Child sex dolls.

Self evident. Any special interest matter can be raised here, including current affairs which might not suit either of the Politics Forums.
User avatar
Bogan
Posts: 948
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:27 pm

Re: Child sex dolls.

Post by Bogan » Sun Jan 26, 2020 4:09 pm

Post by Outlaw Yogi » Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:35 pm

Hmmm, thought provoking, maybe even challenging topic.
My initial response was "That's (the doll) fucked up". But then so is an unknown quantity of humanity.
The arguments that such an item could or does prevent rather than incite paedophilic activity seem like cop-outs to me.
I suppose someone's making money out of it, and that makes me wonder about the psychology of the creator/manufacturer.

Many years ago I was in a yogic cult - the main motive was for access to Vedic texts without having to pay a fortune for them.
Although shrouded in religious jargon, those texts contain fascinating information which much of is now considered scientific fact.
Albert Einstein reputedly got the idea for the atom bomb from the Mahabharata.

Anyway, according to the cult guru (she, yes she, was trained as a doctor and psychologist) perverted sexual desires emanate from the super-ego (where instinct resides) and cause the pineal gland to swell, which in turn induces further mental health problems.
Her advice was that acting out such desires does not relieve any associated anxiety, but merely increases the desire for more of the perverted act.


Hi Outlaw Yogi

I would not have though that pig shooters were the sort of demographic interested in yoga?

Pornography was once completely banned in Australia for the same reason that your guru said. It was presumed that it would titillate men so much that they would not be able to control their sexual urges. The degree of censorship in Australia was quite impressive. It not only included pictures in magazines, it included a complete ban wide array of books, magazines, and visual media.

Hundreds of books were on the Banned List, including Lady Chatterly's Lover, Lolita, God's Little Acre, Brave New World, and A Farewell To Arms. Catcher in the Rye was also banned, even though the US Ambassador had donated one the Canberra Library as a fine example of American literature. Pulp fiction books of the "Carter Brown" and "Larry Kent" series of books were banned, even though a black market existed for them and they were extremely popular. US artists, writers, and producers had to struggle against their own laws, but the moral climate in the good old US of A allowed them to spice up their products in ways that there Australian contemporaries could only dream about.

But over time, it was considered that the original premise, that pornography made men more likely that men would not be able to control their sexuality, went the way of the dinosaur. Except of course, in Queensland ( the equivalent of the Deep South for our American friends) where even Playboy was banned up until the late 70's.

It would probably take a sharp psychiatrist to decide whether allowing men who are sexually attracted to prepubescent children would make them worse or better, if they had sex dolls. My opinion, is that many of these men, provided that they are not already forcing themselves on children, need more pity than contempt. It is the way they are. Allowing them to use dolls to satisfy their sexual compulsions seems to me a better option than allowing them to fantasise for years, until a life of total denial encourages them to do something stupid.

User avatar
Black Orchid
Posts: 25300
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:10 am

Re: Child sex dolls.

Post by Black Orchid » Sun Jan 26, 2020 4:44 pm

Bogan wrote:
Sun Jan 26, 2020 3:01 pm
No, once again I am talking about a man with a rubber doll. Like it or lump it, this man has some sort of compulsive, abnormal, and unnatural need to have sex with sexually immature children. Isn't it better for him to satisfy his compulsive sexual passions with a rubber doll instead a real child?

How do you define "Children"?
You would have to convince me that supplying him with a lifelike rubber child sex doll would keep him satisfied so that he doesn't progress to the real thing. Do you realise many of these dolls are programmed to talk and tell the 'user' how much they are enjoying it?

Children = You know, those little short innocent people who should be able to trust the adults they are dependant on.

User avatar
Bogan
Posts: 948
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:27 pm

Re: Child sex dolls.

