I have held off writing this entry for a long time, because I was worried about the response I might get. So, I’ll start by pointing out what I hope should be obvious anyway: I do not support or seek to protect paedophiles. Anyone who abuses children deserves punishment.
The issue at hand is new legislation aimed at making “virtual” child pornography illegal. The main type they seem to be targeting is photos or videos modified to look like drawings or cartoons. Kind of like effect used in A Scanner Darkly, where a person or a computer traces over a photo to make a realistic looking drawing. Other kinds include things like photoshopping a child’s head onto a suggestive image of an adult’s body, or simple drawings created entirely by hand or on a computer (e.g. CG like the Baeowulf film).
There was a surprisingly level headed discussion of the issue on Slashdot.
While naturally most people find these kinds of images distasteful, I think making them illegal is a bad idea. The main issue is freedom of expression, although I would also like to mention the point that as there has been very little study of paedophile behaviour it is not at all clear that banning such things will protect children. In fact, it’s possible that by denying these people this outlet, they might be more likely to pray on actual children. It’s not a “good” situation by any means, but if the goal is to protect children… And the reality is, no-one knows one way or the other. If the government wants to do something, they should support academic studies. Know your enemy and all that.
Anyway, the freedom issue. The problem here is that, at least in the case of pure drawings (or written stories for that matter), no actual human being has been harmed. Punishing someone for producing or having such things amounts to punishment for thought crime, or perhaps pre-crime if you take the view that it’s a preventative measure.
The idea that seeing something can cause a person to want to do it is quite outdated too. It was popular in the 60s, but has been largely debunked. Every adult in the UK sees violent images, crimes being committed and anti-social behaviour every day on the TV, but most don’t go out and copy it. While it’s true that people who are considering doing those sorts of things do sometimes seek them out, correlation is not causation.
Ultimately, in any society with freedom of speech and expression, you have to tolerate things you don’t like. That’s the basic principal of the thing. While most people dislike this kind of stuff, since no actual harm is being done to anyone banning it can only be seen as a form of censorship.
The government argues that paedophiles may be using these kinds of images as loophole in the law. However, you have to question the basic assumption that paedophiles are automatically criminals. Don’t get me wrong, of course child abuse should be a crime, but is merely thinking about child abuse a crime? It can only be one if you believe in thought crime.