704. The Irrational Distinction Between The Abuse Of Women And Of Children
A German politician has been caught as suspicious of owning child pornography. Reported in the medias has been his possession of pictures of naked boys, which are not explicitly sexual. Such pictures are actually not illegal in Germany.
The German newspaper "Rheinische Post" writes today.
A German politician has been caught as suspicious of owning child pornography. Reported in the medias has been his possession of pictures of naked boys, which are not explicitly sexual. Such pictures are actually not illegal in Germany.
The German newspaper "Rheinische Post" writes today.
"Die Bundesregierung plant, den Handel mit Nacktfotos von Kindern zu verbieten. Niemand dürfe mit den Körpern von Kindern und Jugendlichen Geschäfte machen"
The federal government plans to make the trading naked pictures of children illegal. Nobody should deal in bodies of children and adolescents.
"Diese Bilder verletzen die Rechte von Kindern".
These pictures violate the right of children.
http://www.rp-online.de/politik/handel-mit-kinder-nacktfotos-wird-verboten-aid-1.4046914
Of course I agree with these quotes. But it makes me angry, that all outrage and wish to protect is reserved to children, while the exactly the same treatment of adult women is considered as acceptable, normal and reasonable.
There is a cruel fallacy in this arbitrary distinction of the victims by their age. This fallacy is the entire focus upon the biological suitability of the victims for male needs and the subsequent denial of the damage done to victimized women.
Abuse (by men) can be defined as the selfish, inconsiderate and irresponsible use of another human being's body, which a man in the state of dishomeostasis uses as an object for the purpose of getting rid of his body waste.
Of course I agree with these quotes. But it makes me angry, that all outrage and wish to protect is reserved to children, while the exactly the same treatment of adult women is considered as acceptable, normal and reasonable.
There is a cruel fallacy in this arbitrary distinction of the victims by their age. This fallacy is the entire focus upon the biological suitability of the victims for male needs and the subsequent denial of the damage done to victimized women.
Abuse (by men) can be defined as the selfish, inconsiderate and irresponsible use of another human being's body, which a man in the state of dishomeostasis uses as an object for the purpose of getting rid of his body waste.
Children are not biologically suitable for this. Therefore nobody disputes children's need to be protected from all abuse, direct and indirect by pornographic representations.
But whenever women are concerned, the view is distorted. Even though adult women are biologically suitable for sexuality, this does not imply any justification for abuse. Women are entitled to be only targeted for a form of sexuality, which is no abuse, because it fulfills their emotional needs.
It is generally accepted, that humans do not exist to be exploited as slaves, just because humans are suitable to do hard labor and others feel a need to make a profit from it. Women do not exist to be abused, just because they are biologically suitable and men have physiological urges. This still needs to be accepted.
This first distortion not only justifies the abuse of female bodies by their biological suitability, but the consequence thereof is also the male denial, that using a woman's body without emotional attachment and commitment even is abuse.
The second distortion is the different interpretation of the damage done depending on the age of the abused victim.
Only the damage done to children is recognized as such and attributed to the abuse.
When abused women become drug addicts, alcoholics or psychiatric cases, this is not recognized and acknowledged as a consequence of what men have done to them. Instead it is falsely attributed to genetic or personality defects.
When abused women become drug addicts, alcoholics or psychiatric cases, this is not recognized and acknowledged as a consequence of what men have done to them. Instead it is falsely attributed to genetic or personality defects.
According to male attitudes, a sane and healthy woman can be abused without suffering, a woman, who cannot be abused without harm and trouble is defective and flawed. Women are not considered to need protection against abuse, they are expected to be willing to be fixed, if they lack sufficient resilience.
Women's self-abuse in exchange for material benefits is mistaken as a choice and as a healthy disposition. Men's denial, that such self-abuse needs to be attributed to social problems depriving women of other options adds to the other male justifications of abuse. The frequent delay between the abuse and self-abuse and manifestations of being damaged adds to the male denial of the true causes for the damage.
Therefore I am correcting the above quotes:
Women's self-abuse in exchange for material benefits is mistaken as a choice and as a healthy disposition. Men's denial, that such self-abuse needs to be attributed to social problems depriving women of other options adds to the other male justifications of abuse. The frequent delay between the abuse and self-abuse and manifestations of being damaged adds to the male denial of the true causes for the damage.
Therefore I am correcting the above quotes:
Nobody should deal in bodies of other human beings, no matter the age.
These [naked or pornographic] pictures violate the right of human beings of any age.
Suitability does not suffice to justify harming others.
Those men, who consume pornography, who abuse prostitutes, who are promiscuous treating and perceiving women as mere toilets for their body waste, are hypocrites, if they demands more protection only for children.
