UNICEF report says pornography is not always harmful to children…


Research
….

Date: June 09, 2021

01) LINK [PDF – Check Your Downloads Folder]

02) LINK

“The report published by the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) addresses how government policy can be used to protect children from harmful, abusive and violent content online. Its conclusion is based on a European study of 19 EU countries that found in most countries, most children who saw pornographic images were “neither upset nor happy.” In fact, the report UNICEF relies on says that 39 percent of Spanish children were happy after seeing pornography.

The 2020 EU Kids Online Study concluded that some children and young people “intentionally seek out sexual content” for a variety of reasons and that seeing sexual images “might also represent an opportunity” to provide answers to questions about puberty and sexual identity. The study encouraged “seeing the nuances” which lead children to seek out and view sexual content online.

UNICEF says any efforts to block children from accessing pornography online might infringe on their human rights. UNICEF bases this claim on an expansive interpretation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”

This needs to be acknowledged and shared.

I notice how the detractors are reaching for a variety of controversial red herrings, instead of acknowledging and responding to the substance of the actual report.

That is how things work with them…They have a zealous, dogmatic agenda, which centers around themselves holding control over others…and anything which gets in the way of that, must be neutralized…censored…crushed…done away with…however you want to put it.

Yes…there is a lot of controversial pornographic content that gets put online…No, I would not suggest that everything is fit for sexual education.

Here’s the thing…

…I remember as a kid the sorts of pictures that were typical in pornography…Playboy, Hustler, Penthouse, Etc…and it was typically just straight forward sex shots.

Okay…Yes…I never saw gay porn [nor other forms of porn] before coming online…and I know there is a lot of branching into niche interests…Plus, I’ll need to read this study report more thoroughly to know for sure…but they’re likely to be talking about photographs [and video] of very basic, non-violent and culturally common sex acts taking place.

There simply is no established path, where a child or youth seeing two people engaged in a sex act, objectively harms or injures that child or youth…

…And No!…You do not get to cite every negative thing that befalls that child or youth in life thereafter, and blame it on porn watching!

We all have crappy, hard lives, breaking down and devolving towards death…everything becomes harder and harder, after a point…and we all have difficult, scary and unnerving social and personal obstacles we are forced to navigate, and it’s hard…maybe extra hard for some…

…You cannot take typical social phenomena that happens to a vast portion [or even all] of the population, formerly abused or not, exposed to sex or not, etc, etc…and claim that it all boils down to “being abused”…or in some way being exposed to something, which zealot cultural architects do not want you involved with.

I call B.S. when people do this…It is not a sound counter argument for anything.

Last point…

…It always galls me, how there is literally no acknowledgement by the governments and organizations in power, of the very real children and youth who’ve had positive experiences involving sex…which skews people’s understanding of the issues, and leaves them with a grossly distorted perception of those issues.

To make things worse, we get the “Beware: Here Be Dragons!” treatment, out of these governments and organizations…which really causes public perception [and emotion] to go completely off the rails…

…And the second anyone with a microphone, on a substantial social platform, has the bravery to talk about this whole other world of ignored facts and experiences…they’re descended upon by “the proper people”, to be condemned as social heretics [and in some way morally/rationally deficient]…often threatened and intimidated into silence…if not by the people and organizations with power and influence, then by the hordes of abusive followers they have.

This silence and censorship has always been maintained, by threats, intimidation, abuses and making example of others who’ve broken the silence.

There is literally no public place set aside for mass consumption…where this kind of dialogue can even take place…

…They even habitually come to small projects like my own, right here…and attempt to get them shut down, if they at all can.

There are people in political and social power [with masses of faithful followers]…who hold complete intolerance towards discussing these kinds of issues, and facts of life…the realities of many people’s very existence.

These very real issues are not allowed a substantial public space, where they can be discussed, communicated and understood…negotiated over, even, by the general population.

The second it gains any social attention or traction, somebody is immediately working to snuff it out…usually in underhanded ways.

