Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Porno kids don't realise anything is wrong [Canadian report]

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Cub Reporter

unread,
Nov 19, 2009, 6:10:56 AM11/19/09
to
Wider education needed on kid porn: protection group
By Chris Kitching

Winnipeg Sun, Canada: 19 November 2009
http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/11/19/11806101-sun.html
[ http://tinyurl.com/ykjcaom ]

A Winnipeg-based group's study into the sickening world of child
sexual abuse and pornography revealed most victims are pre-pubescent
children under 12 who don't understand the disgusting acts against
them are wrong.

This is one reason why the Canadian Centre for Child Protection is
demanding wider education for young kids and adults, so they can
recognize and report inappropriate behaviour, interrupt or prevent
sexual abuse, and be comfortable disclosing abuse to a family member,
friend or authority.

"Children are being sexually abused before the images hit the
Internet, what we'd like to see is citizens playing a larger role in
protecting children and stopping the abuse before the images hit the
Internet," said Signy Arnason, director of Cybertip.ca, which is owned
and operated by the CCCP.

Released yesterday, the report examined a variety of issues and
suggests a number of ways to prevent abuse and catch offenders in
what's become a worldwide problem. It's the first in a series of
studies.

In terms of education, special attention must be paid to kids under
12, the report states.

The report is based on the analysis of thousands of websites and
images reported to Cybertip.ca between September 2002 and March 2009.

More than 82% of images depicted very young, pre-pubescent children
under 12. Most were female. Most concerning was the rate of extreme
and severe abuse, some involving violence, as more than 35% showed
serious sexual assaults, the report stated.

This challenges the misconception most material is innocent or
harmless nude photos, the report stated.

Most kids are abused by someone they know, Arnason said.

The report delved into the structure of money-making child-porn
websites, which are part of a multi-billion dollar business, and how
operators protect their identities to elude capture. These are among
the challenges police and organizations such as CCCP face.

To view the report, titled Child Sexual Abuse Images: An analysis of
websites by Cybertip.ca, go online to protectchildren.ca.

[ http://www.cybertip.ca/app/en/research - click "Download PDF of
Research Report"]

...

unread,
Nov 19, 2009, 7:29:22 AM11/19/09
to
> The report delved into the structure of money-making child-porn
> websites, which are part of a multi-billion dollar business...

_____________________________________

Yep, we've all heard that one before, many times. It's a favourite of
the tabloids, in particular, and of especially over-enthusiastic
coppers given to verbal flights of fancy.

The truth is - and this comes from the IWF - that there is little to
no 'commercial' CP at all, anywhere in the world. What little there is
originates in eastern Europe or the Far East. The VAST MAJORITY of
what CP remains (not much) is freely traded and exchanged via P2P
networks. No money changes hands. Again, this comes from IWF and from
CEOP's own comments. It's one reason why CEOP in particular has
refocused it's efforts on P2P filesharing, social networks, etc. The
'old model' of online CP is dead and buried and the experts know it.

Sadly idiot journalists and the occassional irresponsible politician
or policeman will repeat the myth of commercial CP as a'$multimillion
industry'. This is simply not true. There is no evidence - anywhere -
to suggest it ever was in the first instance.

Nigel Oldfield

unread,
Nov 19, 2009, 10:53:02 AM11/19/09
to
"who don't understand the disgusting acts against them are wrong."

So, the extrapolation must be?

WM

Nigel Oldfield

unread,
Nov 19, 2009, 11:13:13 AM11/19/09
to

> [http://www.cybertip.ca/app/en/research- click "Download PDF of
> Research Report"]

Actually, it is a very thorough report, based on their database since
2002.

Teeming with valued judgements, false claims and emotive terminology,
of course, but it will be very useful in the future.

WM

Special Care

unread,
Nov 19, 2009, 2:36:29 PM11/19/09
to
Did any of us know that the INTENSE SEXUAL PLEASURE Mummy gave us in
our anuses was "wrong" until our stupid warmongering mothers went into
reverse, ENDING the sexual relationship between mother and baby, and
started bombarding us with the toxic shame?
I certainly didn't know that pleasure is wrong.
I still don't know that pleasure is wrong.
I LOVED going to the toilet with Mummy and feeling the nice feelings
in my anus, followed by her loving touch as she caressed my anus for
me.
Didn't know it was wrong till the toxic shame hit, which ended the
Garden of Eden that is the early mother-infant relationship because
the purpose of motherhood in an INVERTED civilisation such as yours is
to generate HATE-CRAZED SOLDIERS TO DO OUR KILLING FOR US.

