If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles.
Here is an interesting book.
Beyond Tolerance: Child Pornography on the Internet By Philip Jenkins http://books.google.com/books?id=9tkKyuii6mgC&pg=PA82 From pages 81-82 Probably the most common type of soft-core photographs involves nude young girls in innocent and non-sexual settings: these are the staples of egroup trade. Many of thse images have been taken in nudist camps or on nude beaches and they generally picture children in groups or with their families, playing sports, or using playgrounds. If not for the context, the scene would seem remarkably wholesome. In the whole range of images these are the least harmful, since the photographs were taken without causing any harm to the subjects. The material does raise sensitive questions, however, about the nudist/naturist subcultures and its alleged relationship to child pornography. Particularly in North America, naturalists have long been regarded as amiable cranks, but various activists and pressure groups have suggested that the movement has attracted more than its share of pedophiles and pornographers, and substantial evidence of misbehavior comes from criminal investigtions and convictions over the years. Without having to accept extreme charges about mass perversions in the nudist world, the volume of nudist photography, particularly involving small children and toddlers, does indicate that the naturist movement has been exploited for pornographic purposes. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles.
On Sep 4, 12:21�pm, Anna wrote:
Here is an interesting book. Beyond Tolerance: Child Pornography on the Internet By Philip Jenkins http://books.google.com/books?id=9tkKyuii6mgC&pg=PA82 From pages 81-82 Probably the most common type of soft-core photographs involves nude young girls in innocent and non-sexual settings: these are the staples of egroup trade. *Many of thse images have been taken in nudist camps or on nude beaches and they generally picture children in groups or with their families, playing sports, or using playgrounds. *If not for the context, the scene would seem remarkably wholesome. *In the whole range of images these are the least harmful, since the photographs were taken without causing any harm to the subjects. *The material does raise sensitive questions, however, about the nudist/naturist subcultures and its alleged relationship to child pornography. Particularly in North America, naturalists have long been regarded as amiable cranks, but various activists and pressure groups have suggested that the movement has attracted more than its share of pedophiles and pornographers, and substantial evidence of misbehavior comes from criminal investigtions and convictions over the years. Without having to accept extreme charges about mass perversions in the nudist world, the volume of nudist photography, particularly involving small children and toddlers, does indicate that the naturist movement has been exploited for pornographic purposes. The nudist culture and child pornography go together. Nudists are nothing but glorified flashers. Not the atmosphere to bring children into. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles.
On Sep 4, 9:40 am, ScottyFLL wrote:
On Sep 4, 12:21?pm, Anna wrote: Here is an interesting book. Beyond Tolerance: Child Pornography on the Internet By Philip Jenkins http://books.google.com/books?id=9tkKyuii6mgC&pg=PA82 From pages 81-82 Probably the most common type of soft-core photographs involves nude young girls in innocent and non-sexual settings: these are the staples of egroup trade. ?Many of thse images have been taken in nudist camps or on nude beaches and they generally picture children in groups or with their families, playing sports, or using playgrounds. ?If not for the context, the scene would seem remarkably wholesome. ?In the whole range of images these are the least harmful, since the photographs were taken without causing any harm to the subjects. ?The material does raise sensitive questions, however, about the nudist/naturist subcultures and its alleged relationship to child pornography. Particularly in North America, naturalists have long been regarded as amiable cranks, but various activists and pressure groups have suggested that the movement has attracted more than its share of pedophiles and pornographers, and substantial evidence of misbehavior comes from criminal investigtions and convictions over the years. Without having to accept extreme charges about mass perversions in the nudist world, the volume of nudist photography, particularly involving small children and toddlers, does indicate that the naturist movement has been exploited for pornographic purposes. The nudist culture and child pornography go together. Nudists are nothing but glorified flashers. Not the atmosphere to bring children into.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Actually for most nudists it isn't about being seen by others nude. They just like to be naked. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles.
