Freethought & Rationalism Archive

chekmate · 08-29-2002, 07:04 PM

I admit that the title is a little misleading. Here's what I mean:

Say a 12 or 13 YO boy is just delving into his sexuality. Pornography, masturbation, etc. But he just doesn't seem to be attracted to the youngest legal allowed (18 here). And so, he goes on the search for people his age, and stumbles across some sites offering images to his liking. Would this be morally wrong for him to pleasure himself to these images?

Mark_Chid · 08-29-2002, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by chekmate:
<strong>I admit that the title is a little misleading. Here's what I mean:

Say a 12 or 13 YO boy is just delving into his sexuality. Pornography, masturbation, etc. But he just doesn't seem to be attracted to the youngest legal allowed (18 here). And so, he goes on the search for people his age, and stumbles across some sites offering images to his liking. Would this be morally wrong for him to pleasure himself to these images?</strong>

Of course not. the person creating and supplying the images is the one who is doing wrong because he knows full well that the audience will not eb limited to other 13 year olds, and the models he are shooting are below the age of legal responsibility and are therefore unable to make informed adult decisions to participate. A few might, but they would be the exception, almost all would be exploited and damaged by the experience.

tronvillain · 08-29-2002, 10:38 PM

No, it would not be morally wrong for him to pleasure himself to those images, but then that simply means it wouldn't bother me if he did. I am simply against child pornography to prevent the abuse and/or exploitation of the young.

Arrowman · 08-29-2002, 11:05 PM

Let's see, here... (all IMHO of course) Some thoughts... I essentially agree with Mark but for the exercise I'd like to take it a little further....

1. There is nothing inherently "immoral" in pleasuring oneself to any image.

2. However if one is aware that the image is very likely from a questionable source (children unable to make an informed decision to participate, and likely to be damaged by the experience), then it could be argued that "using" such an image despite its source, is at best a rationalisation and at worst immoral (I'd prefer "unethical").

3. However (again) - having stumbled across such images, could your average 13 year old be expected to appreciate the (probable) nature of their source? If they were acting in genuine ignorance, I wouldn't apply 2 above to a 13 year old - in other words, I wouldn't accuse them of acting immorally or unethically.

4. And some might argue that the viewer is not supporting or encouraging the provider in any way if
(a) the material is free
(b) the website in question does not have a hit counter (to encourage the author) or any revenue source based on hits.
- So therefore it is not immoral, because your use or non-use of the image in no way affects whether that image (and future ones like it) will be created.
Personally, I would see that argument as rationalisation.

Arrowman · 08-29-2002, 11:13 PM

Supplementary question: Assuming (if we can) that there is no immorality in the creation of the images - that the images are morally neutral - is there anything immoral / unethical / inappropriate / just plain "wrong" about a 13 year old jerking off to images from his own age group (as opposed to images of older women) ?

My first reaction to this, when I posed it to myself, was one of discomfort. So I examined that feeling of discomfort and concluded (rationalised, if you like

) that it's because I have a problem with a 13 year old learning to objectify girls of his own age group.

OK, so jerking off to older women is objectifying them too, but at least he doesn't mix with them where he gets a chance to treat them as "objects" in real life.

In other words, better that he deal with images which can realistically be nothing other than fantasy until he's old enough to have hopefully developed some solid personal ethics about the opposite sex, than have him dealing with images which he might have [think he has] some realistic chance of acting on.

Yes, I know that logic is all a bit loose and subjective, but is there any sense in there at all? Just some random thoughts I've had while mulling this over.....

echidna · 08-29-2002, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by chekmate:
<strong>I admit that the title is a little misleading. Here's what I mean:

Say a 12 or 13 YO boy is just delving into his sexuality. Pornography, masturbation, etc. But he just doesn't seem to be attracted to the youngest legal allowed (18 here). And so, he goes on the search for people his age, and stumbles across some sites offering images to his liking. Would this be morally wrong for him to pleasure himself to these images?</strong>

What is the point of your question ?

What conclusions do you expect to make from the answers ?

luvluv · 08-30-2002, 12:34 PM

Why shouldn't children be exploited?

Viti · 08-30-2002, 12:37 PM

What do you mean luvluv?

Bill · 08-30-2002, 01:17 PM

<Administrator hat on>The admin team is concerned that this thread be: 1) kept civil; and 2) not descend into the clear advocacy of illegal activity.

So long as the above remains true, we probably will not act on the request we've received to delete this thread.

