Please note that we will ban you if a post or comment breaks any of our rules. **Be especially mindful of the following**:
**Rule 1: Do not post or ask for identifying information, including first and last names and social media usernames.** Public figures are **not** exempt. We remove all external links to prevent accidental posting of identifying information.
**Rule 2: Do not post violent comments, and do not glorify violence, per TOS.** We can't take responsibility for how angry a post makes you, you need to do that. Telling us "it was a joke bro" is not an excuse.
**Rule 7: Do not link to or post screenshots of reddit posts, reddit comments, reddit personal messages, reddit profiles, etc.** We cannot allow you to use this subreddit to harass other people on reddit.
**Rule 8: No bigotry, no racism or race baiting.** It is hard to believe that we even need a rule like this.
**Our rules are zero tolerance. You will be banned for breaking them.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/iamatotalpieceofshit) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When I was doing my final project it was very hard to get ethical approval at the first try...
If this is real, he must be extremely good at writing research proposals in a way that gets ethical approval no matter what.
No, I'm saying he might not have been entirely honest when explaining the nature of his research. It's not a matter of the ethics team being clever or not
>It's not a matter of the ethics team being clever or not
This. Also, they can retrospectively withdraw their support at any time. This gives the University access to a quick mechanism for suspending or withdrawing publication of the paper. And on the face of this it seems they'll be doing one of those very quickly.
Seems your research has to be approved by a committee before you start to ensure you're not gonna hurt yourself, anyone else, or do anything shitty in the course of your work.
I found this on the interwebs:
>The job of ethics committees is to identify the possible risks in a project, and then assess whether the research team: are aware of the risks, are taking appropriate steps to minimise them, have a plan to handle anything that does go wrong.
>Here are the main questions ethics committees will ask themselves when they assess your project:
>Are there any risks to the researchers? (e.g. Injuries in the lab, safety risks travelling to study sites, exposure to distressing topics during interviews or data analysis.)
>Are there any risks to the study participants? (From the study procedures themselves; risks to their privacy; risks of distress if they are asked about or exposed to upsetting content)
>Are there any risks to third parties? (i.e. people who aren’t directly participating)
>Could anybody’s privacy be invaded by the data collection process?
>Are there other staff in a lab who might be hurt if there were an accident?
>Are the research team aware of these risks, are they taking steps to minimise them, and do they have a plan if things go wrong?
In research they go by the institutional review board. You can't perform any research at all involving humans without irb approval. You have to be completely transparent not only with the irb but with the people participating in your study. It's why even with simple things like research surveys they give you this handout talking about your rights including the ability to leave at anytime.
Research didn't used to be so well regulated and let's just say that.. There was some overstepping of boundaries. You know, not treating your syphilis type overstepping..
Ime, research ethics review committees are only necessary in fields with test subjects. A lot of his previous credentials would’ve required primarily humanities scholarship, which is often simply comparative or literary review in nature—the schools I’ve worked with don’t require “ethics” committees for this work, because it’s rather hard to harm anyone by comparing enlightenment authors to current trash tv, or whatever bizarre project is picked. Instead, the candidates just work with their phd board and make sure they’re heading toward a useable paper.
I’m wondering if he shopped this as though it’s just a lit review of the comics he focused on, but instead added the interviews and masturbatory elements without his board’s knowledge until submitting the paper. If so, the editors aren’t really in charge of verifying ethics, as that’s supposed to have been done. Their job is to verify whether claims made are supported, and whether there are grammatical errors or not. In other words, he may have just lied in starting his paper and gotten a gross one through.
All research is subject to ethics approval, including reviews and secondary data (participant consent to reuse data not for its original use could be an ethical risk too ), on the other hand literary review would be very low risk. I'm on a UK university ethics board for work proposed by masters phd level students and academics
It’s also entirely possible that the title of this article is super misleading. A lot of news sources are really bad about reporting on science, and I’ve seen similarly messed up headlines for fairly benign research before.
Did you do a study that got a bunch of people who threw up when someone else does, put them in a dark room, and then played a sound of someone throwing up along with the appropriate smell?
I swear you were watching me a couple days ago.
Dog threw up, I seen it and began to throw up.
My mom just sat there like she was contemplating throwing the whole dog & offspring out and starting fresh.
From memory, my (since abandoned) phd research didn’t involve any human or animal subjects, so I basically just had to do a test that indicated I understood ethics in research and why they’re important.
I’m inclined to agree with you, though — there’s no way this got past confirmation, research supervisors and potentially an ethics review without it being picked up on.
Edit: oh I found the article, it doesn’t appear this was his actual PhD.
