Acquittal not Good Enough for Feminist

japanese-sex-doll-10In her recent Toronto Star article, Heather Mallick suggests that “You be the judge in sex doll case”, but goes on to suggest that judges are befuddled and tells you what to think.

The acquittal of a Newfoundland man on a child pornography charge after he bought a sex doll from Japan reveals yet another judge befuddled by male sexual peculiarity and intent.

A feminist journalist claims that a judge is befuddled… seems legit.

When is a sex doll not childish?

This is indeed the question. If pornographic representations of children are illegal–in Canada, they are–you need to be able to distinguish between them and legal pornographic representations of adults.

Will it ultimately harm living children, as police working on sex crimes believe?

There seem to be at least as many opinions that say childlike sex dolls will reduce pedophilia. In any case, these are opinions, not facts.

The doll was indeed pornographic, the judge said, but ruled there was reasonable doubt that the unfortunate Kenneth Harrisson, 54, had actually ordered a child-sized one (sold with names like Lola and Lolita).

According to the CBC, the judge ruled that the doll was child pornography. Harrisson’s intent–or rather, the prosecutor’s failure to establish it–was the reason given for Harrison’s acquittal. The names these products are sold under is not relevant.

Harrisson, a skinny balding man with fly-away hair, testified that in 2013 he had googled “sex doll” and for $1,000 ordered the one with the most “malelike” face, if an adult male doll was named Carol, with makeup and styled pubic hair. Harrisson said he wanted a com-panion to replace his infant son who had died in 1986. Divorced, he has lived with his mother for 3o years.

So the doll was called Carol, not Lolita.

But neither the doll that was ordered nor the one that arrived resembled a baby or even the son who would have been 25 had he lived. There was no explanation of why he hadn’t simply gone to a local toy store. Any suggestion that he wanted an adult male doll as a sort of Netflix companion is either tragic, or “incredible,” as the judge said, or both.

I thought the judge was befuddled? Finding Harrison’s story “incredible” seems pretty sound.

The doll that arrived came dressed in a school uniform. She had a vaginal opening, lubricant and panties. Maybe this was a standard customer service dispute. A buyer wanted an adult sex doll and the warehouse shipped a girl.

Or maybe Harrison didn’t know what he was ordering.

As is standard, the defence questioned whether using a fake child as a masturbatory tool would harm the living. Hypothetically speaking, isn’t keeping a doll better than finding a child who is alive, though possibly not for long? I say no, not if the doll inevitably leads to worse, as is the human pattern.

This seems a reasonable question. What evidence is there that dolls “inevitably lead to worse”? None that I’ve seen.

Given that a new doll brothel nearly opened in Toronto recently, this case is turning into a latex version of the traditional male demand for access to prostitutes. I question whether men should always get what they want.

I question whether anyone should always get what they want. But, if no one is getting hurt, who are you to say that men shouldn’t be allowed to use dolls? What would you say if men tried to ban vibrators?

Child porn online uses real children, who scream as they are sexually tortured, sometimes in a livestream while a customer gives orders. It’s a crime to download because it sustains a monstrous global market. But child sex dolls are arguably a step further. A customer can do anything to a doll, from vaginal slicing to decapitation. Wouldn’t it be nicer if she screamed? He feels unsatiated.

Arguing that sex dolls are a step further than actual sexual torture of real children is insane. What evidence is there that sex dolls lead to actual violence? This seems like the same tired “video games lead to violence” rhetoric.

That’s the thing about pleasure, whether it’s delicious food, euphoria inducing drugs or a sexual practice taken too far and then further. We don’t stop. Animals don’t eat themselves to death or auto-asphyxiate. Human do that.

Perhaps you’re projecting your own lack of self control on others? Humans, not animals, possess free will and the ability to control their own actions based on morals. At least most of us do.

What does Wikipedia have to say about Mallick? An investigation by the CBC ombudsman found that “many of her most savage assertions lack a basis in fact”.  The publisher of CBC news, John Cruickshank, apologized for publishing Mallick’s column, which he called “viciously personal, grossly hyperbolic and intensely partisan”.

Her July 28, 2011, article in the The Toronto Sun titled “What to do when a monster likes your work”, Mallick described the recipients of emails [from Breivik] as a “small but select crowd of people in Canada, the U.S. and Europe”, as “agitators who woke up last Saturday to find that the Norwegian monster Anders Breivik liked them.” A British journalist mentioned in the column, Melanie Phillips, promptly commenced legal action. The Star printed an apology, stating in part, “The column made reference to Ms. Phillips’ writings in an entirely misleading and inappropriate manner.” The paper also removed the column from their website, and settled with Phillips for full legal costs, plus a donation to a charity of her choice in lieu of damages.

The issue of sex dolls is not an easy one. Having the Toronto Star unleash their “viciously, grossly hyperbolic and intensely partisan” columnist on it is not helpful.

About jimbelton

I'm a software developer, and a writer of both fiction and non-fiction, and I blog about movies, books, and philosophy. My interest in religious philosophy and the search for the truth inspires much of my writing.
This entry was posted in philosophy and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s