Washington (CNN) — More than 50 members of a child pornography ring who engaged in what authorities describe as "horrific" and "unspeakable" crimes have been arrested for sexually exploiting children from 12 years old to as young as infants.

Video

Network That Preyed on Children Is Broken | NYT

Published: August 3, 2011

WASHINGTON — Federal investigators announced on Wednesday that they had dismantled a sophisticated global network of pedophiles who traded pornographic videos and images of children as young as infants over the Internet, using encryption and proxy servers to evade detection.

About 600 people around the world were members of the online bulletin board “Dreamboard” before it shut down this spring amid the investigation, officials said. The Justice Department announced that 72 people had been charged so far, including more than 50 already arrested in the United States and abroad.

The network specialized in graphic and often violent images of the sexual abuse of children under the age of 12, including infants. It created an incentive among its members to create new files by kicking them out of the network if they did not upload material at least once every 50 days, and by granting them greater access to its archives if they created their own child pornography, said Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer.

“Words cannot describe how horrific the enterprise’s alleged crimes were,” Mr. Breuer said. “Dreamboard was extreme even among online child abuse forums. So-called ‘super hard-core’ images — those depicting adults having violent sexual intercourse with ‘very young kids’ — were highly valued.” [...]

Finally.

• Real children (not adolescents), really young,
• real intercourse (not sexy posing).
• Real victimization (not voluntary sexting or voluntary joyful photo sessions)

Exactly what the unitiated person envisions when the world "child pornography" is used. And they actually encouraged production of more material through actually abusing children. And one section of the board was specifically about children in pain with tears. (level 10 on the Copine scale)

It is shocking that the feminist and religious anti child pornography crusaders devalue the suffering of truly abused children by conflating

1. such horrible true abuse of children with
2. adolescent sexting (self photos) and
3. adolescents in Leotards dancing provocatively (Knox vs. USA).

All theses 3 are called child porn. In cases 2 and 3, there is no child, no porn, but it is called "child porn". Thus , with such manipulative language the populace can be whipped up into a frenzy. It makes them believe that harmless adolescent erotica are violent depictions of child sex.

More Human Stupidity Analysis further below.

The investigation began in 2009, and officials said they were trying to identify the victims

Human-Stupidity Analysis

1. We are surprised we found out about this shocking case months after it turned public. Somehow, amidst all the child pornography witch hunt frenzy, this extreme case did not call an commensurate amount of attention
2. Finally, amongst all the victimless child pornography  [children photographing themselves masturbating, sexting adolescents, fully dressed 15 year old dancers (Knox vs. USA), manga drawings], finally real penetrative child sexual abuse. And members even encourage further actual abuse. Finally one true case where the worst expectations of the child pornography inquisitions became true. And we don’t hear much about it.
3. Those who really produce abusive child pornography deserve punishment for violently abusing pre-pubertal children. Enough laws always were in place for that, child pornography laws are not really needed. Though, we admit, in this case CP laws make prosecution easier.
4. We suspect that the worst CP, freshly produced penetrative sex with young prepubertal children in tears, is just a very small percentage. We also suspect that the lesser members did not have access to that. We suspect that the majority of the CP (child pornography) material found is just the garden variety of adolescents having normal age appropriate sex, joyful posing and more. We can not know, because this analysis is not provided.
5. Note that no financial initiative was given nor needed for the production of CP (child pornography).
6. The lesser members, who did not actively engage in child abuse, nor actively encouraged it, do they need 10 year to 200 year prison sentences? Remember Professor Milton Diamond proved, in peer reviewed academic papers, that freely accessable child pornography greatly reduced child sexual abuse in half a dozen countries. The mechanisms seems to be that the pedophiles watch pornographic material, masturbate and thus take the pressure off their sexual drive. They act out their phantasy with pornographic material instead of with real children.
7. Dr. Milton Diamond suggests to use artificially produced child pornography (drawings, photoshop, young looking adults, etc.). Human-Stupidity suggests to additionally use

1. Child porn that was produced without vicitms. Sexting photos, legally produced 15 year old porn from the 70ies in Holland,
2. Old child pornography could be grandfathered. Whatever has been produced before a certain cutoff date is legal, because no new vicitmization will happen (except for the voodoo theory of CP). This site must have a HUGE database of pretty much all CP in existence and could provide CP for decades to come without need to victimize new children to produce more CP.