I've done my best to help you.

I didn't know pleasure is bad.

I still don't know it.

I am not INVERTED.

You are.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Baby is not a Sack of Potatoes, Mrs !
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dddp6bt4_121hsrds9ww

Shaking the Baby
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dddp6bt4_21gvfsbjdd

Careless Hands
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dddp6bt4_187gpmt3sjh

Practical Reparenting - One Step at a Time
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dddp6bt4_144hq6nhqgd

The Universal Fear of Being Known
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dddp6bt4_188hggbt5f8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-xRRZUeC9A&feature=related
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-----
Am Am/G Am6 Fmaj7
I look at you all see the love there that's sleeping
Am G D E
While my guitar gently weeps
Am Am/G Am6 Fmaj7
I look at the Ball and I see it needs sweeping
Am G C E
Still my guitar gently weeps
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­----
A Amaj7 F#m A Bm E
I don't know why nobody told you how to unfold your love
A Amaj7 F#m A
I don't know how someone controlled you
Bm E
They bought and sold you
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-----
Am Am/G Am6 Fmaj7
I look at the world and I notice it's turning
Am G D E
While my guitar gently weeps
Am Am/G Am6 Fmaj7
With every mistake we must surely be learning
Am G C E
Still my guitar gently weeps
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-----
A Amaj7 F#m A
I don't know how you were diverted
Bm E
You were perverted too
A Amaj7 F#m A
I don't know how you were inverted
Bm E
No one alerted you
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-----
Am Am/G Am6 Fmaj7
I look from the wings at the play you are staging
Am G D E
While my guitar gently weeps
Am Am/G Am6 Fmaj7
As I'm sitting here doing nothing but aging
Am G C E
Still my guitar gently weeps
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-xRRZUeC9A&feature=related
=================================================
"PLEASURE IS ABUSE"
http://fr.youporn.com/watch/347007/best-blow/

Special Care

unread,
Nov 21, 2009, 2:02:09 AM11/21/09
to
For the most part, it would be impossible for kids to know that
pleasure is abuse.

Oxana Malaya shows the intensity of our impulse to IMITATE and REPEAT
early formative experiences.
So in every child there is - or at least was until it was shamed and
crushed - an intense impulse and need to imitate and repeat the bodily
pleasures / physical expressions of love of the early mother-infant
relationship, predominantly breastfeeding, anal eroticism, shared
baths and naked skin-on-skin hugging.
As the child gains movement and vocabulary, s/he is "informed" that
pleasure as an expression of love has suddenly and mysteriously been
reclassified as abuse.
The ending of pleasure makes no sense to anyone, so the only way to
impose it is not by explaining it, and then facing the child's awkward
questions, but to impose it using toxic shame, meaning shame with no
basis in ethics/logic, imposed to avoid discussion.

This INVERSION in the later stage of the mother-infant relationship is
a major root of your Orwellian-Stalinist INVERTED civilisation.

That's also why Apollonius-Jesus said:
"become as little children..." because they meant largely that infants
see the world as it really is and do not yet "know" that pleasure is
abuse.

And that is why Bernardo Bertolucci stated:
"children are tortured until they tell their first lie,"
the lie that your children are forced to tell being summed up as
"pleasure is abuse."

Then every few weeks we'll have yet another letter or article from
some stupid, INVERTED old woman urging young mothers to breastfeed
their babies and to "enjoy it while you can; it will be over all too
soon."
Those very words were published recently...... and allowed to pass
unchallenged.
So, we all enjoy something, and yet it will soon be over. Why?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Collective Mental Illness" / latest addition, very valuable text:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.uk.law/msg/5b3a7564845b3cc3

Cork Soaker

unread,
Dec 10, 2009, 2:19:47 PM12/10/09
to
Cub Reporter wrote:
> Wider education needed on kid porn: protection group
> By Chris Kitching
>
> Winnipeg Sun, Canada: 19 November 2009
> http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/11/19/11806101-sun.html
> [ http://tinyurl.com/ykjcaom ]
>
> A Winnipeg-based group's study into the sickening world of child
> sexual abuse and pornography revealed most victims are pre-pubescent
> children under 12 who don't understand the disgusting acts against
> them are wrong.