"ScottyFLL" wrote in message ups.com... On Sep 4, 12:21?pm, Anna wrote: Here is an interesting book. Beyond Tolerance: Child Pornography on the Internet By Philip Jenkins http://books.google.com/books?id=9tkKyuii6mgC&pg=PA82 From pages 81-82 Probably the most common type of soft-core photographs involves nude young girls in innocent and non-sexual settings: these are the staples of egroup trade. Many of thse images have been taken in nudist camps or on nude beaches and they generally picture children in groups or with their families, playing sports, or using playgrounds. If not for the context, the scene would seem remarkably wholesome. In the whole range of images these are the least harmful, since the photographs were taken without causing any harm to the subjects. The material does raise sensitive questions, however, about the nudist/naturist subcultures and its alleged relationship to child pornography. Particularly in North America, naturalists have long been regarded as amiable cranks, but various activists and pressure groups have suggested that the movement has attracted more than its share of pedophiles and pornographers, and substantial evidence of misbehavior comes from criminal investigtions and convictions over the years. Without having to accept extreme charges about mass perversions in the nudist world, the volume of nudist photography, particularly involving small children and toddlers, does indicate that the naturist movement has been exploited for pornographic purposes. The nudist culture and child pornography go together. Nudists are nothing but glorified flashers. Not the atmosphere to bring children into. then you are a child molester |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles.
Anna wrote:
Here is an interesting book. Beyond Tolerance: Child Pornography on the Internet By Philip Jenkins http://books.google.com/books?id=9tkKyuii6mgC&pg=PA82 From pages 81-82 Probably the most common type of soft-core photographs involves nude young girls in innocent and non-sexual settings: these are the staples of egroup trade. Many of thse images have been taken in nudist camps or on nude beaches and they generally picture children in groups or with their families, playing sports, or using playgrounds. If not for the context, the scene would seem remarkably wholesome. In the whole range of images these are the least harmful, since the photographs were taken without causing any harm to the subjects. The material does raise sensitive questions, however, about the nudist/naturist subcultures and its alleged relationship to child pornography. Particularly in North America, naturalists have long been regarded as amiable cranks, but various activists and pressure groups have suggested that the movement has attracted more than its share of pedophiles and pornographers, and substantial evidence of misbehavior comes from criminal investigtions and convictions over the years. Without having to accept extreme charges about mass perversions in the nudist world, the volume of nudist photography, particularly involving small children and toddlers, does indicate that the naturist movement has been exploited for pornographic purposes. --------------------- And so have National Geographic and the Sears and Monkey-Ward's catalog! The point being that what you're talking about is INTENT, and you're NEVER going to be able to criminalize internal mental attitudes, it is impossible to determine, finally, someone's internal thought processes and desires, and it is also impossibly invasive, beyond the pale of all the laws in free nations, so just give it up. The ONLY reputable evidence ANYWAY, for ANY connection between porn of EVERY kind and sexual violence is that porn ASSUAGES, or SATES the motivations of potential assailants, as any porn of any kind might do for any OTHER sexual activity. In other words, IF you use porn to "get off" through masturbation (And what then would be the purpose if NOT masturbation?) then your motivation to offend is diminished for the period of time masturbation sates your ability to respond sexually, which for most male humans is a day or two, if not longer. This principle of human sexual behavior is well born-out by all the European studies where this has been studied extensively in connection with the sensible updating of their sexual and social laws, and which are always, it seems, a little bit in advance of ours in the USA. The Meese Report commisioned by the republican President at the time, has cited these as the reason that, in all scientific conscience, and AS MUCH AS THAT SIDE OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM ACTUALLY WANTED TO DO, that they could NOT find scientific evidence for porn stimulating sexual violence, but in fact ONLY THE REVERSE, and that a BANNING of such porn may well actually STIMULATE sexual assaults!! Now in the case of porn that constitutes evidence of a crime, we might make exception, but in the case where the crime is consensual and only statutory, or where it isn't a legal crime at ALL, we might be better off, in terms of the rate of sexual assault, if would be better for us to leave such mild "porn", or whatever it is, the hell alone so that it can do its good work or PREVENTING sexual assault, as it is WELL-KNOWN to do!! Steve |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles.