‘

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said, "To give you an example of the scope of this forum, the capture and analysis of the forum revealed that the board may have been the vehicle for the distribution of up to 123 terabytes of child pornography, which is roughly equivalent to nearly 16,000 DVDs. … Additional media recovered from the targets arrested in the United States alone has been found to contain over one million images of child pornography."   CNN

Video

McDonald’s finds a way around San Francisco’s ‘Happy Meal ban’

San Francisco’s so-called "Happy Meal ban" goes into effect Thursday, but McDonald’s has already found a way around it.

The ordinance prohibits fast-food restaurants from including free toys with children’s meals that don’t comply with nutritional standards.

McDonald’s answer? It will charge 10 cents for the toy. The proceeds will be donated to Ronald McDonald House, the company’s charity for children with cancer.

It would be more behooving to start a charity for childhood diabetes and other obesity related diseases.  An NGO for promotion of exercise also could help undo the damage.

[...] that McDonald’s response "allows them to continue marketing this unhealthful food to children in the midst of an obesity crisis."

Eric Mar, the member of the Board of Supervisors who led adoption of the law, called the 10-cent charge a "marketing ploy," but he told The Associated Press that he didn’t plan to seek any changes to address the tactic.

Maybe he should change his plans. We are talking hundreds of millions of children, world wide, heading towards a life of obesity, disease and early death. And almost nothing is being done about it.

• "Child Food-Porn" (Junk food advertising) makes our children obese & unhealthy
• Childhood Obesity Promotion: Cartoon characters attract kids to junk food
• Food Porn arouses Lust for Food with No Nutritional Value

McDonald’s, said all of the company’s U.S. stores would offer Happy Meals with apples and smaller servings of french fries by March.

We are amazed how McDonald’s escapes through a loop hole huge as a barn door and can continue to cause grave damage to children. The damage is not just the one happy meal, but conditioning malleable children to a life-long preference of wrong foods.

Human-Stupidity is amazed, how, on the other hand, any loop-hole gets closed to prevent people from seeing so called child porn, due to voodoo theory. In spite of evidence by professor Milton Diamond that Child pornography viewing reduces child abuse.

We would like to invert the situation: seducing children to grievous bodily harm should be a crime, whose damage has been clearly proven.

Should Parents of Obese Kids Lose Custody? Yes. They expose children to harm. Our entire system needs to be revamped. Feeding children into obesity, allowing them to sit all day on video games and in boring schools, all this needs to be seriously changed. Social workers, advertising, public relations, all need to work together to save our children.

How many vegetables are in this picture? Yes, 3. Strangely Coca Cola is not yet defined a vegetable, but it seems that french fries already were defined vegetables.

In case you were wondering where all of the healthy vegetables were on your child’s lunch menu at school, they’re in the pizza they’ve been eating everyday. Congress recently declared that Pizza constitutes a vegetable requirement even though it only contains an average of two tablespoons of tomato sauce. inquisitr

Who needs leafy greens and carrots when pizza and french fries will do?  In an effort many 9-year-olds will cheer, Congress wants pizza and french fries to stay on school lunch lines and is fighting the Obama administration’s efforts to take unhealthy foods out of schools. KSPR

"While it’s unfortunate that some members of Congress continue to put special interests ahead of the health of America’s children, USDA remains committed to practical, science-based standards for school meals," says a USDA spokesperson. Newser

Like many of you, when I heard this I thought it had to be a headline from The Onion. But sadly I’ve realized that there are too many agri-businesses and politicians who are willing to allow our childhood obesity epidemic to continue. They don’t care that our military is telling us that young people are too fat to fight, with only one in four meeting the fitness requirements for military service. They don’t care that one in three children under the age of 18 will develop Type II Diabetes within their lifetime. They don’t care that the rate of childhood obesity has doubled since 1980.   TheStateColumn