Then what the fuck makes you think it is?

Lee

unread,
Dec 12, 2009, 2:18:34 AM12/12/09
to

• centuries of philosophy
• the concept of consent
• the idea from the first point that young children are unable to consent
• almost all versions of morality/ethics (proscriptive (i.e christianity), subjective
(various), objective (various others), etc.)
• etc etc etc

--
Lee

Cynic

unread,
Dec 12, 2009, 12:12:23 PM12/12/09
to
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:18:34 +1100, Lee
<tard...@one.of.the.free.providers.com> wrote:

>>> A Winnipeg-based group's study into the sickening world of child
>>> sexual abuse and pornography revealed most victims are pre-pubescent
>>> children under 12 who don't understand the disgusting acts against
>>> them are wrong.

>> Then what the fuck makes you think it is?

>� centuries of philosophy

The foundation of philosophy grew in a time and place where homosexual
pederasty was not only legally and socially acceptable, it was
considered to be noble.

>� the concept of consent

The children in question *do* consent - that's the thrust of the
article.

>� the idea from the first point that young children are unable to consent

That is a legal construct rather than a normally applied social
principle. Children clearly do consent or object to various
activities routinely. In fact, in most activities it is socially
acceptable for adults to force children to do things *against* their
obvious non-consent.

>� almost all versions of morality/ethics (proscriptive (i.e christianity)

Is it specifically excluded in the Bible? At what age did girls in
biblical times routinely lose their virginity? I put it to you that
it is in fact a fairly modern addition to our moral outlook rather
than being something inherant that has been a taboo since ancient
times.

>, subjective
> (various), objective (various others), etc.)
>� etc etc etc

Be specific.

There are indeed good reasons for adult/child sex to be outlawed in
our particular time and place, but you have not given any.

--
Cynic

Nigel Oldfield

unread,
Dec 12, 2009, 12:24:50 PM12/12/09
to
On Dec 12, 7:18 am, Lee <tardi...@one.of.the.free.providers.com>
wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 06:19:47 +1100, Cork Soaker <Thunderb...@intrepid.invalid> wrote:
> > Cub Reporter wrote:
> >> Wider education needed on kid porn: protection group
> >> By Chris Kitching
>
> >> Winnipeg Sun, Canada: 19 November 2009
> >>http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/11/19/11806101-sun.html
> >> [http://tinyurl.com/ykjcaom]
>
> >> A Winnipeg-based group's study into the sickening world of child
> >> sexual abuse and pornography revealed most victims are pre-pubescent
> >> children under 12 who don't understand the disgusting acts against
> >> them are wrong.
>
> > Then what the fuck makes you think it is?
>
> • centuries of philosophy

Really? Where?

> • the concept of consent
> • the idea from the first point that young children are unable to consent

... and yet they do (or do not), not that it matters, in law.

> • almost all versions of morality/ethics (proscriptive (i.e christianity), subjective
>   (various), objective (various others), etc.)

Really? Even if it mattered, Where does it say in any religious text
it is harmful or in even unacceptable to have sex with any minor?

> etc etc etc

??????

Really must try harder.

WM

Cork Soaker

unread,
Dec 14, 2009, 2:25:35 PM12/14/09
to
Lee wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 06:19:47 +1100, Cork Soaker
> <Thund...@intrepid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Cub Reporter wrote:
>>> Wider education needed on kid porn: protection group
>>> By Chris Kitching
>>>
>>> Winnipeg Sun, Canada: 19 November 2009
>>> http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/11/19/11806101-sun.html
>>> [ http://tinyurl.com/ykjcaom ]
>>>
>>> A Winnipeg-based group's study into the sickening world of child
>>> sexual abuse and pornography revealed most victims are pre-pubescent
>>> children under 12 who don't understand the disgusting acts against
>>> them are wrong.
>>
>> Then what the fuck makes you think it is?
>>
> • centuries of philosophy

Prove it.

> • the concept of consent

That's what the article is about, can you read?

> • the idea from the first point that young children are unable to consent

Based on what?

> • almost all versions of morality/ethics (proscriptive (i.e
> christianity), subjective

Christianity? For fuck sake!

> (various), objective (various others), etc.)
> • etc etc etc
>

You should have just said "blah blah blah". Oh no, you did.

0 new messages