France’s consumer watchdog has reported the Asian fast fashion giant Shein to authorities for selling “sex dolls with a childlike appearance” on its website.
The Directorate General for Competition, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control (DGCCRF) said the online description and categorisation of the dolls “makes it difficult to doubt the child pornography nature of the content”.
Shein later told the BBC: “The products in question were immediately delisted as soon as we became aware of these serious issues.”
I really don’t understand what you are saying. I was in fact looking to open a discussion on a personal freedom angle. But the specific topic here was just what got me thinking about it. “A guy with a megaphone”. I really have no idea what that is referring to.
I did suggest that all sex toy type products could maybe be required to have some dimension that clearly marks the item as representing an adult. That would be my suggestion. But I am still curious where people draw the line on personal freedom vs something that isn’t proven to be harmful. Drugs and such are another good example. Should people be allowed to do whatever dtugs they want, as long as they don’t drive or something. Alcohol actually follows that example. Guns do to. Lots of ways to frame the debate.
The “guy” would be Shein.
Another neat way to frame the debate, to reach for the obvious example, is over swastikas. Of course, having a picture of a swastika tattooed on your arm isn’t harming anyone, so why should we as a society have any distaste for it?
To answer “we shouldn’t” is to cede ground to nazis. We do not, actually, have to tolerate their symbols.
The 4chan-nazi pipeline—yes, I’m still talking about pedophiles—if you’re not aware, is a strategy by which people are drenched in ironic, nazi iconography, which results in them being more permissive of that kind of thing, and thus makes them much, much easier to be groomed by king-master klansman, or whatever they call themselves.
Being too permissive of something is socially harmful.
I agree, pedophiles are often villainized way too much. I would like them not to be so afraid of being found out that they never get therapy. If they’re good people, I assume they want to be better as much as I want them to, even if it’s difficult. None of this means we need to sell dolls to them.
Think about it this way: I watch pornography all the time. I am not any less likely to fuck a woman. How is the doll supposed to satiate them?
I realize that I sound very condescending right now, but I’m sincerely asking: this idea that a legal outlet is actually more helpful to them, where does this come from? Does it even make sense?
Whether you mean to or not, I think that you are ceding ground to people who want pedophilia to be more popular. They do exist: middle America loves child marriage. This is why I’m not engaging with the personal freedom angle; it’s not really relevant.
Also, requiring child dolls to have some dimension by which they are clearly identifiable as adults is an effective ban on child dolls—it’s the same thing.