Human-Stupidity analysis

1. Children are endangered, made obese, sick, diabetic for life. Not only is this tolerated, active advertising for child food porn is legal.
2. This dangerous deadly child abuse (yes people die earlier because of obesity) is a world wide epidemic and almost nothing is done against it.
3. This human stupidity is "normal". The entire world is getting obese due to wrong nutrition and lack of exercise. And it starts with children, their parent’s mistakes, and child food porn propaganda
4. *Language abuse helps to deceive the common person into accepting rules that otherwise would create more resistance. A law saying that a healthy meal has to contain milk, meat, and pizza would cause more resistance.
5. It is all about influential special interest groups! Healthy food brings economic benefits to small farmers, small enterprises, and of course to the entire (healthier) population.
6. Hundreds of millions of children get sick because of false nutrition they were unable to give informed consent to. On the other hand, the "best interest of the child" is used as pretext to condemn men to ruinous child (wife) support payments, debtor’s prison. Alleged concern about children’s welfare is used as excuse for the child porn witch hunt and legal morass created around teenage sexuality. All this is hypocrisy

• Did the Reagan-era USDA really classify ketchup as a vegetable?

(Reuters) – The House of Representatives dealt a blow to childhood obesity warriors on Thursday by passing a bill that abandons proposals that threatened to end the reign of pizza and French fries on federally funded school lunch menus.

The scuttled changes, which would have stripped pizza’s status as a vegetable and limited how often French fries could be served, stemmed from a 2010 child nutrition law calling on schools to improve the nutritional quality of lunches served to almost 32 million U.S. school children.

The action is a win for the makers of frozen French fries and pizza and comes just weeks after the deep-pocketed food, beverage and restaurant industries successfully weakened government proposals for voluntary food marketing guidelines to children.  

"It’s an important victory," said Corey Henry, spokesman for the American Frozen Food Institute (AFFI). That trade association lobbied Congress on behalf of frozen pizza sellers like ConAgra Foods Inc. and Schwan Food Co and French fry makers McCain Foods Ltd and J.R. Simplot Co, the latter best known as a supplier to fast-food company McDonald’s Corp.

"Our concern is that the standards would force companies in many respects to change their products in a way that would make them unpalatable to students," Henry said.  Reuters

It is time now technicians learn what child pornography is. Do you know? You think child pornography is photos of 7 year olds in explicit sexual activities? You really have no clue about the law!

• 17 year old "children"? United Nations confesses political manipulation of "child" definition

17 year olds have become "children", department store children’s swim suit catalogue photos become child porn when collected by a person who seems to have prurient reasons to collect such photos. Knox vs. USA determined that photos of 15 year olds in Leotards can constitute child pornography

• Copine/ Sap Scales, Dost Test: Severity of child porn

Can you imagine all the cell phone repair-men now are required by law to turn in adolescents for taking their own photograph or having a photograph the girl friend sent?  Sexting teens in Oregon will prefer to destroy defective cell phones to getting free warranty repairs that might land them in jail.

• Sexting: Courts victimize Teens with child porn charges for exchanging their own nude photos
• Sexting children Margarite, Isaiah in Lacey, Washington avoid jail

We wonder why the law does not include teachers and parents in their duty to report and criminalize adolescents. With some effort, 20-30% of adolescents could be criminally persecuted just for sexting. Remember, receiving the photos is a heinous crime, too.

Oregon’s Senate approved a bill that requires computer technicians to report images of child pornography

The measure passed the state Senate on a 24-1 vote Friday and now heads to the governor for signature or veto.

Technicians who believe they may have spotted images of child porn must notify the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the state Department of Human Services or law enforcement. Failure to do so could result in a misdemeanor charge.

Only a misdemeanor? We think technicians should get mandatory felony charges </sarcasm>

We are surprised, that in this day and age where toddlers play with cell phones, no 7 year olds have yet been arrested for photographing themselves nude or their doctor plays. It will happen!

• 6-year-old charged with sexual assault for consensual doctor play

And don’t forget all the family photos of babies taking bath, changing diapers. They all need to be analyzed painstakingly by police and and highly paid defense lawyers to see if baby poses in a way that the perverted mind of a public prosecutor considers sexually enticing or provocative.

