Child Sex Dolls for Pedophiles?

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by Ivan Seeking, Aug 23, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Pedophilia is not a crime. Acting on those feelings is.
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member


    According to Wiki, 13 years is the cut off for pedophilia, not 15. The criteria is apparently prepubescense.
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    That ^^^ is true spidergoat, and more of what I meant. I stated it as such a few posts back.

    * billvon, true, but nonetheless, it's important to figure out the root causes as then and only then, can we work towards helping people/finding a cure, if there is one. That's just my opinion.
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. billvon Valued Senior Member

    No - you give them substitutes that are less dangerous. Methadone for heroin addicts. Computer gaming for gambling addicts. Chocolate for alcoholics. Chalk for smokers who need something to do with their hands.
    If that would cut down on the number of people murdered? Absolutely.
  8. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Well, you give them substitutes that help wean them, not substitutes are that are just ... substitutes.

    But that's part of a larger issue of treatment.

    But would it?
  9. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    I have a friend who is a recovering drug addict, he was addicted to meth for a while. He went into a few treatment facilities, and nothing helped until he went to one where the doctors and counselors were interested in what caused him to become addicted to begin with, and that has finally helped him. So, while it's an often arduous process, it pays greater dividends to get to the heart of why people are living dysfunctional, unhealthy lives, so they can heal and be on a path to a healthier way of living, if possible.
    Magical Realist likes this.
  10. Bells Staff Member

    Child sex dolls will not help treat paedophiles, or prevent them from offending. Far from it.

    It provides paedophiles with an outlet for their sexual desire for children. Consider that for a moment. Paedophiles buying sex dolls, some as small as a child who is 5 years of age, with the correct anatomy of children, for the purpose of having sex with them. From the article you linked:

    “I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire.”

    That quote, is from the maker of the dolls. A self confessed paedophile.

    In short, he has devised a way to allow paedophiles to act out on their sexual attraction to children. He then refers to said paedophilia as a fetish. In other words, he is attempting to normalise it, to turn it into something not harmful.. It is a classic tactic of paedophiles. Any excuse they can find to normalise sexually molesting or raping children, they will use it. Calling it a fetish is just yet another way.

    You describe your sexless marriage and how unhappy you were, etc.. You forget to mention that you and who you have sex with are adults, consenting adults. To wit, you are comparing apples to oranges. But to use your very argument as a prime example of just how dangerous these dolls are and how much they do place children at risk... You got a divorce after years of unhappiness. You were no longer satisfied sexually. You weren't getting enough from the relationship. So you left and found someone who gave you what you so desired and apparently needed.

    Now consider what will happen when a paedophile, not getting enough from a lifeless child doll, decides that he or she (for the purpose of this thread, the article only caters to male paedophiles, so I'll stick with "he" for now) needs to move on, to get what they really need and want sexually?

    Because preferential paedophiles and child sex offenders, truly believe that having sex with a child, is showing it love. What happens when they get sick of the doll? And they will get sick of it. Preferential paedophiles have a tendency to groom children, to insert themselves into areas or positions that places them in direct contact with children. They get off on grooming their victims, of doting on them, of 'loving' them and being loved back with the grooming process. A sex doll will not provide them with that level of satisfaction. It isn't just about the sex for these paedophiles. It is about being in a position of power and trust over their victim, which allows them to often normalise sexual behaviour with the child. It is why so many victims of paedophiles go on to becoming paedophiles themselves and sexually abusing children as adults. They grow up to believe that this form of 'love' is normal, because they were groomed as children to believe that way, to expect that this is how to show love to a child. Paedophiles who purchase these dolls will not have that level of interaction with the doll. Sure, it will provide them with a means to expend sexual energy, but preferential paedophiles tend to need more and it can very well lead them to molest and sexually abuse children, to get more.

    Most importantly, the dolls present a clear danger to children, because they enable paedophiles. The dolls literally "reinforce" the paedophiles attraction to children and sexual behaviour towards children. Which can and will lead to more harm in the future.
    My home State in Australia, is looking at ways to ban these dolls from entering the State, because of the real harm they present to children and with good reason.

    University of Western Sydney social sciences lecturer Dr Maggie Hall has worked alongside sex offenders. She said the dolls would not be helpful in curbing the desires of paedophiles, and could in fact be harmful.

    "I don't think there is any evidence that the provision of these things would [be beneficial], and it may make things worse in that it may reinforce the behaviour [paedophilia]," she told the ABC.

    She said on the basis of what cognitive behaviour therapists would say, the dolls could cause harm.

    "In my personal view, anything which represents children in a sexualised way, or makes it possible to imitate a sex act with a child, should be banned," Dr Hall said.


    University of Queensland clinical psychologist Professor Justin Kenardy said he was not aware of any research to support or refute Mr Takagi's claims, but commercialising such a product was risky.

    "By commercialising this product in the open market, and associated behaviour, it moves it slightly but significantly from margins to mainstream," he told the ABC.

    "I am sure that sale of these type of things have been around for some time and will continue underground. But I don't believe it should be validated as a means of redirecting or satiating paedophilic urges without reliable evidence to support [that idea], nor should it be condoned."

    And I do not think they are wrong. Think of it this way, a preferential paedophile, for example, who has not offended, has managed to control his or her sexual desire for children, could very well turn to these dolls, believing that it will provide them with a form of release. But in doing so, they have just caved to their sexual desire to have sex with a child. And could very well lead them to act towards a child. From your link in the OP:

    So far, there is no research to indicate whether or not Takagi’s dolls would be successful, and Peter Fagan from the John Hopkins School of Medicine is skeptical that there ever will be. Citing cognitive-behavioral theory, the paraphilia researcher believes that contact with Trottla’s products would likely have a “reinforcing effect” on pedophilic ideation and “in many instances, cause it to be acted upon with greater urgency.” The research Fagan cites to support that conclusion is based on offenders, so it is unclear whether the effects would be different for non-offenders.

