September 17, 2008

Oprah's show on child predators.

I caught 5 minutes of this and had to turn it off.  I was physically ill when she showed the instruction booklet on how to take proper porn pictures of babies 0+, 3-6 months old, 12 months, 18 months in age.  Someone made an instruction booklet for getting good pictures - by "good" I mean pictures that people  will pay money to buy/see.  HOW DISGUSTING.  That someone would do this to a child is so sickening.  I can only hope there is a special place in hell for this type of person.  She showed some sick examples of what is out there (with the proper blurring, thank god or I would have simply died).  I cannot imagine these poor children.

Seriously, if I caught someone doing that to a child, any child, I would have to kill them.

The point of Oprah's show was to raise awareness ( I am aware now, although I cannot stomach watching the rest of the show ) and to gain support for a new law designed to help protect our children.  Please follow the links to get to your Senator's contact pages and let them know you support the bill.

For children.  For your children.  For your future grandchildren.


enjanerd said...

Wow. I understand why Oprah would have a show on this, but I'm a little shocked, just from your description, of how graphic it was.

Now, just as an intellectual exercise, I'd like to know what you think about virtual porn. All digital, no actual kids involved. If this could prevent people from seeking out actual children and/or fulfill whatever desires they have to see real pictures, would you allow it?

I've heard different arguments for this and I still don't know where I stand. And it's kind of icky to think about, so I never really consider it for long.

VHMPrincess said...

I could NOT BELIEVE how graphic the show was ( the pictures were heartbreaking, even though blurred ) - descriptions of objects and lube, etc. I think she was trying to shock everyone into action, and for me, totally worked. The thought that someone could do things like that to a sweet 6 MONTH OLD and that other people would WANT to look at the pictures totally disgusts me and I want those people OFF THE STREETS. Now that my kids are involved in school and have friends, they are around other adults when I am not around sometimes and the idea that one of them could be one of these sickos is TERRIFYING.

As for virtual porn, I would have to say, YES, I'd have a problem with it - I would be afraid that it would be desensitizing - esp. w/the quality of today's graphics the children would look TOTALLY real and feeding addictions like these cannot be a good thing in any way. And once people are USED to seeing images like that, after a time, I don't think they'd think twice about the difference between real and not real. Normally, I wouldn't care, but on the issue of children and things that can scar them so terribly deeply that they may never recover (not to mention physically harm them) I don't think there is any waffle room allowed. None. If you saw some of those images of sweet children, your heart would shatter with pain for them. Thinking, that out there, there is a poor sweet baby girl and someone is doing those things to her or hurting her like that, it is so heartbreaking I can't stand it.

enjanerd said...

I completely agree that this is one of those cases where one strike is one too many, especially for the child involved.

But actually implementing those punishments isn't as clear cut. These people are still out there and it's unlikely they can all be caught/rehabilitated/whatever. So, if virtual pictures could keep them away from your kids, isn't it worth considering?

I would also guess that most pedophiles know what they are doing is wrong, but have some kind of imbalance that they are unable to overcome. If they had a legal outlet, that could allow them to fulfill their addiction -- possibly even get help -- it seems reasonable. Maybe a bit optimistic though.

Then... there's the challenge of regulating yet another thing. If it looks real, how do you prove that it's not? And if there are people who wouldn't have looked at it before, but it's easily accessible, would it, like you suggested, start desensitizing people?

Like I said... I still don't know what I think about this.

VHMPrincess said...

Here is where our schools of thought differ, I think...

While I agree that pedophiles do have some sort of chemical imbalance that makes them WANT to see stuff like that, they CHOOSE to actually get their hands on the materials. Yes, it would be hard, but they could not look if they really wanted to. Much like people can overcome alcohol/drug addictions if they really want to, and those that don't want to as much won't.

I also don't think giving them virtual pictures would keep them away from children, I think it would make it easier in their mind to justify/blur the lines between real and unreal, right and wrong and they'd end up with the real pictures and/or actually seeking out children.

It's a tough issue and I don't think there is one right answer - and it might take trying several different things before we find something that works, but what we are doing now isn't working, so it's worth at least trying some other option.

But I'm glad Oprah has got people talking about it, aware of the issue and at least thinking about what we can/should do to try and protect these poor children.

enjanerd said...

That's a very good point about where our opinions differ. I definitely see the relationship to drugs/alcohol addictions. I can also see this being analogous to video games/violence -- where people use it as an outlet, but don't actually intend to go out and kill people.

But our conclusions are the same: what's being done now isn't working. And yes, kudos to Oprah for facilitating the discussion. :)