• Enter search term(s):

Real Child Rape Photos

intersex display puts perverse curiosity over care

Forum: a personal uJournal site
Date: 02/03/2004

plastic kodama (konekomimi) wrote @ 2004-02-03 02:13:00:

<< I've always said that gynecology texts should really have photos. well, here are many, of congenital anomolies. kind of fascinating in a train wreck kind of way, however where else can you see a photo of intersex genitalia. it does satisfy my curiosity. >>
[note: the link at the word "here" has been removed -ek.]

Curiosity is fine, but did you think about how these pictures are taken? There is a standard procedure in medicine that some of us refer to as the "medical display," which involves repeated and unnecessary display of children's naked bodies to doctors, nurses, medical students, and others for the sake of satisfying their curiosity. Typically, parents are asked to leave the room when they bring in the child for a "medical exam," and then medical professionals and students will come in and out of the room as the child is held down with legs spread apart so that they can come and oggle at the freaks of nature. They touch, poke, giggle, whisper to each other, take photos (some of these photos end up in a book like this, while others remain a personal collection of the doctor), etc., all the while liberally expressing disgust as if to maintain their sanity. The child experiences this event as nothing short of ritualized gang rape.

Perhaps some picture-taking may be necessary in order to advance medicine and educate medical students, but the way it is currently done is extremely damaging to the child and the harm far outweighs the benefit. Medicine needs to serve the needs and interests of the patient first and foremost, rather than satisfying the perverse curiosity in the medical gaze.

- ek @

Date: 02/17/2004

twoeyesleft 2004-02-17 02:56:

<< what i was trying to say is that it's ONLY rape if the child says it is... like it's only rape when the woman feels like she was raped. not ALL the children who were photographed felt oh so 'abused and raped', infact i think some of them.. didn't even know what was happening. at the time. >>

Oh, so if the child doesn't immediately realize s/he is being abused, then it's not child abuse. If the child doesn't remember every details of it, it's not child abuse. Sounds like a child molester's rationalization to me.

<< what you're doing is akin to watching another couple have sex and saying 'oh this is moraly wrong, the girl is probably getting raped'. >>

The difference between sex and rape is "consent." Since very young children can't provide "consent" for sexual acts like adults could, we should assume that there is no "consent" for the child to engage in sexual contacts or display (e.g. posing for porn). Any touching, probing, displaying, etc. of child's sexual organs beyond what is medically or otherwise necessary and in the interest of the child, then, is abuse.

<< i condemn you (yes you aren't the only person who could do that) for you preachyness, you gaul to censor other people posts in THEIR own journal. >>

If simply criticizing someone's comment is a form of "censorship," then I could say that you are censoring me. Of course, that's not true--you are just expressing your disagreement with me, and there's no censorship going on. Likewise, I am not exercising censorship here nor would I be able to even if I wanted to (which I don't, by the way).

- ek @