Post by Bogan » Sun Jan 26, 2020 7:31 pm

Black orchid wrote

You would have to convince me that supplying him with a lifelike rubber child sex doll would keep him satisfied so that he doesn't progress to the real thing.
Would it not be unreasonable to conclude that the reason men may purchase adult sex dolls is because it frees them of any legal or moral obligations towards even needing a female sex partner?
Black orchid wrote

Do you realise many of these dolls are programmed to talk and tell the 'user' how much they are enjoying it?
No, I did not know that at all. Although I saw a youtube vid on how popular sex dolls were for males in China and the program claimed that Chinese manufacturers were working in that direction.
Black orchid wrote

Children = You know, those little short innocent people who should be able to trust the adults they are dependant on.
Would you classify teenage girls as "children"?

Juliar
Posts: 1355
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:56 am

Re: Child sex dolls.

Post by Juliar » Mon Jan 27, 2020 12:32 am

Heavens! Sounds like a late night program on SBS. What has this got to do with politics ?

User avatar
The Reboot
Posts: 1500
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2019 6:05 pm

Re: Child sex dolls.

Post by The Reboot » Mon Jan 27, 2020 2:19 am

Bogan wrote:
Sun Jan 26, 2020 3:31 pm
I do not understand how any man can view a sexually immature child as a sex object. But the fact remains that an unknown proportion of men do just that. I heard one explanation pertaining to the high rate of paedophilia in the Catholic church. That is, if you have a man like a priest who either has been forced to forgoe his normal sexuality through obedience, or who just happens to be a poorly socialised person who through either extreme shyness, or a total lack of social skills, they will remain in a child like state of sexuality. Provided that such people do not force themselves upon children, they probably deserve more pity than contempt.
Interesting. I had come to the conclusion that individuals within the catholic church, who had such desires, had simply used the church as a "costume". I mean, upon face value people will naturally think, "Oh, this guy goes to church. He helps out at the soup kitchens and I confess my sins to him, he must be a good and trustworthy bloke." And judging by this "face value" impression we have, we don't think twice that he's actually a filthy child molesting scumbag. In fact, it's a well known documented tactic of the psychopath to pretend to be something he isn't to avoid detection. I don't know if you know much about the Claremont Serial Killer case, the most expensive investigation in WA police history. The guy that's only recently been caught was involved in a lot of "community" work, particularly with sports teams. I would even wager that many crooked politicians engage in this false virtue signalling type behaviour, just to score "brownie points". Some may do it to win elections and gain power. Others use it to kill in cold blood or molest children. I have come to this conclusion by observing the fact that within religion, there are a lot of dark individuals whose actions go undetected because a lot of money and effort goes into covering it up and that's across most, if not all faiths.
Bogan wrote:
Sun Jan 26, 2020 3:31 pm
This seems to suggest that there are maybe more people with these tastes in society than is suspected.
Yep. This is why we have child sex rings, and why child pornography is prevalent. It is also common for rich men (and without a doubt, women, cause hey guess what? Women can be pedophiles too. Gasp!), likely in politics and finance, to fuck off to shithole countries like Thailand and the Phillipines, where they can get away with diddling children. It is a lot more prevalent than we are comfortable to admit to, but it's one of those things that sort of takes the back seat to what I call "non-issues" such as identity politics, "invasion day" and the like. What we should be concerned about is those in high places who work so hard to cover it up and grant rights to them when they gave up their rights the moment they took away a child's through defilement.
Bogan wrote:
Sun Jan 26, 2020 3:31 pm
Perhaps allowing them to use rubber dolls would be preferable to them hunting children?
I honestly believe that practising intolerance and issuing out harsher penalties would be more effective than pandering to their "fetish". By doing that it sends a message that it is too dangerous to be a pedophile. One may argue that it will just be covered up or hidden more, but guess what? It's like that now, anyway. At least if they are caught, they can be shot rather than resources such as food in prison, "reform" and "anti libido medication" being wasted on the pieces of shit. If that makes me a "fascist", then so be it -- this scenario is a lot different than say, drawing a satirical picture of Serena Williams that a bunch of pussies think is "offensive". :rofl

For instance, for argument's sake: in my late teens it was still pretty unacceptable for a person to have sexual inclinations towards the same sex. Because of this, I was frightened to be "open" about my attraction to other females. Of course, like most other human beings, I have "needs". You know how I "dealt" with said "needs"? Self-pleasure. Gross, I know. Immoral to some, I know. But hey, I didn't go out and "rape" or "defile" something that wasn't mine to do so. I only ever have sexual relations with consenting adults too, despite many in the "far-right" camp equating it to be the same thing. :rofl
The point is, if you are that sexually depraved that pleasuring oneself and letting your "depravity" out isn't going to do the trick, than neither will a lifelike sex doll. The "likeness" to real life will only drive the obsession further. It's like a marijuana addict who wants to "explore" what else is out there, so they try LSD, magic mushrooms and then they may dabble into something harder, like heroin or meth. That never ended well with anybody.

