Germany reduces penalties for child porn possession
Not a good sign. Germany has downgraded possession of child porn to a misdemeanor:
German lawmakers justified their action by arguing that decriminalization gave “necessary flexibility” to deal with the “large proportion of juvenile offenders,” and would also protect parents and teachers who discover child porn on the devices of young people and pass them on to the relevant authorities.
There are ways to make exceptions for those things, without downgrading possession as a whole. Young people sharing naked pictures of each other with other young people is a different thing than adult consumption of child porn, and can be treated differently. But that’s not what happened in Germany. And of course, the pro-pedophilia groups are very encouraged by this, as well they should be.
Children are children, and limits must always be placed on the adult use of children for sex. Children cannot give such consent, period. I have written about this many times before.
From the article:
According to this corrupted way of thinking, nothing more than consent is required for a sexual relationship to have legitimacy. The logic goes like this: Because minors are autonomous persons with human rights, any restriction on activities to which they consent is unjust.
Child porn is child exploitation, and while its makers are obviously exploiting children, its makers also depend on child porn consumers to make their money. What of child porn that involves cartoons – in other words, no living children were harmed in making it? Not as clear-cut. But that’s not what this law is about.
The article points out that one of the goals is to undermine the family and parental authority. True; we’ve seen that in so many ways.
This is depraved and Orwellian:
“The taboo of pedophilia must finally be broken at all levels of society,” Gieseking [an offender and pedophile activist] once said. “If a pedophile can come out without fear of exclusion or even demonization, then this is the best prevention against child abuse.”
Pedophilia is a sexual orientation. #NoJudgment #NoLabels
Here’s to progress…. all’s fair in lust and abortion.
“The taboo of pedophilia must finally be broken at all levels of society…this is the best prevention against child abuse.”
As far as German humor goes, that’s actually pretty good…
Making pedophilia something people don’t disapprove of is the first step to making the activity more common. It will lead to more child abuse, not less.
Leave it to the Germans.
There are bestiality brothels in Germany.
Germany is falling. Faster and faster.
Kate (4:16 pm) points out that pedophilia “will lead to more child abuse, not less.”
I say, most pedophiles know that full well. My guess, based on zero research (therefore, caveat emptor), is that most of them are knaves*, not fools. (What say you?)
* for disingenuously claiming that pedophilia will lead to less child abuse. Or does it depend on one’s definition of “child abuse”?
M J R, they’re going to re-define “abuse,” because they claim that children have sexual interests and feelings from birth, and that to deny them sexual activity is abuse.
What they really mean is that they have sexual interests in children and current law denies them the opportunity to prey on young people who do not understand and cannot properly consent.
Kate (6:27 pm), your first sentence is exactly why I appended “Or does it depend on one’s definition of ‘child abuse’?” to my comment.
The left is somethin’-else when it comes to redefining long-understood ideas so they may be shoehorned into the woke paradigm du jour.
Not surprising since CP used to be legal in the 1900’s for all the germanic/nordic countries up until the 70’s.
Absolutely disgusting. Evil.
I’ve been surprised by this long trans campaign. I figured the age of consent and group marriages were the next bold new sexual frontiers to transgress.
When I lived in Cambridge in the 80s, one of my roommates was an MIT grad who had been a member of a wacky far-left sex-cult/commune in Austria called Friedrichshof run by the usual power mad, sex-obsessed guy. Otto Muehl was his name. He had been a Wehrmacht officer in WW II. Afterward Muehl turned radical Aktion artist and later he founded Friedrichshof.
What could go wrong?
_________________________________________
Gradually, Muehl began to distance himself from “Aktion”. He regarded the “happening as a bourgeois art form, mere art”. The “transition from art to life” resulted in the founding of the Friedrichshof commune as a kind of anti-society. The declared aim was the destruction of bourgeois marriage and private property, free love, and collective education of the children. In the eighties, tensions within the commune increased until they culminated in a revolt. When, on top of that, Muehl was arrested and imprisoned in 1991 [for sexual offences with minors and drugs], the commune fell apart.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Muehl
_________________________________________
My roommate took Otto as a role model and was always playing mini-Otto and manipulating everybody. He drove his lover, also a roommate, pretty close to a breakdown.
I hated this guy. He is the only person I every challenged to a fist fight. My girlfriend at the time prevented it.
There is a weird European combination of far left politics and sex that I can only understand as Smash All Boundaries and Get Laid with whomever you want.
