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.
Hehehe. I don’t usually use touhou names for screen names, but my girlfriend went with Keine, so… XD
Cassandra I’m so sorry that happened to you that’s awful! And yeah I’m glad there’s been no trolls on this thread (so far) I really hope it stays that way.
That’s true. “Public accessibility” is closer to what I was going for, but is much more general and potentially allows for prosecution under a wide variety of circumstances not limited to presentation in public space. Of course, obscenity law is sometimes subject to criticism for that reason, as well as for its reliance on vague and changeable norms of behavior, consumption, etc. to dictate its standards.
There are images and videos of the acts committed against me probably being traded right now. When I was younger, I used to wonder whether people who looked at me were just randomly staring or whether they recognized me from something they saw online. What bothers me most is not that images are out there, but that there is nothing I can do about it. Those images of me, my brothers and cousins are going to be around as long as the memory chips they are stored on survive.
That said, the people who look at those images and videos are not hurting me. The act has already been done. Sure, those women and men (some of whom may be here) may look at those images and videos and take pleasure from my pain, but they did not cause it. They are “enjoying” it after the fact. I do not like it, but it also makes no sense to hold someone who who never touched a child to spend more responsible than the women and men who made the images. I understand why it happens from a legal standpoint. It is much easier to prove someone possesses illegal material than prove they abused a child. But it makes no logical sense to hold them more responsible than those who actually abuse children.
On a side note, the majority of the comments from the Reddit thread sound like mine. Yes, a small number of people made horrific comments, but the majority did not and many of them took the other folks to task for making those comments.
If I had to guess, I’d say it’s not a single thing. The implied power imbalance — the girl whose photos got leaked, for example — the violation of privacy; the part where she has no say in how they use and circulate her private photos; the part where the person represented in them is a girl in transition to young womanhood, with all the transgression, and explicit power imbalance that entails — plus the fact that she’s got fresh boobs and curves but not the life experience and maturity that would make her capable of both recognizing and avoiding creeps, holding her own in conversation with an adult man, and just generally being a woman with enough authority over herself to be “scary” to the sort of creeps who must resort to stealing photos of underage girls to get off.
Well, after laying it all out, I guess it is one thing — power. The power to “overrule” any no, whterh it’s a “these pictures are in a private folder you are not supposed to have access to”, or a “No! Don’t touch me!”
Oh of course, Toy Soldier is the emperor of abused children everywhere and uses his position to defend MRAs. As usual. If we’re going to get a troll derail, can we get an actual derail? Seriously, like this.
I did notice that he implied that some of the commenters here might be among those who viewed images of his abuse. Hey, you have to give him credit, he’s getting more subtle in his attempts to suggest that feminists are evil.
That was a nice touch, especially since we’ve been so pro-child porn in the past.
/sarcasm
Toysoldier, I’m sorry you were abused. I’m sorry that there exist videos or images of the abuse. That is horrible and shouldn’t have happened to you.
I do think the continued existence of those images is another violation of you and they shouldn’t be viewed by just anyone. I think the only reason the videos or images should be saved and not destroyed is as evidence against the people who abused you.
I understand what you’re saying about the people viewing the images or videos not being as responsible as the people who actually abused you. That’s true; however, I think they are guilty to a degree, further violating you, and should be punished, too.
I hope you’ve received the help you deserve to have gotten over the abuse as much as anyone ever can.
Ahhh, feminist logic. It’s a thing to behold.
First off, it’s only very recent in the history of mankind, that’s right, mankind, (as in man and his kind), that you’ve been treated like children for such an extended period of time, and still beg Big Daddy for more coddling. Up until about a 100 years ago, 14/15 year old boys and girls got married, had jobs, raised families, contributed to the community, They had responsibilities and they were treated as adults, because they were. Unlike todays princesses who demand pampering and exemption from accountability for any bad decision they make for their entire lives.
Why do girls take naked photos of themselves? Vanity? Pride? Narcissism? Attention? We could say don’t be so stupid, vain or prideful to take naked photos of yourself, thereby placing the blame where it belongs. But no, no, noooo. We mustn’t ever blame a girl. It’s so much better to blame men for looking; misandry is so much more progressive. Girls wear less because they know men will look and they insatiably crave the attention. Yet somehow. when the feeling strikes them, they’re mortified when men do look.
Feminism will be the promoters of true pedophila. Since women were never oppressed, feminism is simply a movement of hatred, sodomy and debauchery. Whatever hardship women claim to have faced in the past, men faced an equally if not more difficult hardship, so there was never any oppression. Of course, the feminist reason for all hardships will be the partriarchy conspiracy. Therefore, men are always to blame and women are victims.
Here’s a few examples of feminists debauchery, degredation and logic.
—————-
@hellkell
“There is no defense for child porn, not in this or any other reality.”
Then tell 14 year old girls to stop taking naked pictures of themselves. Or would that interfere with her precious sexual agency? We can’t blame her, can we? Best to blame a man who looks.
—————-
@Holly Pervocracy
“Lolicon manga is in the category of things that I think should be legal, but I’m not going to be friends with anyone who has any. Kind of like white supremacist literature, I guess.”
Promoting something to legality so you can point the finger of shame at any who look. Aren’t you just morally superior! Would supremacist literature be like a race of people calling themselves Gods chosen people and considering all other people lesser? She who lives in glass houses…
—————–
@kirbywarp
“How much do y’all wanna bet that NWO’s gonna pop up soon demanding that all cp is basically just young sluts doing what sluts do, and how dare we fight for women to be treated like grownups only when it is convenient?