Look, I may be a fascist but I will condemn a pedophile whether they act on it or not. People like that need to be eradicated from the earth. If they can stay celibate and restrict themselves to their "imagination", good on them. But still, we shouldn't be encouraging it and those who are selling child-like sex dolls and capitalizing on the "fetish" are just as bad as pedophiles. It's sick, plain and simple.

Alas, thank you for a good topic and thank you for an intellectually stimulating debate void of red herrings and sneery one-liners :thumb

sprintcyclist
Posts: 7007
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 11:26 pm

Re: Child sex dolls.

Post by sprintcyclist » Mon Jan 27, 2020 3:07 am

The Reboot wrote:
Mon Jan 27, 2020 2:19 am


.......................... Look, I may be a fascist but I will condemn a pedophile whether they act on it or not. People like that need to be eradicated from the earth. If they can stay celibate and restrict themselves to their "imagination", good on them. But still, we shouldn't be encouraging it and those who are selling child-like sex dolls and capitalizing on the "fetish" are just as bad as pedophiles. It's sick, plain and simple.

Alas, thank you for a good topic and thank you for an intellectually stimulating debate void of red herrings and sneery one-liners :thumb
Great sentiments there ReBoot
Right Wing is the Natural Progression.

User avatar
Bogan
Posts: 948
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:27 pm

Re: Child sex dolls.

Post by Bogan » Mon Jan 27, 2020 7:19 am

The Reboot wrote

Interesting. I had come to the conclusion that individuals within the catholic church, who had such desires, had simply used the church as a "costume". I mean, upon face value people will naturally think, "Oh, this guy goes to church. He helps out at the soup kitchens and I confess my sins to him, he must be a good and trustworthy bloke." And judging by this "face value" impression we have, we don't think twice that he's actually a filthy child molesting scumbag. In fact, it's a well known documented tactic of the psychopath to pretend to be something he isn't to avoid detection. I don't know if you know much about the Claremont Serial Killer case, the most expensive investigation in WA police history. The guy that's only recently been caught was involved in a lot of "community" work, particularly with sports teams. I would even wager that many crooked politicians engage in this false virtue signalling type behaviour, just to score "brownie points". Some may do it to win elections and gain power. Others use it to kill in cold blood or molest children. I have come to this conclusion by observing the fact that within religion, there are a lot of dark individuals whose actions go undetected because a lot of money and effort goes into covering it up and that's across most, if not all faiths.
Your analysis that some obsessed paedophiles go to the trouble to join groups who are considered above reproach, especially those dealing with children, has merit. But in the case of the high rates of paedophilia within the Catholic Church, I doubt if most men with such tendencies would join such a strict and disciplined organisation specifically to gain access to children. They could more easily become boy scout leaders or begin a career in child minding than join a restrictive organisation like the Catholic church.

The problems of the church involve the recruitment of young men with probably no sexual experience at all, and then forcing them to maintain their virginity over their entire lives. Such a discipline is completely unnatural. Unable to form sexual relationships with women, they instead find that they can at times have real authority and control over children. In such a case, it is almost inevitable that they will become sexually attracted to children, even though they may not have been sexually attracted to children previously.

Power and control is a real factor in sexuality. In his book about the Gulf War, General Norman Schwatzkopf wrote that when he first got his general's stars, he was taken to a room by a senior officer and told in no uncertain terms the quickest way to lose them. The US Army recognised that whenever a man received general's stars, he suddenly considered himself more sexually attractive to women. And the US Army had a serious problem with newly minted generals chasing every female subordinate under his command around the office.

