Registries continue to punish youth years and even decades after they have served time. Data and research show that registries don’t improve public safety.
The problem isnt the registries per se, it is that they are extremely poorly administered if children are being put on them. The criteria for adding an individual to such registries needs to be strict and with a reasonably high threshold, so that nobody gets on one for things like pissing outside, or accidental exposure, or minors sexting each other, or for accidentally having a few CSAM images that they had downloaded unwittingly etc
I had some involvement with a local registry some years back, and we only inluded adults who physically offended against minors and with a significant age difference, and adults who were actively and deliberately involved in the production and distribution of copious quantities of CSAM. Most had track records involving multiple offences and multiple victims
The criteria for adding an individual to such registries needs to be strict and with a reasonably high threshold
I think this needs to be part of the law itself. If it’s at the discretion of people in charge of administering it, that’s easily subject to corruption.
The argument is that the use of “porn” implies that it’s as acceptable as regular porn, that it ligitimizes it.
Which is absolutely ridiculous. Only a pedophile would see “child porn” and think it’s just another perfectly acceptable category of porn.
But some SJW think tank probably got a grant and a few professors got published due to this.
My guess is that the churn in PC terms is similar to the way software companies always have to release an “update” or “new feature” even if their product is working perfectly fine: people need promotions, and big initiatives make them look good, and they nope out to another company before the negative effects can be seen, so future employees who are stuck with the stupid unnecessary change get the blame for its failure.
Thank you for educating me. I hate the constant churn of PC terms. It makes communication less effective, doesn’t help the problem in the slightest, and actually hampers solutions. I hope I’m not alone in this.
What you’re doing here is thinking your feelings are facts. You need to back up what you say with facts not feelings. Common sense is a feeling, it’s not an objective truth in the world.
Okay, let’s reverse your logic. Can you point to a study that points to a positive effect of changing “child pornography” to “csam” that would justify the effort of re-educating the public at large to this new terminology? Because if there isn’t, there is no reason to change. It’ll just divert effort away from solving the problem.
You are not alone, but in many spaces, especially those dedicated to fighting child porn, going against the hive mind means being accused of being a pedophile. Even for something as trivial as the term being used.
We do the rehabilitation/ treatment thing here. It does not work, at least long term - not surprisingly really given that it is an innate defect of laregly biological origin. The best solution is perhaps not prison per se but some kind of community where they can live somewhat normal lives but are isolated away from children and have filtered net access so there is no possibilty of their reoffending
The problem isnt the registries per se, it is that they are extremely poorly administered if children are being put on them. The criteria for adding an individual to such registries needs to be strict and with a reasonably high threshold, so that nobody gets on one for things like pissing outside, or accidental exposure, or minors sexting each other, or for accidentally having a few CSAM images that they had downloaded unwittingly etc
I had some involvement with a local registry some years back, and we only inluded adults who physically offended against minors and with a significant age difference, and adults who were actively and deliberately involved in the production and distribution of copious quantities of CSAM. Most had track records involving multiple offences and multiple victims
I think this needs to be part of the law itself. If it’s at the discretion of people in charge of administering it, that’s easily subject to corruption.
Agreed
What does csam mean?
“Child Sexual Abuse Material”
It’s the new PC term for child porn. It actually is more accurate, to be fair.
It is just a longer term, not better.
The point is that porn is consensual. A child being abused or manipulated into production can’t consent.
The argument is that the use of “porn” implies that it’s as acceptable as regular porn, that it ligitimizes it.
Which is absolutely ridiculous. Only a pedophile would see “child porn” and think it’s just another perfectly acceptable category of porn.
But some SJW think tank probably got a grant and a few professors got published due to this.
My guess is that the churn in PC terms is similar to the way software companies always have to release an “update” or “new feature” even if their product is working perfectly fine: people need promotions, and big initiatives make them look good, and they nope out to another company before the negative effects can be seen, so future employees who are stuck with the stupid unnecessary change get the blame for its failure.
Thank you for educating me. I hate the constant churn of PC terms. It makes communication less effective, doesn’t help the problem in the slightest, and actually hampers solutions. I hope I’m not alone in this.
What you’re doing here is thinking your feelings are facts. You need to back up what you say with facts not feelings. Common sense is a feeling, it’s not an objective truth in the world.
Okay, let’s reverse your logic. Can you point to a study that points to a positive effect of changing “child pornography” to “csam” that would justify the effort of re-educating the public at large to this new terminology? Because if there isn’t, there is no reason to change. It’ll just divert effort away from solving the problem.
You’re assuming that I must take the other position because I called out your position.
They have reasons for theirs, you have reasons for yours.
But here you are again, another post, saying the exact same thing with nothing to back it up other than your feelings.
I was assuming you were arguing in good faith.
You are not alone, but in many spaces, especially those dedicated to fighting child porn, going against the hive mind means being accused of being a pedophile. Even for something as trivial as the term being used.
It’s such a toxic space.
Child Sex Abuse Material
They shouldn’t exist. If someone is a danger to reoffend they shouldn’t be let out of prision in the first place.
This is what you get with a justice system focused on punishment, not justice, and a for profit penal system fixated on money not rehabilitation.
They need treatment and rehabilitation, not incarceration for the sake of filling beds
We do the rehabilitation/ treatment thing here. It does not work, at least long term - not surprisingly really given that it is an innate defect of laregly biological origin. The best solution is perhaps not prison per se but some kind of community where they can live somewhat normal lives but are isolated away from children and have filtered net access so there is no possibilty of their reoffending
Technically everyone is capable of reoffending.
This would be the ideal solution, yes