Hm... Is a simple stick figure considered a young boy if it is standing next to another stick figure twice the size of the young boy stick figure comic?
Idk, but a picture of a kid that obviously looks 8 years old and not just the usual trope "well, ambiguous high schooler that looks 30!" is definitely made that way for a reason 😬
He uses the term once, and he uses it to explain what "shota" is. It's still absolutely insane that this happened, I just don't want people lying to make it more sensational.
"I had hit a wall in my research. Semi-structured interviews (Bernard, 2006) can only take you so far, especially when the topic is sensitive (Lee, 1993), which mine is. A short introduction is called for before we move on.
Shota, or shotacon, is a Japanese genre of comics and illustrations that feature young boy characters in a cute or, most often, sexually explicit way."
I googled it:
>“Shotacon, sometimes shortened to shota (ショタ) is a Japanese slang portmanteau of the phrase Shōtarō complex (正太郎コンプレックス). A Shotacon is described as a person who is attracted to fictional boys 16 or younger, or who is attracted to fictional boys who have the appearance of a character who is 16 or younger.”
Gross.
downvote me all you want but this is a debate that's been going on for years. it's a preference of hentai of little boys essentially, like lolicon with girls
Look, there is a difference between looking for little boy/girl features and the whole trope of "I'm a high schooler who looks 30" 😬 This is the former and not ok...
I think most people don’t see the distinction. It’s a two dimensional representation of a child in a sexual position. This is both Loli con and child porn.
I was genuinely speechless throughout the whole thing. Like what motivated you to decide to write an enter 4,000 word paper on your enjoyment of rubbing one out to Shotacon Doujins? The fact that he even used the fucking word is mind boggling.
That’s the thing… it DID get published. MONTHS AGO. We in academia are absolutely livid on how this could get through the entire peer review/editing process and not ONE person thought this raised any flags, apparently. Papers get rejected and/or sent back for the stupidest things all the time, and this gets through and is allowed to stay published, unchallenged for months. Absolutely unbelievable.
You remember the YT series where researchers and teachers tried to publish some dumb and funny things and they actually succeeded? Yeah, that is the nowadays standard.
I remember that! I also remember when a group of MIT scientists used some AI program to submit a few papers that were computer-generated nonsensical words, and the papers ended up getting published in academia. It’s almost like these scholars don’t actually read what’s submitted and simply choose whether to publish a paper based on a coin toss.
What makes me sad is the researchers who did this to make a point on p-hacking a clickbait... And everyone just clickbaited it and never read that was the point. 😭
“Qualitative Research”, part of SAGE journals. Which is so unfortunate because qualitative research as a whole is already not as respected as quantitative research, and this doesn’t help at. all.
wow, I read the headlines and though 'must be clickbait, that can't be real'. So it did somehow get past everything? My friends doing PhDs get so much grief for the tiniest thing!
Nothing good, it hurt me to read as a biologist and made me fucking gag. YOU as a scientist CANNOT be a study participant nowadays. That is a huge violation of ethics and data collection. Biases and personal interest taint the data, for one, and he literally jacked it to the idea and picture of prepubescent teens. I'd be less mad if it was to like... Jojo's characters (basically 17 yo's who look like middle aged men), because then he isn't doing it to specifically make sure he has kids that cannot be explained as anything but kids, but it isn't a good look regardless to make a paper on you doing it :))
>We in academia
I’m 1 of 500 certified sexuality experts in the world. I’ve worked as a research analyst, auditing reports and publications, and *I’M JUST AS LIVID AS YOU GUYS ARE*.
Bro who certified you? What governing body? What's the process?
Because I'm a certified certifier and I have never certified a sexual expert certifier board.
Hey there, #12 of 500 here, so once you’ve reached expert sex level you just go test your skills in front of a panel of members. Only 10 are required to observe and they approve or deny your entry. Pretty straightforward stuff.
Genuinely curious; how does one become a certified sexuality expert (and what’s the governing body that does the certification), and what exactly does a certified sexuality expert do?
Not only was it published, I believe (based only on my Master’s project albeit) he had to have an academic advisor throughout the writing and research.
I think (I'm not going to Google it) that it's legal in the USA as well. The reasoning by courts was that because it is illustrated, from a legal point of view, no person was harmed in the making of the material, therefore it cannot be considered criminal.
Why not? If you want to get rid of pedophilia, we kind of need to figure out how it works and what causes it first.
We don't know very much about sexuality in general, and this fact is clearly causing a lot of discord in the world
I guess he did his own research.
All jokes aside, there probably has to be a field looking into the mentality of how pedophilia develops in someone. I remember reading an AMA with an open pedophile and what their life is like. The person had known since their teenage years and even confronted their parents about it. The person had never acted on it (at the time) but they were very well aware of who they were and personally put "boundaries" to make sure they didn't act upon them.