The next factor in the high rates of paedophilia within the Catholic Church, is that when the conditions to create a high rate of paedophilia occur within a closed society, then it can eventually be considered normal among the members of that closed society. As leadership positions become available, it is inevitable that high ranking members of the Catholic Church will be paedophiles themselves, and they will be protective of their younger or lower ranked members who think like they do.

As for the Claremont Serial Killer case, what I remember is that the WA police had a suspect that they were keeping under very close, 24 hour surveillance. Unable to pin him for the prior murders, all they could do was watch him and be there when he struck again. This surveillance was blown when the story leaked to the media, who publicised the surveillance, and the suspect learned that the police were watching him. Nice one, guys.
The Reboot wrote

Yep. This is why we have child sex rings, and why child pornography is prevalent. It is also common for rich men (and without a doubt, women, cause hey guess what? Women can be pedophiles too. Gasp!), likely in politics and finance, to fuck off to shithole countries like Thailand and the Phillipines, where they can get away with diddling children. It is a lot more prevalent than we are comfortable to admit to, but it's one of those things that sort of takes the back seat to what I call "non-issues" such as identity politics, "invasion day" and the like. What we should be concerned about is those in high places who work so hard to cover it up and grant rights to them when they gave up their rights the moment they took away a child's through defilement.
I agree with all of that. But I would like to make the obvious fact that female paedophilia is generally not considered anywhere near as bad as male paedophilia. Although, sometimes, the media will publish fire and brimstone articles denouncing a female paedophile and pretending that it is. As a matter of fact, many men openly approve of it, even the "victims." In George Crile's book "Charlie Wilson's War", the author recounted the story of a US Secret agent who in his early teens had matured into a highly intelligent, physically strong, handsome, and very healthy looking young boy. The 15 year old had subsequently engaged in an ongoing sexual relationship with his best buddy's mother. The agent's opinion of his "victimisation" was, "If that's paedophilia, then I thoroughly recommend it to every 15 year old boy."

The movie industry is well aware of the audience pulling power of stories involving sexual relationships between boys and mature women. There have been a string of movies, usually about attractive teachers having sexual relationships with boy students. Even Kate Blanchett acted as the "villain" in such a movie. In the USA in real life, there have been a string of convictions involving very attractive female teachers having sexual relationships with young male students. While the media stories about these women are full of self righteous indignation and utter condemnation, I think most men would think about the "victims", "You lucky little bastard."
The Reboot wrote

I honestly believe that practising intolerance and issuing out harsher penalties would be more effective than pandering to their "fetish". By doing that it sends a message that it is too dangerous to be a pedophile. One may argue that it will just be covered up or hidden more, but guess what? It's like that now, anyway. At least if they are caught, they can be shot rather than resources such as food in prison, "reform" and "anti libido medication" being wasted on the pieces of shit. If that makes me a "fascist", then so be it -- this scenario is a lot different than say, drawing a satirical picture of Serena Williams that a bunch of pussies think is "offensive".
But that "solution" does not take into account that the penalties for paedophilia are already extremely severe, especially in the USA. Not only that, those sent to prison are usually very roughly handled by inmates. In a book I read about Goulbourne jail, it recounts the arrival of paedophile actor Robert Hughes from the "Hey Dad!" television sitcom. Within seconds of entering the prison grounds, he was pelted with bags of excrement and urine, and had death threats levelled at him by prisoners who looked very capable of carrying out those threats. Being convicted of being a paedophile is one of the worst things you can imagine. Men who have these tendencies, and there may be a lot of them, would probably consider the a much safer alternative like a sex doll, to procuring and using the real thing, to be a godsend. (if that is the right metaphor)
The Reboot wrote

