Addiction to porn makes a person want to look at people who are a 1 on the tanner scale of sexual maturity?

According to experts yes - it does not make them want to look at children or be sexually attracted to children - it is kind of like say alcoholism - experts say that if you only drink one beer every Friday night but you cannot do with out that one beer you are an alcoholic - people do not start out to be addicted to something but the steps of addiction are such that when one thing satisfies for a while sooner or later it doesn't do the trick anymore - so the addiction escalates - one beer turns into 3 and so on. Porn addiction is the same way - it escalates into hard core, kiddie porn, restraint stuff etc. but it does not make those people pedophiles or murders or sadists.

I agree Advocate. I have spoken to someone who was convicted of CP. They said it was a porn addiction that got out of hand.

This is what happened to Little Lupe for showing u the US government. http://colombiareports.co/colombian-porn-star-wanted-by-interpol/

doesn't surprise me in the least!!!!! we all know the feds have a very low tolerance for being humiliated....

I wonder how that turned out ? That story was quite a while ago - it says the arrested her husband

Do you have links to the studies? I can't understand looking at images with no sexual development, the lowest level of the tanner scale without being at least somewhat attracted to them.

I understand looking at teenagers and being attracted, hell the "she just turned 18" sites are very popular. Looking at a sexually mature person as a possible mate fits in with our biological imperative, to reproduce. Again not condoning sleeping with underage girls that are sexually mature but I can see from biology why there is attraction there. I just cannot get looking at pre-pubescent children, I don't see a biological reason for it.

Do you agree that they should separate looking at sexually mature teenagers from pre-pubescent children in the charges for CP?

But it is not about being attracted to them - it is about the porn - in fact most experts say the porn takes on a detachment factor because of the addiction - I will look later for some of the info

In the feds, you will get an enhancement (more time) if the images are under 13 and more time as they get younger. You will still go to prison for a couple of years if they are 17.
Most of these studies are too small a sample size and too short a period of time to be much help. Remember CP has only been illegal in the US since 1977-1978. The best chance for a decent study was tainted by the corruption scandal in Butner Federal Prison, where most SO's were being housed until about 2008. the inmates that were in for CP crimes were told that if they didn't admit to contact crimes they would be civilly committed, so obviously most made up stories to get released.
People look at things that disgust them also, scat, bestiality, cuckolding, ect. It's different and they think that the are safe in their homes and anonymous.
The largest determining factor to me is the percentage of their porn that is illegal or at least the number of illegal files. If someone has 1000 pic out of 1 million they have viewed is that better or worse than having 100 pics out of 500? Did they save the pics, did they sort out their collection, all of this is ignored. Plead guilty to possession and everything looks the same on paper.

Thanks advocate, having a hard time wrapping my head around that idea.

And hank, thanks for the info on enhancement. And I agree that once someone takes a plea it all looks the same on paper. So any study would have to be qualitative in nature and not quantitative. The researchers would need to get their hands on the original police reports for each convicted CP offender and even that could be somewhat tainted because the evidence has not been cross examined. However since the defendant accepted the plea there is probably truth to the report. It's a messy subject to deal with that's for sure.

I understand but think of it this way - does looking at a picture of a murder make you a murderer? There are people that get quite a kick out of watching slasher movies but it does not make them a psycho. Personally I find those types of movies just as offensive as I would kiddie prom

I understand the analogy but I am not sure it is a perfect comparison. First, in slasher movies, no one is actually being slashed. It is a story, a bloody story, but still make believe. I agree with you that I find these movies in bad taste.

Two, there have not been the same type of links between slasher movies and murder as there have been between CP and contact crimes. Now I preface this by saying I have not seen any studies that show CP leads to contact crimes. This is an unproven link, and I am not sure there is an ethical research methodology to find out one way or the other. There are several studies besides just the one from Butner that show prisoners in prison for CP also have contact crimes and people who are in prison for contact crimes have looked at CP. But like I said it is pretty impossible to prove one way or the other, its a chicken and egg scenario, which came first and what caused the other, the contact crime or the CP? One caveat with the older studies of contact crimes and CP, it is my belief that before politicians widened the net of who is considered a sex offender, the people in prison were legitimately more dangerous than the people in prison are now. That's because there is a much lower bar to make it into prison now as a sex offender than there was 20-30 years ago.

And three, most people that are looking at porn at least to my understanding are doing it for sexual gratification. So these people are sexually gratifying themselves while looking at pictures of 8 year olds is concerning to me in a way that sexually gratifying yourself and looking at pictures of a 16 year old is not. I understand that acting out one's own past trauma could come into play here, so I am not passing judgment. I am also not suggesting that all people who look at CP of 8 year olds are pedophiles, but I certainly think it is a slippery slope.

I would love to read more about this to get some more clarification on the topic.

I think that is probably a high incidence of molesters today actually viewing CP, BUT I don't think it works the opposite, where most people who view CP actually molest. And if someone who has NEVER committed a contact crime is convicted for CP, I would that it is highly improbable that after their conviction and going through the system and therapy they will commit their 1st contact crime after a non contact conviction.

I would tend to agree with you Hank. Especially after therapy for a CP conviction. I just want to see the studies and where the information is coming from. I am curious if someone smarter than me has come up with a better research methodology.

I also want to know if there is a difference between the age of the CP and the likelihood to commit a contact crime. It is my hypothesis that the younger the CP the more likely they are to commit a contact crime.

There can't be any decent studies because CP convictions have really only been a thing since about 1996. Also, where are you getting a control group of people who have viewed CP, but never been caught, they are not going to volunteer.
You do know that that the crime of possession occurs when the image is downloaded, right? From what I learned from other people's stories in group sessions, there is thankfully very little young hardcore, in fact most people involved don;t even refer to those images as CP, it is called hurtcore. These pics and such are generally despised by the pedos. Almost any CP where the victim is under 10, consists of nudity way more than penetration or rape. The problem is when someone is arrested the reports will say CP and probably detail the age of the worst image, so if a guy had 1000 pics of 15 year olds and 1 image of a 7 year old, it would read the victims were as young as 7. Factually correct, but definitely misleading.