You’re wish is my command. A 14 year old girl takes naked pictures of herself and I happen to look, whose to blame? Teach little girls not to take naked pictures of themselves, it’s common sense.
———————-
@ozymandias42
“I totally support the legality of loli and other forms of CP that don’t involve hurting children; I think it’s far better for pedophiles to have an outlet that isn’t molesting children. But getting off on hurting children is sick, wrong and evil.”
Promote getting off on, “images” but don’t promote it. Genius!
———————–
@ozymandias42
“Also, it’s possible to be into loli without actually wanting to molest actual children, in much the same way as it’s possible to be into rape porn without wanting to rape people, or extreme BDSM porn without actually supporting slavery. Fantasy and reality are not the same thing.”
This from wunderfem who in a previous thread talked about pain threshold from caning. Here’s a fun link to the fruits of feminists gender-raunch splashing over into real life. Don’t fret, it’s a man being cruelly treated. At worst it’ll be just a theoretical puzzle.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/milwaukee-satanic-ritual-657329
Oh geez, the rapist wannbe is here. I hope a parent catches you leering at their kid on the beach and [redacted] you, you brainless, evil sicko.
Aaaaand NWO rolls in to defend this. This train is never late.
Please exile yourself from the rest of humanity, NWO. For everyone’s sake, including your own.
“gender-raunch”
Um, so that would be…um…
OK, I’m totally lost. Anyone want to attempt a batshit to English translation?
I think it’s his batshit attempt to lampoon genderqueers and slutty slut sluts (all women to him), who are all a big blob of raunch to the Slave.
If I”m right and can translate him now, that’s not a comforting thought.
@OSHIII
“That does it, I’m replanning my career path, and going into politics. I’m going to introduce a two-strikes law for pedophiles. They get one normal tip through the penal system, and then if they go back to their abominable ways, they get banished to a desert prison-island…”
Would this punishment also extend to the promoters of pedophilia? Ya know, the ones who actually take the pictures of themselves and text them all over? Or are they victims? A 14 year old girl shouldn’t know better than to post naked pictures of herself but a man over 18 should know better than to look? Is this what you’re saying?
—————-
@OSHIII
“If I had to guess, I’d say it’s not a single thing. The implied power imbalance — the girl whose photos got leaked, for example — the violation of privacy; the part where she has no say in how they use and circulate her private photos; the part where the person represented in them is a girl in transition to young womanhood…”
Oddly enough, men are more apt to look at naked girls in their prime as opposed to 90 year old grandmothers. Probably has something to do with biology. Also the same reason that same 90 year old women doesn’t take woman doesn’t take naked pictures of herself and toss them online.
It has nothing to do with any of your indoctrinated feminists nonsense. And you could always tell young girls to stop taking pictures of themselves. Taking a picture of a young girl against her will is a crime. If a young girl takes naked pictures of herself, she is to blame. Teach her to stop fucking taking naked pictures of herself.
Amazing how the gender-raunch gang are suddenly puritans if a girl has the slightest chance of being held accoutable for her actions.
——————
Further proof of feminists complete promotion of true pedophelia is the fact that the majority of pedophelia promoters are women/feminists. They of course don’t get into trouble. I gave a link a while back about Sweden, the feminist vanguard. How there where like a ring of 16 feminists and 1 man in the largest pedophile ring in the world to date. You’ll be happy to know that the man is safely behind bars. The 16 women however recieved a slap on the wrist and a fine, which I believe didn’t exceed like $1500.00. Quite stiff for Sweden actually.
Since women don’t get punished for promoting pedophelia, (or the punishment is a joke), they can engage in it as well without punishment.
http://www.news.com.au/national/woman-gets-no-jail-for-sex-abuse/story-e6frfkvr-1226171268758
It seems the little snowflake had, “low self esteem.” As I said, feminism could never have been about oppression, since women were never oppressed. When your movement promotes gender-raunch S&M, sodomy, slutdom, ect. How much of a leap is it to promote pedophelia? Women are already forgiven for promoting and committing the act.
If feminism were truely about equality you’d be screaming for her blood as you surely would if it’d been a man.
@ hellkell – Could be, but then he said this.
“Amazing how the gender-raunch gang are suddenly puritans if a girl has the slightest chance of being held accoutable for her actions.”
And now I’m lost again. I guess the logic is that men are neutral and only women have gender, and therefore raunchiness from a woman = gender-raunch?
NWO, by your reasoning, the Penn State football team was run by feminists. Fuck off, you sleazy piece of shit.
Cassandra: then there’s this:
We may never truly know the mind of this deep, deep man.
“We may never truly know the mind of this deep, deep man.”
Let us all give thanks for that.
Except that he wants to rape kids, we do know that.
Oh and he wants to be praised for raping the kids too!
NWO, that “men of course look at pubescent girls, it’s biology!” thing is nonsense. First of all, most people who got married at super-young ages in the past were nobility. The commoners, who make up the bulk of the population, had to wait longer, until they had enough money to marry. Hunter-gatherer women don’t usually enter adulthood until late teens, early twenties, which is when they usually get married the first time and have their first kids. Fourteen year olds are not built for having babies. I had my first period when I was freakin’ ten, but I didn’t stop growing for several years after that, and it took awhile to age enough to have a body that could support a child. An early teenager is not as fertile as a woman who is older, just because it is much more difficult for her to sustain a pregnancy. So stop blaming biology for your pedophilia, because it’s not biology’s fault.