ScottyFLL wrote:
On Sep 4, 12:21�pm, Anna wrote: Here is an interesting book. Beyond Tolerance: Child Pornography on the Internet By Philip Jenkins http://books.google.com/books?id=9tkKyuii6mgC&pg=PA82 From pages 81-82 Probably the most common type of soft-core photographs involves nude young girls in innocent and non-sexual settings: these are the staples of egroup trade. Many of thse images have been taken in nudist camps or on nude beaches and they generally picture children in groups or with their families, playing sports, or using playgrounds. If not for the context, the scene would seem remarkably wholesome. In the whole range of images these are the least harmful, since the photographs were taken without causing any harm to the subjects. The material does raise sensitive questions, however, about the nudist/naturist subcultures and its alleged relationship to child pornography. Particularly in North America, naturalists have long been regarded as amiable cranks, but various activists and pressure groups have suggested that the movement has attracted more than its share of pedophiles and pornographers, and substantial evidence of misbehavior comes from criminal investigtions and convictions over the years. Without having to accept extreme charges about mass perversions in the nudist world, the volume of nudist photography, particularly involving small children and toddlers, does indicate that the naturist movement has been exploited for pornographic purposes. The nudist culture and child pornography go together. Nudists are nothing but glorified flashers. Not the atmosphere to bring children into. --------------------- And when our human species EVOLVED living naked for the VAST majority of our existence on this planet, you get this where????? Sounds like you're ignoring a ****-load of evolution and obvious science just to please your sick little antisexual superstitious religion. Steve |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles.
Dexter Sinatra wrote:
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 09:21:50 -0700, Anna wrote: Here is an interesting book. Beyond Tolerance: Child Pornography on the Internet By Philip Jenkins http://books.google.com/books?id=9tkKyuii6mgC&pg=PA82 From pages 81-82 Probably the most common type of soft-core photographs involves nude young girls in innocent and non-sexual settings: these are the staples of egroup trade. Many of thse images have been taken in nudist camps or on nude beaches and they generally picture children in groups or with their families, playing sports, or using playgrounds. Exactly ------------------------------ Lessee, these are legitimate occurrences, but somehow a video record of them is not? Why is that exactly? Are we to believe that a video or photograph of the same scene would somehow be "corrupting" but not the original situation? And how, precisely, do you know THAT, or is it that you wish to ban all nudity?? If not for the context, the scene would seem remarkably wholesome. In the whole range of images these are the least harmful, since the photographs were taken without causing any harm to the subjects. The material does raise sensitive questions, however, about the nudist/naturist subcultures and its alleged relationship to child pornography. Particularly in North America, naturalists have long been regarded as amiable cranks, but various activists and pressure groups have suggested that the movement has attracted more than its share of pedophiles and pornographers, and substantial evidence of misbehavior comes from criminal investigtions and convictions over the years. Apparently that means nothing in rec.nude. ------------------------ And THAT'S because you **** are a bunch of irrational CRANKS! If their isn't a peer-reviewed piece of research on an academic journal, it doesn't happen . ----------------------------- And why would people want evidence to be peer-reviewed, I wonder?? Maybe because without that process stupid humans are apt to confuse their ignorant religious and sexual prejudices with reality?? That they exist,have exploited children.have been arrested for their crimes and gone to prison means nothing. ------------------------------- Those who go to prison obviously did so because they committed crimes. Those who did NOT go to prison obviously did so because they did NOT commit crimes. Which group is it that you wish to ban. Both, perhaps, and merely because you're a ****ing antisexual Fundie crank?? Without having to accept extreme charges about mass perversions in the nudist world, the volume of nudist photography, particularly involving small children and toddlers, does indicate that the naturist movement has been exploited for pornographic purposes. Now you are confusing them with facts . The problem doesn't exist,nothing need be done to address it,everything is hunky dory -------------------------- That is like a bid to ban swimming pools because it allows humans to see each other half-clothed or less. Why who KNOWS what they might be thinking secretly!!?? The organized criminals responsible couldn't hope for better cover than they get in rec.nude. ----------------------------- You're insane and irrational. Steve |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles.