There is a documentary on Friedrichshof titled “Slaves in Paradise” I would like to see sometime. To ripe even for “The Guardian”:
______________________________________
Set up for idealistic young people by a then middle-aged Vienna artist, Otto Muhl, the commune swiftly degenerated into an out-of-control Muhl cult where the 600-strong community’s pre-occupation was to procure ever younger girls for the ever older, fatter and more arrogant leader to sleep with. Muhl believed humanity’s future lay in a life of free love, art, endless psychotherapy and economic communism.
In 1991, amidst predictable hullabaloo in Austria, he was arrested and jailed for seven years for underage sex, no small feat in a country where the age of consent is 14.
https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/1999/oct/08/features11.g21
Huxley
Everyone should have line. You cross it, time to beat that ass. Way to go.
We are in the middle of a neo-pagan revolution/revanchist movement against the Judeo-Christian West.
Conscience is a Jewish invention. It is a [mutilation], like circumcision. … There is no such thing as truth, either in the moral or in the scientific sense.
– Adolf Hitler
}}} Children cannot give such consent, period. I have written about this many times before.
The only objection I have with that statement is the vast array of idiots who consider a 16yo girl the same as a 10yo girl.
And no, I don’t think you necessarily include that meaning — at least not in the context of, say, an 18yo boy with a 16yo girl. That is not necessarily a manipulative one, and, in fact, given differing maturity levels, it might even be girl-manipulating-boy in at least some cases.
I think one problem we have is that we don’t differentiate at all in our current society between teens and children. Hell, they don’t even want to differentiate between adults and children. :-/
I put it that teens are (and yes, this does vary somewhat with maturity levels, and boys do mature later than girls most of the time) “Adults In Training” — you start giving them adult responsibilities and watch how they handle it. As long as they keep handling them well, you slowly add to their responsibility — and related authority, too!
I personally suspect that this is a large source of “teen angst”… they know they should be given more authority over their lives, and yet they don’t get any.
Even when I first read Romeo and Juliet, at 12, it seemed really stupid to me (yes, I think I was relatively mature for 12 — I lacked experience to create wisdom, but the foundational structures for wisdom were already there).
Fast forward a couple decades, and I find out that literally every single one of our depictions of R&J are ridiculously old… Even the fairly decent Romeo+Juliet still used late-teens teenagers, as did the Zefferelli version.
In the original versions, it was understood — Romeo was 13 or 14, and Juliet was 12 or 13.
Yet Romeo was running around Verona fighting and defending his family’s honor, and the parents are concerned that Juliet is going to be an “old maid” at the start of the play.
Recognizing this, their actions have a lot more sensibility. They’re literally kids, raw, inexperienced, and impatient as hell like any other 12-14yo is, and, very critically, no sense of time — a few months feel like decades do to adults. So when they have to wait for a while to be with each other, well, ohmigerd, it’s an eternity!!
Contrast also with the movie Unforgiven. When Eastwood has to go West, he has a 10yo boy and a 6yo daughter. The boy already goes out and hunts on his own for food for the family. And when he leaves, he leaves the boy in charge, while making sure he knows he can get the neighbor if he needs adult help, and, of course, the neighbor is going to check in with him regularly.
Granted, these are a play and a movie, but, still… they do represent more typical expectations of children and teens in more primitive societies — they don’t have the wealth needed to keep useful hands idly not-contributing to the family’s needs.
I’m not saying “make teens fully responsible”, of course. Kids should be able to grow up at their own speed, within limits (e.g., if you aren’t an adult by 25, your parents failed you utterly). But you should, as a parent, encourage them to take responsibility, to exercise agency, over their own lives as they become capable of handling it (no, this is most emphatically NOT to be twisted into support for puberty blockers for teens!). Give them more and more responsibility as they get older, and give them agency to go with it. Permanent, life-altering changes? Well, you’re going to have to take a lot of time to convince me you’re sure about THAT!
As an example, if the family is going to make a life-changing alteration — say they’re moving to get new jobs 1000 miles away — they should talk with the teen about it, before the final decision is made and preferably even, early on in the consideration process — and let them say how they feel about it. They may not have full veto power, but they’ll at least feel like they’ve been part of the decision, and not just a helpless victim of it. That’s what being an adult is about… you would no more relocate your family without your spouse’s input (at least, not in the USA’s last 75y of tradition), so why would you do it to a maturing teen?
OBloody:
You are wrong about the ages of Romeo and Juliet. Romeo’s age is unspecified but the consensus is that he’s supposed to be about 17. Juliet’s age is given in the play quite specifically: she will be 14 in two weeks.
In Zefferelli’s Romeo and Juliet, Olivia Hussey (Juliet) was 15 and Leonard Whiting (Romeo) was 17. The almost exactly correct ages.