For instance, for argument's sake: in my late teens it was still pretty unacceptable for a person to have sexual inclinations towards the same sex. Because of this, I was frightened to be "open" about my attraction to other females. Of course, like most other human beings, I have "needs". You know how I "dealt" with said "needs"? Self-pleasure. Gross, I know. Immoral to some, I know. But hey, I didn't go out and "rape" or "defile" something that wasn't mine to do so. I only ever have sexual relations with consenting adults too, despite many in the "far-right" camp equating it to be the same thing.
But isn't a rubber doll simply a more realistic version of sex with less need for fantasising during masturbation? Especially so, if these dolls are so realistic and even express pleasure during the act? And especially so, when considering the difficulties in obtaining a real child sex partner, and the appalling consequences that would eventuate if caught?
The Reboot wrote

The point is, if you are that sexually depraved that pleasuring oneself and letting your "depravity" out isn't going to do the trick, than neither will a lifelike sex doll.
Not for females, because I don't even know if sex dolls for females even exist. ( I have not been studying this subject) But for males, that concept is very debatable. I would opine, that for most males who have "needs" to have sex with a minor, using a realistic sex doll that even expresses pleasure is infinitely less risky than trying to procure the real thing, and suffering the very unpleasant consequences if caught. The fact that so many children are abducted, raped, and murdered tends to indicate that men who need to have sex with children or minors are very aware of the consequences should they get caught, and murdering their victims to shut them up is the usual practice. In addition, there may be males with strong sexual attractions towards children who are themselves deeply ashamed of their own feelings, and would never approach a child for sex. Once again, a lifelike sex doll which expresses pleasure would be the perfect victimless solution to the man's problems.
The Reboot wrote

The "likeness" to real life will only drive the obsession further. It's like a marijuana addict who wants to "explore" what else is out there, so they try LSD, magic mushrooms and then they may dabble into something harder, like heroin or meth. That never ended well with anybody.
I agree that some people have trouble with self control and no matter what the vice. They can not stop themselves becoming more and more involved until it overwhelms them. A woman I once asked to marry me is now a brain damaged drug addict. But most people do have self control, and that includes men (and women) who are sexually attracted to children. It does not mean that every or even most paedophiles who may enjoy heightened and more realistic sexual pleasure from a sex doll will automatically go onto openly molesting children. Doing so is a very dangerous thing to do, fraught with very severe penalties, and an ongoing life of public humiliation and social ostracism. That may even include the shunning by one's own family. A sex doll is a lot less risky in terms of discovery, or in attempting to procure a real child sex partner.
The Reboot wrote

Look, I may be a fascist but I will condemn a pedophile whether they act on it or not. People like that need to be eradicated from the earth. If they can stay celibate and restrict themselves to their "imagination", good on them. But still, we shouldn't be encouraging it and those who are selling child-like sex dolls and capitalizing on the "fetish" are just as bad as pedophiles. It's sick, plain and simple.
You may need to eradicate a lot of males and females from this earth. And I am surprised that you condemn all people who have deviant tendencies, whether they act on them or not, when you have informed us about your own sexuality, which probably half the population of Australia still considers deviant. In our Christian culture, temptation is not a sin. Every one of us has fantasised about murdering or beating the ever lovin' shit some bastard we hate, but it is only a crime if you act on your fantasies.

You could say that male paedophiles who do target and molest children do deserve it, but the majority of men might disagree with you about female paedophiles. Because although the Sisterhood can not accept it, male and female attitudes to sexuality are different. While a male teacher bonking his 15 year old female student would be regarded by parents and grandparents as utterly evil, a 15 year old male "victim" of a female teacher would have something to brag about with his mates.

Even female "victims" might not consider themselves victimised. Former Prime Minister Bob Hawke's second wife, Blanche d'Apulget wrote a biography of her own life where she bragged about getting regularly bonked as a 14 year old schoolgirl by an (unnamed) respected judge, in the judge's own chambers, while still in her Dover Heights, private girl's school uniform.
The Reboot wrote

Alas, thank you for a good topic and thank you for an intellectually stimulating debate void of red herrings and sneery one-liners
And I thank you too.

User avatar
brian ross
Posts: 6059
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 6:26 pm

Re: Child sex dolls.

Post by brian ross » Mon Jan 27, 2020 3:34 pm

What rates do people consider likely in the Christian Clergy (we have to be fair, it wasn't only Catholic Clergy investigated in the Royal Commission)? 1%? 5%? 10%? 20%? 30%? 50%?