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 10:12:03 -0700, Dexter Sinatra
wrote: Probably the most common type of soft-core photographs involves nude young girls in innocent and non-sexual settings: these are the staples of egroup trade. Many of thse images have been taken in nudist camps or on nude beaches and they generally picture children in groups or with their families, playing sports, or using playgrounds. Exactly Exactly, what? Exactly? If not for the context, the scene would seem remarkably wholesome. In the whole range of images these are the least harmful, since the photographs were taken without causing any harm to the subjects. The material does raise sensitive questions, however, about the nudist/naturist subcultures and its alleged relationship to child pornography. Particularly in North America, naturalists have long been regarded as amiable cranks, but various activists and pressure groups have suggested that the movement has attracted more than its share of pedophiles and pornographers, and substantial evidence of misbehavior comes from criminal investigtions and convictions over the years. Apparently that means nothing in rec.nude. Um, Dex? What should the unsubstantiated suggestions that "various activists and pressure groups have SUGGESTED that the movement has attracted more than its share of pedophiles and pornographers, and substantial evidence of misbehavior comes from criminal investigtions and convictions over the years" mean????? Suggestions are not evidentiary, neither are accusations. If their isn't a peer-reviewed piece of research on an academic journal, it doesn't happen . You're weaseling. Provide the evidence. That they exist,have exploited children.have been arrested for their crimes and gone to prison means nothing. So have priests. Let's close all of the churches. Without having to accept extreme charges about mass perversions in the nudist world, the volume of nudist photography, particularly involving small children and toddlers, does indicate that the naturist movement has been exploited for pornographic purposes. The nudists have been exploited. So have the students, parishoners, scouts, etc. What's the difference? Now you are confusing them with facts . The problem doesn't exist,nothing need be done to address it,everything is hunky dory What specific resorts/clubs have you been to? When? What problems did you personally witness? What do you know about any of this first hand? -T. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles.
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 22:16:04 GMT, "wonderer"
wrote: The nudist culture and child pornography go together. Nudists are nothing but glorified flashers. Not the atmosphere to bring children into. And you base this on? -T. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles.
On Sep 4, 8:57 pm, Dexter Sinatra wrote:
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 17:45:17 -0700, "R. Steve Walz" wrote: Anna wrote: Here is an interesting book. Beyond Tolerance: Child Pornography on the Internet By Philip Jenkins http://books.google.com/books?id=9tkKyuii6mgC&pg=PA82 From pages 81-82 Probably the most common type of soft-core photographs involves nude young girls in innocent and non-sexual settings: these are the staples of egroup trade. Many of thse images have been taken in nudist camps or on nude beaches and they generally picture children in groups or with their families, playing sports, or using playgrounds. If not for the context, the scene would seem remarkably wholesome. In the whole range of images these are the least harmful, since the photographs were taken without causing any harm to the subjects. The material does raise sensitive questions, however, about the nudist/naturist subcultures and its alleged relationship to child pornography. Particularly in North America, naturalists have long been regarded as amiable cranks, but various activists and pressure groups have suggested that the movement has attracted more than its share of pedophiles and pornographers, and substantial evidence of misbehavior comes from criminal investigtions and convictions over the years. Without having to accept extreme charges about mass perversions in the nudist world, the volume of nudist photography, particularly involving small children and toddlers, does indicate that