• Family pictures of nude baby bath: ruinous child porn prosecution 

Privacy laws? Technicians snooping our income tax return?

So the technician now is encouraged to snoop cell phones and computers to find child pornography? What if he finds the income tax return? Insider information about the stock market? Or stories about adult love affairs? Is he not violating the privacy of his customer?

Everyone now risks 10 years in jail and  has to be wary when

• crossing international borders with a computer or cell phone
• developing photos at Wal-Mart and now
• having computers and cell phone repaired.

Reporting laws create suffering for adults and children

A lot more suffering will be created. Not only for innocent children accused of sexting, of adults inadvertently getting child porn  photos,

• Cruel child porn laws kill, "destroying lives unnecessarily” (Judge Jack B. Weinstein)

Lots of so called child porn certainly does not cause any damage to the minor when produced, for example taking one’s own nude photos, or boyfriend and girlfriend engaging in legally allowed sex (age of consent of 16 or 14)

• Jailed for possession of video of himself masturbating when he was 12
• Mandatory 15 years jail for photos of legal girl friend: You Can Have Sex With Them; Just Don’t Photograph Them
• Eek! A Male! Pedophile hysteria hurts and kills children!

Well, and sometimes our zeal goes a bit overboard

• "Operation Protect Our Children" mistakenly shuts down 84,000 Sites with no child porn

Child pornography reporting laws don’t make children safer

Only the perverted logic of feminists and religious zealots can invent the lore that (even inadvertently) downloading or looking at some pictures somehow hurts a person thousands of miles away that is not even aware of the guy’s action.

• "Watching child porn victimizes the child". The Voodoo science of child pornography laws"

So 95% of so called child porn never endangered any child, because it really is adolescent erotica, involves legal acts, …. There is small percentage of true child pornography that serves as the excuse for the witch hunt. It did hurt a child at some time, but its viewing will not hurt it again as some mystics claim.

• Leading sex research experts against child porn laws: "Adolescents and young adults are no children"

Equally as viewing photos of stoning, whipping, clubbing to death or beheading of minors will not re-victimize the victim of violence.

Do NOT report movies of children whipped by Taliban, stoned to death, beheaded by terrorists or of self mutilating jackass wannabees

Our sex obsessed society feels comfortable about violence, vigilantism, killing and mayhem.

• Adolescent girl-fights with injuries: cheer on! Nudity, love and sex are crime and victimization.
• Hollywood movies glorify criminal heroes: how romantic!
• Supreme Court oks indefinite detention for possession of photos. But violent robbers get freed.
• Woman causes permanent brain damage in infant: 2 years. Kills baby: 4 years. Man possesses photos: priceless (40 years)

Do report academy award winning movie "The Tin Drum" when in Oklahoma

• Child Porn on Australian WTV television (and in video stores and academy award winning movies "The Tin Drum")?

By conventional logic, Brooke Shields must be a total wreck. Her movies and photos have been seen by millions and still are all over the net. And her movies "Taxi Driver" and "Blue Lagoon" clearly are child porn by today’s standards. She still gets re-victimized tens of thousands of times per day.

• Brooke Shields nude: exploited pedophile magnet?

Many minors were on the cover of Playboy magazine or on page 3 of British tabloids in the 1970s. Now this needs to be reported as child porn.

Child  porn prohibition likely to cause increased child abuse

World renowned academic researcher is getting ostracized for his scientific research that showed that

• Legalizing Child Pornography reduces child sex abuse crimes (Scientific study by Dr. Milton Diamond, U. Hawaii)

He suggested to use artificially created child porn so no children would be harmed. We suggest to add so called child porn depicting that was clearly created without hurting children, and to grandfather child porn that has been around for decades, where no new damage is being done.

Close the loophole: outlaw unborn child porn

A tasteless article poking fun at the child pornography prosecution craze:

• Unborn Child Porn is Unborn Child Abuse. Outlaw fetal abuse!