    Michael Seto from the University of Toronto speculated on the possible existence of two distinct populations of pedophiles. Drawing an analogy to methadone treatment for opioid addicts, the psychiatrist hypothesized that “for some pedophiles, access to artificial child pornography or to child sex dolls could be a safer outlet for their sexual urges, reducing the likelihood that they would seek out child pornography or sex with real children. For others, having these substitutes might only aggravate their sense of frustration.”

    “We don’t know, because the research hasn’t been done,” he concluded. “But, it would be a very important study to conduct.”

    The last thing anyone should be doing with paedophilia is normalising or enabling it. These dolls do just that.

    Sure, for some it might provide sexual release, but for others, it will just drive them to having sex with a child, because the doll is not enough for them. They will end up wanting a real child.
    ajanta and wegs like this.
  11. Bells Staff Member

    In my experience, I think it would lead to more attacks and potential sexual molestation of children. Simply because the child sex dolls enable the behaviour. Reinforces the attraction and desire for sex with children.

    Some scientists are researching the use of virtual reality to help assess and treat paedophiles in various ways. Some have even broached the subject of robotics as an outlet for some paedophiles, under strict conditions. But open access like the ones being offered in Japan, where paedophiles can place an order for a child doll they want, to match what they want visually..? They all agree that that is courting danger, because of the very real risk that some paedophiles would end up actually abusing a child after such contact with these types of dolls:

    “I wouldn’t take any chance with that kind of use of robotics,” says Renaud. “Maybe some very intelligent and controlled individual could have such contact only with dolls, but for [others], I think that would only lead to the need to go further and to cross the line with real victims.”

    To wit, there is no research into what effect such sex dolls might have on paedophiles. And I'm sorry, but I am not going to trust a paedophile, who is making anatomically correct dolls to mimic a 5 year old girl to be used for sex, for his guarantee that it will protect children. I have met enough paedophiles in my time to doubt the veracity of his beliefs. Especially after he tried to normalise paedophilia by referring to it as a mere fetish.
    wegs likes this.
  12. Ivan Seeking Registered Senior Member

    Bells, firstly, you are showing clear bias by neglecting the obvious definition of a fetish. Pedophilia is clearly a desire for something that is not a typical desire so it is a fetish or acts just like one. Why do people assume that all fetishes are harmless? Far from it!!! I have read of people into S+M who have to keep a defibrillator handy. Also, remember David Carradine. And need I get into a discussion of the first hanging in Vermont [maybe NH, one of those States] of a young man who was doing everything from sheep to chickens?

    Domination and control certainly is a fetish. Hell, it's entire an industry! There are tons of sites for doms and subs.

    The other thing I noticed is that everything you linked appears to be speculative. Are there equally speculative alternative opinions?

    And it is disingenuous and a straw man to suggest that anyone would take the word of a pedophile on this... or that you would accept his opinion were it not for his definition of a fetish.

    I also specified that IF this drive is like the normal drive, then therapy won't fix it [which is supported by the meta analysis linked earlier]. And I don't know if it's apples and oranges. Your assertion is circular logic. Is this simply his normal? Is this how he was born? I don't know. You do?
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2016
  13. Ivan Seeking Registered Senior Member

  14. Ivan Seeking Registered Senior Member

    To the best of my knowledge, practitioners of BDSM do not typically escalate to actual torture [though there are people really into pain! So some go that way by choice]. They are able to release their impulses through controlled activities, and are suggested to be mentally healthy and even healthier than the average person in some regards, by a number of studies.

    "A recent study on the psychological profile of BDSM (bondage-discipline, dominance-submission, sadism-masochism) practitioners has attracted a great deal of media attention, with headlines proclaiming that “S&M practitioners are healthier and less neurotic than those with a tamer sex life (link is external).” Although BDSM has often in the past been thought to be associated with psychopathology, the authors of the study argued that practitioners are generally psychologically healthy, if not more so in some respects, compared to the general population. However, it should be noted that most of the apparent psychological benefits of being a practitioner applied to those in the dominant rather than the submissive role.


    True story: When I first started doing the online dating gig, I entered into my profile that an ideal date might include some Dom, meaning Dom Perignon Champagne. It was a couple of months before a woman asked what I like; whips? Bondage? And do I like dom or sub?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    I had to wonder how many women saw that and thought the same thing! Jeeeez!!!!!
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2016
  15. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Mod Hat ― Brief Notes

    Just a few things to bear in mind:

    • "Fetish" as applied to sexual behavior is not a formal, proper term; it suffices colloquially, but in some questions precision is important.

    • "Pedophilia" is a paraphilia; not all paraphilias are healthy or harmless.

    → Pedophilia is not in and of itself a crime except perhaps where genuine "thought police" might exist.

    → Pedophilia was not so long ago listed as a primary disorder; this is not presently true. In order for pedophilia to be regarded as a disorder, it must necessarily disrupt normative socialization and function.

    ↳ Typically, pedophilia either stabilizes in abstraction or escalates attention and behavioral demands.​

    • The problem with a question of "normal drive" is that pedophilia as an inherent or natural inclination, acted upon, requires specific harm unto others.​

    This last is important, and definitive. It is one thing to discuss the clinical aspects of such behavior; it is quite another, and, in the end, insufficient, to simply raise the subject in a speculative fashion. That is to say, this is one of those dangerous subjects for which having something of a functional, useful clue is specifically prerequisite. Blindly groping after some manner of justification for discussion of dangerous behavior does not qualify.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page