the naturist movement has been exploited for pornographic purposes. --------------------- And so have National Geographic and the Sears and Monkey-Ward's catalog! The point being that what you're talking about is INTENT, and you're NEVER going to be able to criminalize internal mental attitudes, it is impossible to determine, finally, someone's internal thought processes and desires, and it is also impossibly invasive, beyond the pale of all the laws in free nations, so just give it up. The ONLY reputable evidence ANYWAY, for ANY connection between porn of EVERY kind and sexual violence is that porn ASSUAGES, or SATES the motivations of potential assailants, as any porn of any kind might do for any OTHER sexual activity. In other words, IF you use porn to "get off" through masturbation (And what then would be the purpose if NOT masturbation?) then your motivation to offend is diminished for the period of time masturbation sates your ability to respond sexually, which for most male humans is a day or two, if not longer. This principle of human sexual behavior is well born-out by all the European studies where this has been studied extensively in connection with the sensible updating of their sexual and social laws, and which are always, it seems, a little bit in advance of ours in the USA. The Meese Report commisioned by the republican President at the time, has cited these as the reason that, in all scientific conscience, and AS MUCH AS THAT SIDE OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM ACTUALLY WANTED TO DO, that they could NOT find scientific evidence for porn stimulating sexual violence, but in fact ONLY THE REVERSE, and that a BANNING of such porn may well actually STIMULATE sexual assaults!! Now in the case of porn that constitutes evidence of a crime, we might make exception, but in the case where the crime is consensual and only statutory, or where it isn't a legal crime at ALL, we might be better off, in terms of the rate of sexual assault, if would be better for us to leave such mild "porn", or whatever it is, the hell alone so that it can do its good work or PREVENTING sexual assault, as it is WELL-KNOWN to do!! Incorrect. many child abusers acknowledge the role pornography played in their offences. A study of sex offenders reported that 56 per cent of the rapists and 42 per cent of the child molesters in the sample said that pornography played a role in their offenses (2). 2. Abel, G., in Einsiedel, E.F., Social Science Report. Prepared for the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., 1986. ***Sexual Assault & Pornography: The Links*** http://www.ncf.ca/ip/social.services...isis/porno.txt (This is one of six fact sheets on the topic of sexual assault prepared by the Ontario Women's Directorate, 1992.) Numerous research studies have highlighted the links between pornography and sexual assault. Pornography is defined as sexually explicit material that portrays and endorses degrading or abusive sexual behaviour (1). Sexual assault is defined here as any unwanted act of a sexual nature. FACTS TO CONSIDER: A study of sex offenders reported that 56 per cent of the rapists and 42 per cent of the child molesters in the sample said that pornography played a role in their offenses (2). A study of video pornography ('adult' videos and highly restricted, or 'triple-X,' videos) found that 13 per cent of all scenes involved sexual violence, including rape (53 per cent), sexual harassment (35 per cent), sadomasochism (17.5 per cent), and sexual mutilation (six per cent). This study also indicated that 'adult' videos had more portrayals of sexual aggression per movie than triple-x videos (3). A national survey of Canadians' use of pornography indicates that: -young people aged 12 to 17 years are the primary consumers of pornography -35 per cent of these young people expressed an interest in watching sexually violent scenes (rape, torture, bondage etc.) (4). ISSUES TO CONSIDER: Males commit most sexual assaults, and are also the biggest consumers of pornography (5). Violent and dehumanizing pornography has been shown to: -increase the incidence of rape myths -increase the acceptance of violence against women -decrease sensitivity to the suffering of rape victims -increase sexual callousness -increase male willingness to rape (6) Studies indicate that pornography