Start reporting REAL avoidable damage caused to children

Pregnant women drink alcohol,cause brain damage in offspring with no legal consequences or social ostracism. Nothing is done about families and food industry conspire to create a generation of obese diabetics who will die 15 years prematurely

• "Child Food-Porn" (Junk food advertising) makes our children obese & unhealthy"

Is our sex obsessed society punishing sexual child abuse too severely,
compared to serious bodily harm to children?

Julie Carr Performed oral sex with baby daughter: 17 years jail; filmed it: 20 years.
Compare: killing baby: 4 years; causing permanent brain damage: 2 years.

We will be attacked now with untrue accusations of "promoting child abuse". Which, of course, we are not doing. We don’t say Julie Carr should go unpunished.

Warning: not safe for children. Do not continue reading if you are easily offended.

We try to avoid explicit language, but even CNN uses some semi-explicit language

We are wondering what is less damaging to the infant:

1. a mother licking baby in the wrong places. (17 years in jail) plus 10 years supervision plus life long sex offender registration
2. physical abuse: violent shaking of an infant causing permanent life long brain damage (2 years jail). Or killing infant (4-5 years in jail). No registration in murderous-nanny-registry to prevent future work as nanny.

No, we are not condoning either behavior. We don’t think it is normal, healthy behavior. Sorry for questioning conventional wisdom and asking taboo questions.

If we suggested killing Julie Carr vigilante style, to mete out a death sentence, or 4 life sentences without parole, that would be acceptable.

But suggesting to even think about lower sentencing for certain kinds of child sexual abuse, is a no-no. We have been warned that this would be dangerous. We hope we will not attract vigilante threats.

But, our sense of justice, our sense of scientific curiosity compels us to ask these questions: Are some licks in inappropriate places really warrant much longer jail terms then violent brain and spinal cord trauma? What kind and how much damage is being caused in the infant by mom licking in inappropriate places? No, we don’t promote or condone such behavior.

And how many other so called "child rapists’ did not do more then Julie Carr? (Did we mention that we don’t condone this behavior, but are opposed to misleadingly call fondling and licking "rape").

Woman sentenced after streaming sex abuse of daughter over webcam|CNN

[Julie] Carr used a webcam to deliver four live videos of herself performing oral sex on her youngest daughter, according to the documents. The videos were sent to Nicholas Wilde, then 19, in West Midlands, England, whom Carr had met on an internet dating site, the documents said.
Woman sentenced after streaming sex abuse of daughter over webcam|CNN

We were surprised that the crime was labeled correctly:
"oral sex on an infant"  and and not the usual "rape of infant".

In case you don’t know, any sexual activity, like kissing or fondling with a minor is defined as "rape". Probably it would sound too weird and incredible to write "Mother raped infant daughter". If it were perpetrated by a man, certainly the headline would read "Man raped his infant daughter".   And everyone would imagine the guy having committed more atrocious acts then licking a baby’s privates.  (No, we don’t approve of this!)

Compare this headline:  Former Army Major Daniel Woolverton Sentenced For Raping Baby. Whereupon Human-Stupidity provokingly asked "What kind of rape"?  (No, we don’t condone Woolverton’s behavior).

We did not want to be sexually explicit, so we refrained from the graphic terminology CNN used in this case here. But we suspect Woolverton probably engaged in similar activities as mother Julie Carr, like oral sex and manual indecent touching.  In Woolverton’s case, we can not know, due to modern misleading language definitions of rape.

We will be crucified for this. People will falsely accuse us of condoning sexual abuse of children. We do not condone Woolverton’s or Julie Carr’s behavior..

Rather our message is 2 fold

1. Don’t mislead! Use correct clear language: Saying "raping a baby"  is meant to confuse people into thinking he did worse things then "oral sex on an infant". NO! we are not saying that oral sex on an infant is right. We are saying: call a spade a spade. Call crimes by their names, don’t mislead the public by abusing and re-defining the language. The real crime is bad enough. No exaggeration is needed.
2. Re-analyze our sex-obsession. Are the punishments for sexual non violent acts overblown? This issue has already been discussed above.

