, as long as sex is freely agreed to, it shouldn’t be considered rape. And again, as I’ve said, how can it be coercion when the offeror is in no way either responsible for creating the situation in the first place and the offeree is free to take it or leave it? I’ll concede that from certain angles, it may be exploitation, but them’s the breaks that comes with the territory of living in a free enterprise system. You don’t like capitalism, go live in a commune.
Survival sex is basically the protoform of prostitution, which is the protoform of marriage, the old school, before the rise of the mostly-European pioneered “romantic ideal of true love”, which has only ever really worked for a minority of people at any given time. (why do you think it’s so celebrated in the first place? if it was commonplace, everybody would take it for granted and it would be ignored).
“back when women didn’t have a choice.”
In this case, women have always had a choice vis-a-vis sex in exchange for support. True, it may not be a choice they would prefer, the alternative being to fend for itself, but just because it’s a painful option doesn’t not make it an option.
fend for herself – correction
Some prostitution undoubtedly does involve rape, if the prostitute is being forced to sell sex against her will by her pimp. Which is why I’m strongly in favor of decriminalizing and licensing it, or any similar method of making it certain that the sex worker is doing it voluntarily.
The phrase “from certain angles” is redundant. And not once have you condemned the “offeror” as an amoral scumbag – or indeed responded to my point about how sex in such circumstances could possibly be a pleasant experience for either partner, unless you’re so utterly sex-starved that even a grotesque parody of the sexual act is in some way fulfilling.
Ah, you are blessed by fate as you apparently have never known what the depths one can descend when driven by deprivation. What an envious life you must have had led, with respect to being lucky with the ladies…
Oh, bullshit. A dry spell is not “deprivation”. Even if it’s a dry spell that lasts your entire life, not having sex is not going to turn anyone into a rapist. Again, why would you want to “have sex” with an unwilling partner, Whatever? What would be the point and how could you possibly get any kind of pleasure from doing that?
haha, depths of deprivation. Such romantic language for not getting laid. I’ve never had sex but skeezy sex with someone desperate for money does not appeal in the least.
Whatever, no matter how terrible life without sex supposedly is, there are these things called “your hand,” “Fleshlights,” and “Real Dolls.” All of them are options that you should really be trying BEFORE “coercing starving children into sex.” Unlike the latter, they also have advantages like “not being illegal” and “not being incredibly fucking disgusting and immoral to any vaguely decent human being,” not to mention the rather obvious “not involving doing something terrible to another person, let alone a child.”
(Incidentally, I’ve gone years not only without sex but without any form of orgasm. Somehow I did not die. Heck, I didn’t even rape anyone! Apparently that’s amazing or something. Ugh.)
And depravation. Because I know plenty of people who haven’t had sex for months if not years who wouldn’t stoop as low as you’re proposing.
If by “lucky” you mean that I’ve persuaded women to have sexual intercourse with me voluntarily on a reasonably regular basis, I’d say I was resoundingly average.
Boo fucking hoo. Buy a Fleshlight or something. People who are only looking for sexual release do pretty well without another human being. We’re not duped. People like you aren’t doing this out of blue balls, but because the very act of exercising power over another human being, of having your own personal fuckslave, is what you’re *actually* after.
The idea that people, especially men, need sex (understand with someone else, not masturbation) is what often makes debates about sex work very uncomfortable.
Person1: Sex workers are not criminals! Legalize sex work to protect them [etc…]
Person2: Yes! If prostitution is illegal, some men will be deprived of sex and will rape women!
Person1: Yeah! Wait, no, hem, well, legalize but…
““romantic ideal of true love”, which has only ever really worked for a minority of people at any given time. (why do you think it’s so celebrated in the first place? if it was commonplace, everybody would take it for granted and it would be ignored).”
Are you serious? Really? People in love are the minority? What planet do you live on?
I know dozens of people in happy and fulfilling relationships. I know you’ve never been in one which is why you feel the need to swing your bullshit on this forum.
None of this is about guys not being able to get laid, cos a lot of them have the ability to get laid and still be bitter about it. This about never being loved by a woman. They’re not sex starved, they’re affection starved.
…and it’s the women’s fault, of course.
But why they can’t see that this attitude unavoidably creates the most vicious of circles, virtually guaranteeing that they’ll be affection-starved for much longer (if not for ever), I really can’t fathom.
Whooops, I’ll have to refrain from further replies from this point on, as this discussion is now getting a little too close for my comfort zone. (Looks around). If I say too much more, I’ll get expelled from the clubhouse and be stripped of my membership. (Facepalms) I’m in despair! Oh, this wretched world that silently dooms man to a lifetime of quiet desperation, has left me in despair! The damned are trapped in distraction, bound for destruction! (Trumpet note).
@Whatever:
No. “Sayonara, Zetsubou-Sensei” quotes for you.
Incidentally, and just to make this clearer, did we start by talking about child porn, and you tried to make some sort of counter argument by saying that giving a starving child food in exchange for sex is fine? In other words, you tried to show cp is ok by asking us to consider exploiting a starving child?
Do you even know how to argue a point? You don’t do it by appealing to something even more despicable.
And of course that line should have been
“No. No “Sayonara, Zetsubou-Sensei” quotes for you.”
curse you, fast clicky finger.