Those that think it was only the Catholics who were likely to engage in Paedophilia was mistaken. I suspect most of you also believe all Catholic clergy are culprits? Wrong. Most estimates put it at 30%, at the most. Catholics are starting to be treated like Jews or Muslims it seems. Tsk, tsk. :roll
Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. - Eric Blair

User avatar
The Reboot
Posts: 1500
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2019 6:05 pm

Re: Child sex dolls.

Post by The Reboot » Mon Jan 27, 2020 4:22 pm

Bogan wrote:
Mon Jan 27, 2020 7:19 am
The Reboot wrote

Interesting. I had come to the conclusion that individuals within the catholic church, who had such desires, had simply used the church as a "costume". I mean, upon face value people will naturally think, "Oh, this guy goes to church. He helps out at the soup kitchens and I confess my sins to him, he must be a good and trustworthy bloke." And judging by this "face value" impression we have, we don't think twice that he's actually a filthy child molesting scumbag. In fact, it's a well known documented tactic of the psychopath to pretend to be something he isn't to avoid detection. I don't know if you know much about the Claremont Serial Killer case, the most expensive investigation in WA police history. The guy that's only recently been caught was involved in a lot of "community" work, particularly with sports teams. I would even wager that many crooked politicians engage in this false virtue signalling type behaviour, just to score "brownie points". Some may do it to win elections and gain power. Others use it to kill in cold blood or molest children. I have come to this conclusion by observing the fact that within religion, there are a lot of dark individuals whose actions go undetected because a lot of money and effort goes into covering it up and that's across most, if not all faiths.
Your analysis that some obsessed paedophiles go to the trouble to join groups who are considered above reproach, especially those dealing with children, has merit. But in the case of the high rates of paedophilia within the Catholic Church, I doubt if most men with such tendencies would join such a strict and disciplined organisation specifically to gain access to children. They could more easily become boy scout leaders or begin a career in child minding than join a restrictive organisation like the Catholic church.

The problems of the church involve the recruitment of young men with probably no sexual experience at all, and then forcing them to maintain their virginity over their entire lives. Such a discipline is completely unnatural. Unable to form sexual relationships with women, they instead find that they can at times have real authority and control over children. In such a case, it is almost inevitable that they will become sexually attracted to children, even though they may not have been sexually attracted to children previously.

Power and control is a real factor in sexuality. In his book about the Gulf War, General Norman Schwatzkopf wrote that when he first got his general's stars, he was taken to a room by a senior officer and told in no uncertain terms the quickest way to lose them. The US Army recognised that whenever a man received general's stars, he suddenly considered himself more sexually attractive to women. And the US Army had a serious problem with newly minted generals chasing every female subordinate under his command around the office.

The next factor in the high rates of paedophilia within the Catholic Church, is that when the conditions to create a high rate of paedophilia occur within a closed society, then it can eventually be considered normal among the members of that closed society. As leadership positions become available, it is inevitable that high ranking members of the Catholic Church will be paedophiles themselves, and they will be protective of their younger or lower ranked members who think like they do.

As for the Claremont Serial Killer case, what I remember is that the WA police had a suspect that they were keeping under very close, 24 hour surveillance. Unable to pin him for the prior murders, all they could do was watch him and be there when he struck again. This surveillance was blown when the story leaked to the media, who publicised the surveillance, and the suspect learned that the police were watching him. Nice one, guys.
The Reboot wrote