undermines internal inhibitions against rape (7). It presents women as objects and perpetuates the myth that women enjoy rape and find it sexually exciting. In an experiment on desensitization, researchers showed men 10 hours of R-rated movies with sexual violence over a five-day period. On the last day, the men watched a documentary re-enacting a real rape trial. The men blamed the rape victim more for the rape, rated her as significantly more worthless, and saw her injury as significantly less severe than did a control group of men who had not viewed the R-rated movies (9). Early studies indicate that debriefing participants of such studies, in an attempt to discount various false messages and myths about rape, can in fact counteract certain effects of exposure to violent pornography and can even reduce the acceptance of rape myths. References: 1. Longino, H., "What is Pornography," in Lederere, L., (ed.), Take Back the Night. New York: William Morrow, 1980, p.44. 2. Abel, G., in Einsiedel, E.F., Social Science Report. Prepared for the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., 1986. 3. Palys, T.S., "Testing the Common Wisdom: The Social Content of Video Pornography," Canadian Psychology, 27, 1986, pp.22-35. 4. Check, J., "Curriculum Development Research Needs Assessment: Attitudes and Behaviour Regarding Pornography and Sexual Coercion in Metropolitan Toronto High School Students." York University: Department of Psychology, February 24, 1986. 5. Finklehor, D., Child Sexual Abuse: New Theory and Practice. New ork: Free Press, 1984. Russell, D., Sexual Exploitation: Rape, Child Sexual Abuse and Workplace Harassment. Beverley Hills: Sage, 1984. 6. Check, J., N. Malamuth, "Pornography and Sexual Aggression: A Social Learning Analysis," in M.L. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication Yearbook, Volume 9. Beverly Hill: Sage, 1985. See also: Donnerstein, E., "Pornography: Its Effects on Violence Against Women," in N. Malamuth and E. Donnerstein (Eds.), Pornography and Sexual Aggression. New York: Academic Press, 1984, and Malamuth, N., "Aggression Against Women: Cultural and Individual Cases," in N. Malamuth and E. Donnerstein (Eds.), Pornography and Sexual Aggression. New York: Academic Press, 1984. 7. Malamuth, N., "Do Sexually Violent Media Indirectly Contribute to Antisocial Behaviour?" Unpublished paper prepared for the Surgeon General's Workshop on Pornography and Public Health, Arlington, Virginia, 1986. 8. Russell, D., Sexual Exploitation: Rape, Child Sexual Abuse and Workplace Harassment, 1984. 9. Donnerstein, E., and D. Linz, Unpublished paper prepared for the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography Hearings, Houston, Texas, 1985. 10. See: Check, J., and N. Malamuth, "Can There Be Positive Effects of Participation in Pornography Experiments?," Journal of Sex Research, 20, 1984, pp. 14-31, and Donnerstein, E., and L. Berkovitz, "Victims' Reactions in Aggressive Erotic Films as a Factor in Violence Against Women," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1981, pp. 710-724, and Malamuth, N., and J. Check, " Debriefing Effectiveness Following Exposure to Pornographic Rape Depictions, " Journal of Sex Research, 20, 1984, pp. 1-13. Further Reading Ontario Women's Directorate, Annotated Bibliography on Sexual Assault Literature. Toronto, July 1990. Russell, D., "Pornography and Rape: A Causal Model," Political Psychology, Vol. 9, No.1, 1988, pp. 41-73. Cole, S., Pornography and the Sex Crisis. Toronto: Amanita Press, 1989. its amazing you can pack so much **** in 1 post. why is there no research into what people that are not convicted molesters or abusers do with the same material? would it spoil their research? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles. | R. Steve Walz | General | 3 | September 4th 07 02:34 AM |
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles. | R. Steve Walz | General | 0 | September 2nd 07 10:55 PM |
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles. | R. Steve Walz | Solutions | 0 | September 2nd 07 10:55 PM |
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles. | R. Steve Walz | General | 0 | September 2nd 07 10:47 PM |
Justice Department-regulars in family nudist camps were often (not rarely) pedophiles. | R. Steve Walz | Solutions | 0 | September 2nd 07 10:47 PM |