If Carr (the mother) had licked the baby on the hand, the feet, the arm, even the belly, nobody would think anything of it. It would be perfectly legal, normal, and morally acceptable. She was probably unaware that putting the tongue in the wrong place would be considered a heinous crime, much worse then killing or permanently disabling her infant. Quite likely she was stupid and thoughtless, but probably she is in no way a carreer criminal and long term danger. (Did we mention that we don’t condone Julie Carr’s behavior?)

"I want to say that I am sorry," she told the court. "I never meant to hurt anyone in my family, and I have regretted it ever since."

Once released, Carr will receive a mandatory 10 years of supervision where, along with checks for drugs and alcohol, her computer and internet use will be monitored, the documents said. She will also be registered as a sex offender
Woman sentenced after streaming sex abuse of daughter over webcam|CNN

• We wish that murderous nannies with anger control problems had the same type of supervision and registry to make sure they will not cause further damage to children.
• We also wish that unbiased unencumbered free academic research can evaluate the amount of damage caused by different types of child sexual abuse. Even if the findings are not what society expects.
  • Since the prestigious Rind study was condemned unanimously by US Senate and Congress, researchers will be wise enough not to get unpopular taboo results that can terminate their carreer. 
  • Legalizing Child Pornography reduces child sex abuse crimes (Scientific study by Dr. Milton Diamond, U. Hawaii) is a rare example of a politically incorrect study that escaped censorship, probably because Dr. Diamond is already Emeritus (retired).

Related articles

A former Army Major from our area was sentenced to 27 years in federal prison for a horrific crime: raping a baby.

Federal authorities found 30,000 images and 100 videos of child pornography on the computer of 35 year-old Daniel Woolverton.

Daniel Woolverton was a 1997 West Point graduate, with a career as an Army trial lawyer that appeared to be on the fast track. Now, hes behind bars after raping a boy as young as three months old, an act he videotaped.

"Well, its repulsive," said an Arlington neighbor.

"Raping an infant? Oh boy. Thats terrible," said another. wusa9.com/news/

Raping a 3 month old infant! We found this terrible, too. So terrible that we consulted a medical doctor to inquire about the consequences of forcible penetrative rape of an infant. He confirmed our suspicion: The absolute mismatch in size would cause extreme, grave, life threatening injuries in an immature infant. So, how come, there is no mention of such grave injury?

We remembered Definition of "Rape": When a "Rape" is not a Rape! The Abuse of the word "Rape": indecent touching of a minor is "rape". It is absolutely impossible for us to know what kind of activities Daniel Wolverton engaged in Our language lost its precision and its power. The new "rape" definition serves purely to mislead the public as to the nature of the crime. To incite the mob. 

Isn’t the truth enough? Most likely he did indecent touching and fumbling with an infant. Yes fumbling in places and ways he should not fumble. But it seems he did not engage in activities that would permanently hurt, mutilate and hospitalize the child.

Compare: Woman causes permanent brain damage in infant: 2 years. Kills baby: 4 years.)

Aren’t we insensitive? Defending a infant rapist? No, we don’t say what he did was right and defensible. We just say we should not mislead the public as to what he did. One thing is for sure. Thanks to the new definition of "rape", we can not know what he did.

Today, FBI executed a search warrant at Woolverton’s residence and seized a memory card that contains an image of an adult male engaging in sexually explicit conduct with an infant who appeared to be under one year of age. The infant has been identified by the FBI. A wristwatch visible on the adult male and items in the photo appear to link Woolverton as the adult in the photo. washingtondc.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel09/wfo101409.htm

The FBI report supports our suspicion. There probably was no true forcible, violent, penetrative rape.