Yep. This is why we have child sex rings, and why child pornography is prevalent. It is also common for rich men (and without a doubt, women, cause hey guess what? Women can be pedophiles too. Gasp!), likely in politics and finance, to fuck off to shithole countries like Thailand and the Phillipines, where they can get away with diddling children. It is a lot more prevalent than we are comfortable to admit to, but it's one of those things that sort of takes the back seat to what I call "non-issues" such as identity politics, "invasion day" and the like. What we should be concerned about is those in high places who work so hard to cover it up and grant rights to them when they gave up their rights the moment they took away a child's through defilement.
I agree with all of that. But I would like to make the obvious fact that female paedophilia is generally not considered anywhere near as bad as male paedophilia. Although, sometimes, the media will publish fire and brimstone articles denouncing a female paedophile and pretending that it is. As a matter of fact, many men openly approve of it, even the "victims." In George Crile's book "Charlie Wilson's War", the author recounted the story of a US Secret agent who in his early teens had matured into a highly intelligent, physically strong, handsome, and very healthy looking young boy. The 15 year old had subsequently engaged in an ongoing sexual relationship with his best buddy's mother. The agent's opinion of his "victimisation" was, "If that's paedophilia, then I thoroughly recommend it to every 15 year old boy."

The movie industry is well aware of the audience pulling power of stories involving sexual relationships between boys and mature women. There have been a string of movies, usually about attractive teachers having sexual relationships with boy students. Even Kate Blanchett acted as the "villain" in such a movie. In the USA in real life, there have been a string of convictions involving very attractive female teachers having sexual relationships with young male students. While the media stories about these women are full of self righteous indignation and utter condemnation, I think most men would think about the "victims", "You lucky little bastard."
The Reboot wrote

I honestly believe that practising intolerance and issuing out harsher penalties would be more effective than pandering to their "fetish". By doing that it sends a message that it is too dangerous to be a pedophile. One may argue that it will just be covered up or hidden more, but guess what? It's like that now, anyway. At least if they are caught, they can be shot rather than resources such as food in prison, "reform" and "anti libido medication" being wasted on the pieces of shit. If that makes me a "fascist", then so be it -- this scenario is a lot different than say, drawing a satirical picture of Serena Williams that a bunch of pussies think is "offensive".
But that "solution" does not take into account that the penalties for paedophilia are already extremely severe, especially in the USA. Not only that, those sent to prison are usually very roughly handled by inmates. In a book I read about Goulbourne jail, it recounts the arrival of paedophile actor Robert Hughes from the "Hey Dad!" television sitcom. Within seconds of entering the prison grounds, he was pelted with bags of excrement and urine, and had death threats levelled at him by prisoners who looked very capable of carrying out those threats. Being convicted of being a paedophile is one of the worst things you can imagine. Men who have these tendencies, and there may be a lot of them, would probably consider the a much safer alternative like a sex doll, to procuring and using the real thing, to be a godsend. (if that is the right metaphor)
The Reboot wrote

For instance, for argument's sake: in my late teens it was still pretty unacceptable for a person to have sexual inclinations towards the same sex. Because of this, I was frightened to be "open" about my attraction to other females. Of course, like most other human beings, I have "needs". You know how I "dealt" with said "needs"? Self-pleasure. Gross, I know. Immoral to some, I know. But hey, I didn't go out and "rape" or "defile" something that wasn't mine to do so. I only ever have sexual relations with consenting adults too, despite many in the "far-right" camp equating it to be the same thing.
But isn't a rubber doll simply a more realistic version of sex with less need for fantasising during masturbation? Especially so, if these dolls are so realistic and even express pleasure during the act? And especially so, when considering the difficulties in obtaining a real child sex partner, and the appalling consequences that would eventuate if caught?
The Reboot wrote

The point is, if you are that sexually depraved that pleasuring oneself and letting your "depravity" out isn't going to do the trick, than neither will a lifelike sex doll.
Not for females, because I don't even know if sex dolls for females even exist. ( I have not been studying this subject) But for males, that concept is very debatable. I would opine, that for most males who have "needs" to have sex with a minor, using a realistic sex doll that even expresses pleasure is infinitely less risky than trying to procure the real thing, and suffering the very unpleasant consequences if caught. The fact that so many children are abducted, raped, and murdered tends to indicate that men who need to have sex with children or minors are very aware of the consequences should they get caught, and murdering their victims to shut them up is the usual practice. In addition, there may be males with strong sexual attractions towards children who are themselves deeply ashamed of their own feelings, and would never approach a child for sex. Once again, a lifelike sex doll which expresses pleasure would be the perfect victimless solution to the man's problems.
The Reboot wrote