This state of affairs is dead wrong.

….

7 thoughts on “UNICEF report says pornography is not always harmful to children…

  1. feinmann

    This discussion paper entitled “Digital Age Assurance Tools and Children’s Rights Online across the Globe”, can hardly claim to discuss the global situation when its primary focus is the situation in Western countries where children have been protected to such a degree from real-life experiences that they emerge totally unprepared for the harsh realities of adulthood.

    Vast swathes of the world fail to get any mention. Russia for example has no child pornography possession law and no legal definition of it, so what effect does that have given that Russian children can freely express themselves online any way they wish? Many other countries around the world are content to treat children in an adult way and not as a completely different species to adults.

    No discussion about TOR and the ability for a child to circumvent age restriction controls and access a broad range of forbidden fruits. Nor any discussion about kids actively seeking out online social network sites for the sole purpose of behaving sexually with their peers.

    “Social media companies … usually set their terms of service in relation to data protection laws, such that they may collect all users’ data without parental consent. Consequently, minimum ages are usually set at between 13 and 16, although users are not generally required to provide proof of their age. One reason given for keeping the minimum age for access to platforms … at 13 is that if the age were set higher, for example 16 or 18, companies would simply exclude children from accessing their platforms until they reach the age of consent … to avoid the cost of differentiating between users with regard to data collection. However, the high market value of child users of technology could mean that these costs may not result in exclusion.” It would seem that the ‘high market value’ of the child trumps the child’s right to safety and privacy in the West.

    This topic is such a bugger’s muddle, in large part due to Western governments rabid over-protection of children and resultant increased infantilisation. I admire Emma Day for having produced an objective paper, despite insufficient relevant global data and wildly different mechanisms of country-by-country governance.

    Reply
    1. eqfoundation Post author

      This is what I love about you, and having you around this blog…You, feinmann, actually do dive in and give a critical response to the actual papers.

      The Russian situation is interesting, but don’t they have a law against pornography in general?

      You’re right about leaning too hard on “western” culture children…I expect, those are the easiest demographics to get access to…plus, they are guaranteed to fit the expected conclusions…Because, as you say…they’ve been raised and conditioned to be meek, shocked and traumatized.

      I like your observation on platforms that prioritize cashing in on children, over putting in the costs of safeguarding them…No doubt, if companies were forced to do this, their profit margin would shrink…maybe even dry up.

      Likewise, I’m also glad to see these things being acknowledged in official releases, from major world organizations…even if it still kinda feels like crumbs being tossed out.

      Reply
      1. feinmann

        Yes Steve, child pornography is illegal in Russia, but there is no legal definition of it in Russia’s national legislation consistent with the Lanzarote Convention. There is also nothing in the law that prohibits simple possession of child pornography: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_child_pornography

        It is a sad indictment of Western governments that one cannot discuss and quantify the nature, frequency and global spread of children’s sexual expression online without fearing repercussions. Emma Day’s article is weaker due to the absence of stats plus her phrase ‘evidence is inconsistent’ in connection with this topic.

        Your comment: “There are people in political and social power [with masses of faithful followers]…who hold complete intolerance towards discussing these kinds of issues, and facts of life…the realities of many people’s very existence.” is unfortunately the case also about many other topics. Doubtless UNICEF will now be cancelled.

        Incidentally, I have some important links to share regarding suppression of discussion on the risks of vaccination against Covid and the momentous lawsuit India is bringing against the WHO. I will pluck up courage and attempt to post these via the mechanism you have sent me.

    1. eqfoundation Post author

      Thank you, Yure!

      I’m flattered.

      I literally snagged the link from your blog…which, I believe, is where I first heard of this.

      In fact, I almost re-blogged your post here.

      Reply
      1. Yure

        I got it from Boychat, myself. They are the “loyal kin” I referred to at the beginning of the text. Thanks for the compliments, though!

Tell Us What You Think...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.