So Human-Stupidity defends sexual abuse of toddlers? No! Just don’t use the word "rape" for fumbling because
the general public gets mislead, they understand something else

The abuse of our language

• Our language loses its precision.
• We don’t usually use one word for totally different actions.
• In law, in science, and in newspaper reports, we strive to be clear and precise.
• Our modern definition of "rape" is unclear and misleading. It has been changed manipulatively, away from the clear meaning it had since the ancient Roman and Greek empires.
• In the zeal to whip up punishment frenzy among the population, whe destroy our language, our capacity to communicate clearly. Everyone imagines a screaming infant being penetrated violently, while in reality it is probably just some quiet fumbling and fiddling around with a clueless infant. The infractor is probably not a monstrous child mutilator, but just a dumb inconsiderate, thoughtless, impulsive, abusive guy. Not to be defended as correct behavior, but not as heinous. 
• Isn’t the true crime bad enough? Sexually molesting a toddler. Do we have to exaggerate with incendiary misleading language? Is that necessary? Of course, that is not a mistake, it is intentional, it is meant to mislead manipulatively.

A child has been sexually abused, and Human-Stupidity cares about semantics? Yes.

• If we distort our language, just to make the sexual molestation seem worse then it is, then our language is losing its power. It is getting confusing, misleading. We lose the capacity to communicate clearly. We cannot know any more what is meant by "raping a baby".
• we agree that an infant can not consent to sexual behavior. But we contend that there still is a difference between "consenting" infant fiddling and violently abusing a screaming resisting infant. Even if, sensibly, at this age the consent is not valid, it still invalid consent is not the same as active screaming resistance.  We lost the capacity to differentiate. We know, we will be crucified for writing this. And we know that never ever a self respecting researcher could make an analysis that the amount of trauma of the former crime is much less then the second. The uproar about the Rind study made it clear that this was totally taboo. 

We are not defending what this guy did. We are not saying it is all right or he should go unpunished. We find it problematic that we have to keep repeating this, and still will be condemned and crucified as if we were condoning sexual abuse of infants.

Our main topic is: We are defending our language. We are defending our capacity to communicate clearly and truthfully.

Our sex-obsessed society thinks that non violent sexual fondling is worse then life long physical or brain damage

In our sex-obsessed society, creepy but non violent and non mutilating touching is considered much worse then potential life long mutilation and disability. And to make sure nobody questions this inversion of values, we have raped our language to mislead the masses into thinking that a real rape, in the classic sense of the word, has happened.

You can find nanny cam videos on youtube, where nanny shakes a baby./ Florida Babysitter Abuses 11 Month Old Baby / "SBS [Shaken Baby Syndrome] is often fatal and can cause severe brain damage, resulting in lifelong disability"

A baby also can not consent to eating unhealthy damaging food that will cause life long diabetes and his early death. Still, nobody jails irresponsible mothers for creating over-fed obese sick babies. Mothers are not even punished for drinking while pregnant and causing permanent brain damage (fetal alcohol syndrome).

Our society suffers from sex-obsession. Now if I had a kid I would rather have a guy sexually fiddle around with the baby 10 times, then some monster hitting, slapping, burning with scalding water or hot iron, or some nanny risking the health of my baby by shaking and throwing it around, or some prengnant woman causing fetal alcohol syndrome in my yet unborn child.

We lost our capacity to evaluate the amount of damage done by a crime. The hypothetical damage by a non violent sexual crime is considered worse then permanent life long brain damage or physical mutilation.

One more time, we don’t think he should not be unpunished, he should not have done what he did. But due to our language distortion, we lost the capacity to evaluate the real gravity of his crime. We think there is a major difference between sexual activity with an immature pre-pubescent child and a post-pubertal adolescent.

Woman killing a baby: 4 years. Man sexually fiddling with a baby 27 years

Do we have the right measuring stick? Are we obsessed about punishing non-violent sexual messing higher then life long brain damage? Do we have a gender bias punishing men harder? Compare:

Woman causes permanent brain damage in infant: 2 years. Kills baby: 4 years.)	Man non violently sexually fiddles with infant. No bodily damage was reported. Psychological damage possible but not proven. 27 years in jail plus future additional convictions for child porn etc.

• Greenburgh nanny sentenced for shaking baby [...] two years in state prison and three years of post release supervision on her July 2008 guilty plea to reckless assault on a child in the first degree. [...] As a result of the violent shaking, the baby suffered a subdural hematoma and diffuse rental hemorrhages, injuries that can lead to numerous, potential lifelong developmental challenges.
• Nanny sentenced to five years for shaking toddler to death
• Nanny Gets Four Years For Shaking Baby: severity of the injuries included multiple skull fractures and massive brain hemorrhages.
• New Study Finds That Many People Guilty of Child Abuse Get “Off the Hook” in Court | Shaken Baby Syndrome Attorney
• A woman knowingly drinks lots of alcohol when pregnant, and thus culpably giving birth to a permanently disfigured and mentally retarded child. Verdict: No crime, no jail

Compare this to

• A trucker arrested in Flagstaff for possession and transportation of child pornography has been sentenced to more than 11 years in federal prison. Prosecutors say 61-year-old Richard Self was convicted last November on three counts of transportation of child pornography and three counts of possession of child pornography. The Arizona Daily Sun says Self was sentenced Monday to a 135-month term
• Travis Matthew, 26, pleaded guilty last September to receiving child pornography and was  sentenced to 20 years in federal prison.
• The former music minister at St. Eugene Catholic Church in Asheville was sentenced to 28 years in prison, followed by a lifetime of supervised release in connection with a child pornography charge. [...] guilty plea to a single criminal count of production of child pornography,
• More examples: child porn witch hunt

Is there gender bias? Obsessive punishment for sexual deviations?

A young man got arrested for possession of child porn. A 12 year boy old masturbating. It is his own video he recorded himself when he was 12 years old. Mandatory minimum jail sentence: 2 years. 

Think hard: maybe you took some indecend photos of yourself or your family album contans nunde photos mom took when you were a toddler.  Burn them whild you still are out of jail!

 Human-Stupidity.com Analysis

1. This is one of the extreme cases of the child porn witch hunt.
   1. Totally uselessly causing trauma in innocent people,
   2. huge expenses in legal fees,
   3. bogging up police and law enforcement capacity for nonsensical persecution
2. Of course, the child porn prosecutions are meant to protect an innocent child "victim" from abuse. So 25 year old John Doe gets jailed to protect 12 year old John Doe from abusing himself? Or 12 year old John Doe gets protected from being re-victimized when 25 year old John Doe watches his own movie? Or 25 year old John Doe might have totally forgotten his old movie and not have watched it for a decade. Still, he needs to be jailed to be protected from victimization!? And of course, as a child abuser, he will most likely be raped in prison. How far has our logic and our legal system sunk.
3. Most normal people would agree that this is excessive zeal. Of course, then the question arises: where should the limit be drawn?
• what kind of child porn should be punished?
• should possession of depictions of legal acts really be punished? 
• Should people be punished for a video of child sexual activity that by all definitions was not abuse?
• And does the possession of computer files, that are nothing but 0′s and 1′s really get people into jail for years? The USA has a tradition of freedom of expression that are getting more encroached upon. Human Stupidity analyzes this on other posts.
• "Sticks and stones may break my bones (but words will never hurt me)".  Should we not, in analogy, say: Sexual abuse may hurt me, but 0′s and 1′s in computer files will never hurt me. All this trauma could be avoided by scrapping all laws for possession. Punish abusers, not people who possess the photos.
• Almost all so called “child porn” in reality is “adolescent nudity” or consensual “sexual activities” of sexually active teenagers. We are not not aware of any deaths due to child porn production. Most child porn is totally harmless, like adolescents taking their own photos, or formerly legal 16 year old sex films made legally in Holland 30 years ago.
• On the other hand there was a death in the production of the following documentary:  Beating Death Of Derrion Albert,16,Caught On Video as described in Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV. Possession, production, and distributions are perfectly legal.
4. I wish to get confirmation of this story from a reputable news agency or newspaper, instead of a hearsay report.  But even if it were untrue, it could happen. It rings true. Similar things have happened, 15 year old girls get traumatized with sexting charges for harmless nude photos. So prosecuting an adult for the movies he took of himself 15 years ago, looks convincing and true

Some commentators at reddit remarked that he is stupid for still being with that girl. But by conventional wisdom she acted correctly. She found heinous child porn of a 12 year old masturbating and reported it to police.

PS: don’t miss the sex-positive reddit r/MensRightsMovement