The "likeness" to real life will only drive the obsession further. It's like a marijuana addict who wants to "explore" what else is out there, so they try LSD, magic mushrooms and then they may dabble into something harder, like heroin or meth. That never ended well with anybody.
I agree that some people have trouble with self control and no matter what the vice. They can not stop themselves becoming more and more involved until it overwhelms them. A woman I once asked to marry me is now a brain damaged drug addict. But most people do have self control, and that includes men (and women) who are sexually attracted to children. It does not mean that every or even most paedophiles who may enjoy heightened and more realistic sexual pleasure from a sex doll will automatically go onto openly molesting children. Doing so is a very dangerous thing to do, fraught with very severe penalties, and an ongoing life of public humiliation and social ostracism. That may even include the shunning by one's own family. A sex doll is a lot less risky in terms of discovery, or in attempting to procure a real child sex partner.
The Reboot wrote

Look, I may be a fascist but I will condemn a pedophile whether they act on it or not. People like that need to be eradicated from the earth. If they can stay celibate and restrict themselves to their "imagination", good on them. But still, we shouldn't be encouraging it and those who are selling child-like sex dolls and capitalizing on the "fetish" are just as bad as pedophiles. It's sick, plain and simple.
You may need to eradicate a lot of males and females from this earth. And I am surprised that you condemn all people who have deviant tendencies, whether they act on them or not, when you have informed us about your own sexuality, which probably half the population of Australia still considers deviant. In our Christian culture, temptation is not a sin. Every one of us has fantasised about murdering or beating the ever lovin' shit some bastard we hate, but it is only a crime if you act on your fantasies.

You could say that male paedophiles who do target and molest children do deserve it, but the majority of men might disagree with you about female paedophiles. Because although the Sisterhood can not accept it, male and female attitudes to sexuality are different. While a male teacher bonking his 15 year old female student would be regarded by parents and grandparents as utterly evil, a 15 year old male "victim" of a female teacher would have something to brag about with his mates.

Even female "victims" might not consider themselves victimised. Former Prime Minister Bob Hawke's second wife, Blanche d'Apulget wrote a biography of her own life where she bragged about getting regularly bonked as a 14 year old schoolgirl by an (unnamed) respected judge, in the judge's own chambers, while still in her Dover Heights, private girl's school uniform.
The Reboot wrote

Alas, thank you for a good topic and thank you for an intellectually stimulating debate void of red herrings and sneery one-liners
And I thank you too.
Good arguments here. I will need some time to think and respond, as I've just woken up at 1pm western time after a very boozy "Invasion Day". :thumb

User avatar
The Reboot
Posts: 1500
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2019 6:05 pm

Re: Child sex dolls.

Post by The Reboot » Mon Jan 27, 2020 4:28 pm

brian ross wrote:
Mon Jan 27, 2020 3:34 pm
What rates do people consider likely in the Christian Clergy (we have to be fair, it wasn't only Catholic Clergy investigated in the Royal Commission)? 1%? 5%? 10%? 20%? 30%? 50%?

Those that think it was only the Catholics who were likely to engage in Paedophilia was mistaken. I suspect most of you also believe all Catholic clergy are culprits? Wrong. Most estimates put it at 30%, at the most. Catholics are starting to be treated like Jews or Muslims it seems. Tsk, tsk. :roll
Brian, what does this have to do with the discussion? You really have trouble comprehending that if somebody mentions "blacks", "Muzzos" or "catholics" it doesn't equate to a "phobia" of all people within these groups. If you don't have anything of value to contribute, I suggest you piss off back to the "playground" where you belong. This topic has nothing to do with the "percentage" of people within the catholic church who are pedophiles, which is a laughable argument when it's covered up and nobody can truly pinpoint the "percentage" without the correct information.

Another example of baiting, trolling and stifling a good discussion, from the mascot of morality, the self-proclaimed "voice of reason". It must have been really hard for you to play at fake niceties these past couple of days. I could see you breaking from the strain. :lol: :lol:

Oh... I almost forgot.

Tsk tsk! :roll: :roll:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests