A University of Hawaii professor and director of the Pacific Center for Sex and Society is postulating that child pornography actually can serve a beneficial service to society because “potential sexual offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex crimes against children.”
The idea by Milton Diamond, whose career includes a long list of studies and other works espousing the availability of pornography, however, is taking a bashing from critics.
“In his study he researched how the legalization of adult pornography in the Czech Republic did not bring a rise in sex crimes against adults. He also states that when child pornography was legalized sex crimes against children were decreased. (Of course they would decrease because it would not be a crime). He believes that children would benefit from the legalization of child pornography,” wrote Joy Brooks in the Examiner.
“You have to stop and ask what kind of world you live in when a college professor believes that the abuse of children being legalized is a good idea,” she wrote.
Diamond’s latest study, which was released just days ago, suggests that although the authors “do not approve of the use of real children in the production or distribution of child pornography, they say that artificially produced materials might serve a purpose.”
“Diamond and team looked at what actually happened to sex-related crimes in the Czech Republic as it transitioned from having a strict ban on sexually explicit materials to a situation where the material was decriminalized,” according to a summary of its results.
“They found that the number of reported cases on child sex abuse dropped markedly immediately after the ban on sexually explicit materials was lifted in 1989. … Child sex abuse was much lower than it was when availability of child pornography was restricted,” the summary said.
Dr. Judith Reisman, whose work on pornography also has spanned the decades and who has served on presidential commissions dealing with the issues, told WND that such results would be no surprise coming from a researcher such as Diamond.
She’s a consultant, the scientific adviser for the California Protective Parents Association and former president of The Institute for Media Education. She’s consulted for four U.S. Department of Justice administrations, the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
“It should not surprise that Diamond (winner of the 2011 [Alfred] Kinsey Award from the Midcontinent Region of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality) like Kinsey, uses bogus ‘data’ to target children as sexual objects,” she said.
“I met many of Diamond’s pedophile-favoring colleagues at the Fifth World Congress of Sexology in 1981. They award each other college degrees and grow in power,” she said. “Having served as a ‘Distinguished Lecturer’ for the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality (IASHS) in San Francisco, Diamond is a long time advocate for legalizing any age victim for pornography/prostitution employment.”
She said Diamond’s institute service “was carried out under Wardell Pomeroy, Kinsey’s co-author and part-time lover.”
Her most recent work, “Sexual Sabotage,” explains how Kinsey corrupted an entire generation by presenting “findings” that children were sexual from birth and vast numbers of citizens engaged in illicit sex.
She argues, “During World War II and the decades that followed, Kinsey and his Indiana cohorts sabotaged our nation by entering our libraries and schools as ‘sex educators’ – ridiculing marriage, fidelity, and chastity. They preached widespread sexual experimentation, succeeded in nationwide fraud campaigns, and gutted the tough laws that kept pornography and predators at bay.”
She explains that the IASHS has as its mission a list of “basic sexual rights” that include “the right to engage in sexual acts or activities of any kind whatsoever, providing they do not involve nonconsensual acts, violence, constraint, coercion or fraud.”
The organization also states sexual entertainment should be “freely available in the marketplace, including sexually explicit materials dealing with the full range of sexual behavior” and noting especially that rights to sexual activities must not be barred for those “disadvantaged because of age.”
“Since children must not be ‘disadvantaged because of age,’ as these ‘Mission Goals’ deliberately have no lower age limit, Milton’s IASHS buddies would legalize adult sexual abuse of infants and children, including incest, child prostitution, and child pornography, assuming they wrest some form of verbal, gestural, or signed ‘consent’ from child, parent or guardian,” Reisman said.
“For decades IASHS faculty and graduates have testified in courts as ‘sexperts’ advocating open ‘homosexuality’ in the military,” she continued. “Kinsey’s co-authors and other IASHS sexperts have been cited in government reports providing ‘data’ showing homosexuality as conducive to unit cohesion and morale. Such compromised ‘sexperts’ always claim ‘victimless’ crimes despite how glaring and tragic the facts actually are.”
Diamond’s report says “Child sex abuse was much lower than it was when availability of child pornography was restricted.”
A report on the study at Hawaii’s KITV said Diamond explained child pornography gives would-be abusers a different outlet to channel their desires.
But Rob Taylor, writing on David Horowitz’s NewsRealBlog, had another perspective.
“The study certainly raises interesting philosophical questions about promoting objectionable material to prevent real-world crimes – but it’s also majorly flawed. A couple of big-time caveats: Diamond’s research finds a correlation between child pornography and sex abuse, which is not the same as causation; and in the Czech case, pornography in general (including kiddie porn) was legalized, not just kiddie porn. It’s also worth noting that the observed drop is in reported child sex abuse.”
He also raised the issue of the facts of real-life crime cases.
A pair of pedophiles known to be active in the online sex offender community named Jeff Brisson and Harold Spurling moved in together in a cozy Connecticut home where it was rumored the two began a relationship with each other. During their ‘romance’ they were found to be molesting a 14-year-old boy. The boy reported that the pair showed him child pornography involving children as young as five but police were shocked to find that the two had sunk to even lower depths. A neighbor allowed them to baby sit her 3-month-old girl.
Brisson had filmed himself raping the infant. The pair had filmed themselves raping several children in fact.
“Clearly in this case access to child pornography not only didn’t stop the pair, but they used it as a prop in their crimes. But more importantly, the study put forward by the University of Hawaii suggests that were we to make the filmed rape of the infant available to others we could decrease the victimization of children which is a theory that conveniently ignores how traumatic it would be for the victims to one day find that their filmed rapes were being passed around to perverts…,” he wrote.
“Just before I sat down to write this, a friend of mine sent me a link to a story about a convicted sex offender named Eugene Melendres Ramos. In 2003 he attacked a 7-year-old girl and was convicted of assault with intent to commit rape, sodomy or oral copulation. Recently released, Ramos stalked a 2-year-old in a department store as the child shopped with her aunt and grandmother,” Taylor wrote. He said police reported when the child was briefly separated from the adults, the girl’s grandmother turned into an aisle and found the girl “pinned down by the suspect” who was assaulting her.
“Do we really believe that if only Eugene Ramos has access to the sado-masochistic films … he could have lived a normal crime-free life?” Taylor wrote.
In 1999, he said, “There are certainly anecdotal reports of negative consequences, aside from sex crimes, attributed to pornography. These range from domestic violence …to child abuse. … There is, however, no evidence that pornography is in anyway causal in such terrible and regrettable crimes.”
Ten years later, he wrote, “It appears that without evidence of social harm from its availability, there is no reason to believe that pornography should not be legally available.”
In a 2010 writing at The Scientist, he said, “There is no doubt that some people have claimed to suffer adverse effects from exposure to pornography – just look at testimony from women’s shelters, divorce courts and other venues. But there is no evidence it was the cause of the claimed abuse.”
“As we have seen ever since Kinsey,” Reisman said, “those using ‘science’ and ‘surveys’ can justify anything. This will do that. It comes on the heels of other so-called studies that have been advocating that pornography reduces rape. Now we’re seeing claims child pornography will reduce child assaults.”