Moderators: please use your own best judgment as to what to do with this thread with respect to future postings, but please keep in mind the forum rules. Thanks!
</Administrator hat on>

== Bill

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas · 08-30-2002, 01:37 PM

Gang,

Wow...I haven't had a laugh this good in a long time.

On one hand we have atheists here claiming that there is nothing immoral about child pornography...

...and on the other hand we have moderators considering closing the discussion alltogether for even discussing child pornography!

When you atheists get your fancy subjective morality put back together give me a call...maybe then we can talk!

Thanks a bunch. Made my day.

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

08-29-2002, 07:04 PM	#1
chekmate Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Downriver Detroit Posts: 1,961	Is child pornography really bad? I admit that the title is a little misleading. Here's what I mean: Say a 12 or 13 YO boy is just delving into his sexuality. Pornography, masturbation, etc. But he just doesn't seem to be attracted to the youngest legal allowed (18 here). And so, he goes on the search for people his age, and stumbles across some sites offering images to his liking. Would this be morally wrong for him to pleasure himself to these images?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-29-2002, 10:38 PM	#3
tronvillain Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 5,658	No, it would not be morally wrong for him to pleasure himself to those images, but then that simply means it wouldn't bother me if he did. I am simply against child pornography to prevent the abuse and/or exploitation of the young.

08-29-2002, 11:05 PM	#4
Arrowman Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Posts: 1,358	Let's see, here... (all IMHO of course) Some thoughts... I essentially agree with Mark but for the exercise I'd like to take it a little further.... 1. There is nothing inherently "immoral" in pleasuring oneself to any image. 2. However if one is aware that the image is very likely from a questionable source (children unable to make an informed decision to participate, and likely to be damaged by the experience), then it could be argued that "using" such an image despite its source, is at best a rationalisation and at worst immoral (I'd prefer "unethical"). 3. However (again) - having stumbled across such images, could your average 13 year old be expected to appreciate the (probable) nature of their source? If they were acting in genuine ignorance, I wouldn't apply 2 above to a 13 year old - in other words, I wouldn't accuse them of acting immorally or unethically. 4. And some might argue that the viewer is not supporting or encouraging the provider in any way if (a) the material is free (b) the website in question does not have a hit counter (to encourage the author) or any revenue source based on hits. - So therefore it is not immoral, because your use or non-use of the image in no way affects whether that image (and future ones like it) will be created. Personally, I would see that argument as rationalisation.

08-29-2002, 11:13 PM	#5
Arrowman Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Posts: 1,358	Supplementary question: Assuming (if we can) that there is no immorality in the creation of the images - that the images are morally neutral - is there anything immoral / unethical / inappropriate / just plain "wrong" about a 13 year old jerking off to images from his own age group (as opposed to images of older women) ? My first reaction to this, when I posed it to myself, was one of discomfort. So I examined that feeling of discomfort and concluded (rationalised, if you like ) that it's because I have a problem with a 13 year old learning to objectify girls of his own age group. OK, so jerking off to older women is objectifying them too, but at least he doesn't mix with them where he gets a chance to treat them as "objects" in real life. In other words, better that he deal with images which can realistically be nothing other than fantasy until he's old enough to have hopefully developed some solid personal ethics about the opposite sex, than have him dealing with images which he might have [think he has] some realistic chance of acting on. Yes, I know that logic is all a bit loose and subjective, but is there any sense in there at all? Just some random thoughts I've had while mulling this over.....

08-30-2002, 12:34 PM	#7
luvluv Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Planet Lovetron Posts: 3,919	Why shouldn't children be exploited?

08-30-2002, 12:37 PM	#8
Viti Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Down South Posts: 12,879	What do you mean luvluv?

08-30-2002, 01:17 PM	#9
Bill Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Gatorville, Florida Posts: 4,334	<Administrator hat on>The admin team is concerned that this thread be: 1) kept civil; and 2) not descend into the clear advocacy of illegal activity. So long as the above remains true, we probably will not act on the request we've received to delete this thread. Moderators: please use your own best judgment as to what to do with this thread with respect to future postings, but please keep in mind the forum rules. Thanks! </Administrator hat on> == Bill

08-30-2002, 01:37 PM	#10
Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 889	Gang, Wow...I haven't had a laugh this good in a long time. On one hand we have atheists here claiming that there is nothing immoral about child pornography... ...and on the other hand we have moderators considering closing the discussion alltogether for even discussing child pornography! When you atheists get your fancy subjective morality put back together give me a call...maybe then we can talk! Thanks a bunch. Made my day. Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.