how-to block ads
|
Christopher001
| reply to Advoc8
Re: Well, well, well......
Actually, Advoc8 is right! There have been no studies done that show that child porn is actually harmful to the children that are used in it. The only study that was actually done and published on it in this century by the Danish, I believe, actually came to the OPPOSITE conclusion, that there is no damage to children from seeing porn, having sex with an adult, or having sex with other children.
Every study our (United States) government has funded has been buried because it actually came to the OPPOSITE conclusion from the one that the government wanted, and the same conclusion that the Danish study found.
The big problem is just that parents do not want to believe that their children could be interested in sex from an early age, and that they have the right to decide for themselves whether to be in sexual activity.
Sure, if they are being forced and you suspect that they are, ask them if they were threatened. But if they say they weren't and you believe them, simply butt out, it is their body and their right to decide who they want to touch it and what they want to do with it. | |
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| said by Christopher001:
Actually, Advoc8 is right! There have been no studies done that show that child porn is actually harmful to the children that are used in it. The only study that was actually done and published on it in this century by the Danish, I believe, actually came to the OPPOSITE conclusion, that there is no damage to children from seeing porn, having sex with an adult, or having sex with other children. Again, post said study or I call BS. | |
illbite
@12.163.x.x
| reply to moonpuppy
All right, I'll chip in, but by no means it doesn't mean I condone this, but you asked for a study.
Search for the original text of:
"A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples."
By:
Rind B, Tromovitch P, Bauserman R.
Department of Psychology, Temple University
The data supported their findings that when the encounters were consensual there was no more damage to the child than with a 'normal' sex encounter and in some cases it even had a POSITIVE effect on the child in question.
The APA published it on a bulletin. However the ensuing uproar and even Congress involvement comdemning the study results because they "disagreed" with their findings caused the APA to issue a formal detraction letter apologizing for having published such article. They couldn't refute the data thought, just got all pissy about the findings going contrary to their moral beliefs. | |
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Retraction of study = "we were wrong, sorry."
If the APA can't stand behind their studies, then they must not have a leg to stand on.
Also, how can we expect a child to be mature enough to have sex but not to drive (until they are 16), hold a job (until they are 18 or earlier with PARENTAL CONSENT), or drink alcohol? Just because they can, doesn't mean they should.
I read that study and find a few of their conclusions a bit off center. I wonder how many people would allow their 12 year old child to have sex with a 30 year old adult.
And why is it the "anonymous" posters are the ones promoting adult/child sex? | |
|
