RIP and key holders who are not in the country

[Ian G Batten]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format...

------------=_953900279-20937-0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Md5: p83JDQUa3wmFAZrvYQMnNw==

> I think the reason people were sniggering when Paedophilia was mentioned =
(5
> times by my count) was that  The Minister thought it would have the effect
> of not having a counter because of the heinousness of the crime. What I

I must confess, as the parent of two small daughters, that I really
don't see why paedophilia (in the sense being used here) is such a
uniquely heinous offence that it is one of the three horsemen of the
epocalypse.  The act of making photographs of children in sexual
contexts is, in most cases, abusive and a crime in itself, although as
is often pointed out, many images which have a perfectly reasonable
existence are also fetishistic to the fetishist.  If people wish to
masturbate over images that are already in existence, I am unclear as to
how prosecuting them will help any single child, and, unless
``Thoughtcrime'' is being suggested, I really can't see how fantasising
about illegal acts can be seen to be an offence.  And if the logic is
that any image that appeals to paedophiles is itself child pornography,
no one will be able to photograph their children.=20

The coupling of child pornography (distasteful to most, and often
associated with child abuse in its production) with child abuse seems to
me to be rather intellectually lazy: the crime is in abuse committed to
produce the image, and we don't in other contexts criminalise film of
real or synthetic crime: hell, Driller Killer will be on Channel Four in
a few weeks time.

=46rom parents' point of view, the rate of child sexual assault by
strangers is in the noise floor: if you, statistically, wish to protect
your children against child abuse, leaving your husband/boyfriend is,
sadly, your best bet, closely followed by not sending the child to any
form of school or childcare.  The best way of avoiding your child being
involved in child pornography is to stop taking pictures yourself, and
so on.  Family, friends of family and family of friends are massively
the people that do the damage.  The idea that dangerous lunatics haunt
the Internet, preying on defenceless children, is akin to the mythical
``Satanic Abuse'' --- by marking the perpetrators as being outsiders, we
avoid the pain of accepting that the abuse comes from society in
general.

> In the end who was really at fault over the paedophilia comments, the
> sniggerers or those that seek to exploit the truly diabolical nature of t=
he
> crime for their own purposes and advantage?=20

If the crime you're talking about is actual, genuine, real child abuse,
then the issue is one for conventional policeing and social workers.  Do
we really want a JET report in five years time, but with the Internet as
the Locus for wasting resourced that might otherwise have protected
children?

ian

------------=_953900279-20937-0
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: PGP Information

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
MessageID: tRUQjYHnSbxEiYKTOZpmdoVrJYu7usFC

iQB1AwUBONtc98oy0yij3IvtAQEzRAL/budHL5s/IJj/5Z0IOSyAq9e33Cw9YkFb
n+OD19znksKV+Idt8FMttai3uYbvH3DEC7vJiRjHcWQHl4OGUT94iGApDw9hf7QE
JAeMOhW/DyLOn4g9idrQw8uTDUss1jnm
=pPt/
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
------------=_953900279-20937-0--