btm said:

Arts said:

there is research on child sex dolls that points to them increasing harm. but, more importantly, no evidence that there is a therapeutic benefit.

Brown R & Shelling J 2019. Exploring the implications of child sex dolls. Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 570. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi570

While you’re here, Arts, and on a similar subject, Lenny Bruce was an American comedian who was in the US Navy for most of WWII; after the war he joined the merchant marine. He said that when whatever ship he was on docked in Paris he and his shipmate on shore leave would go to a particular brothel. The most popular girl there dressed and behaved like a child; she said that her clients “needed to feel that they were taking her innocence.”

Is there any evidence that men using a (voluntary) worker to do those things reduces or increases sexual assault on children?

In the work I have done with true paedophiles (as diagnosed in DSM) there are a group of individuals who call themselves ‘Virpeds’ – Virtuous paedophiles. These individuals have the diagnosis, understand their sexual orientation has the potential to be harmful and will (apart from support each other in non- harmful/offending behaviours) will often seek out sexual partners that are typically smaller in stature and younger looking. While I cannot make a statement on the actual data for the reduction of harm, in the cases you describe, we could extrapolate as this seems to reduce harms for both potential victims and for those with the sexual orientation.

Of course this all is a non argument for child sex offenders who perpetrate harm for other reasons.

However, interestingly, CSO’s are potentially ‘treatable’ while true Paedophiles are really only ‘supportable’