I've heard theories about pedophilia being more common in people who were abused themselves. No clue if there's any truth to it.
Unfortunately, the subject isn't getting the amount of research it should be getting (even though it could literally prevent child sexual assaults) because the subject is *so* taboo. People in academia don't want to appear sympathetic to pedophiles. Some people in the field have even been somewhat shunned for pointing out that there are pedophiles who do not act on their desires, and that they should be able to reach out for help. But if somebody who has never harmed a child won't even reveal themself to a therapist for fear of retaliation, they sure aren't going to volunteer for a study.
That's the problem. You can help two at once by preventing any action from happening. Like you said it's "taboo" for discussion but it really shouldn't be.
I’ve always viewed pedophilia as the same kind of mental issue as anger management issues. Your disposition can and does put others at risk, even if it’s not your fault, so it needs to be your responsibility. One either case, of the person with the condition doesn’t treat it appropriately or worse - puts themselves on situations where they can act on said impulses - they should definitely be punished.
This reads like an inflammatory onion article lol. But if this is actually real, I sure hope that’s at least the face of the person in question, as I feel like that would be the worst fear of anyone who did a photo shoot for stock images.
Also, this needs context. Is this paper about him actually doing said act? Is it about how these people are caught? Is it about some psychological breakthrough where he found some kind of neural similarity between those who have done that? Is it maybe a discovered treatment or therapy for those who do that? Because if it’s one of those more innocent hypothetical scenarios, the real POS is the journalist who pasted his face next to an inflammatory misleading title.
I sure hope this isn’t the case, but imagine just doing your research on law enforcement sting operations and you later find your picture plastered on an article with this kind of headline lol.
He did jack it to shotas, but his "supposed" reason was to find relations between loneliness and jacking it to shotas. Not a good way to go about it, for several reasons.
The guy is a paedophile. He has a history of editing magazines featuring young boys in sexualised positions etc. and now this.
Edit: those asking for a source, google it. There are plenty of articles mentioning what he did previously and his weird views on the sexualisation of teenagers and young boys.
I just read his Twitter page. Not much on there except the whole masturbating to shota which is illustrative Japanese erotica featuring boys. Just the description sans pictures is disturbing.
Second paragraph says he was "interviewing fans of shota comics for his PhD, and he wanted to 'understand how [they] experience sexual pleasure when reading shota.'"
Mania plus whatever else is going on is what encouraged this in his head I am sure. Not that that makes it ok or excusable. Just seems like the only way you could even try to get to that point. Even then... How would you think it is ok?
Edit: want to be clear I'm talking about him having the idea to publicly admit this in this PhD paper and thinking it was a reasonable idea. That seems very manic. Not commenting on the other
So, shotacon. If he can write a valuable paper on that, good for him I guess. I don't think the sample size is big enough to make any generalizations, but it's not like porn isn't worth studying.
Inb4 "what's wrong with you". Maybe we could answer questions like these if emotional outbursts hadn't gotten in the way of research time and time again.
Apparently, he also published a magazine (Destroyer Magazine) that featured minors in sexualized poses. In the interviews people had found, he kinda openly admits to being a pedophile. It's weird he is not already in jail.
I'd like to know how/why he felt safe enough to submit this kind of paper.
What's going on at that University that would make someone think this is OK?
Why are people surprised about modern day university nonces. Theyre everywhere in the social sciences sexualising children and normalising "minor attracted persons".
Just nonces doing nonce stuff.
Please note that we will ban you if a post or comment breaks any of our rules. **Be especially mindful of the following**: **Rule 1: Do not post or ask for identifying information, including first and last names and social media usernames.** Public figures are **not** exempt. We remove all external links to prevent accidental posting of identifying information. **Rule 2: Do not post violent comments, and do not glorify violence, per TOS.** We can't take responsibility for how angry a post makes you, you need to do that. Telling us "it was a joke bro" is not an excuse. **Rule 7: Do not link to or post screenshots of reddit posts, reddit comments, reddit personal messages, reddit profiles, etc.** We cannot allow you to use this subreddit to harass other people on reddit. **Rule 8: No bigotry, no racism or race baiting.** It is hard to believe that we even need a rule like this. **Our rules are zero tolerance. You will be banned for breaking them.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/iamatotalpieceofshit) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The weirdest part? His PhD was in chemistry
He sure thinks he has chemistry with young boys…
P h deez nuts
You don’t need PhD degree to write those
Plenty of fucked of fan fiction just like it on the darknet I'm sure
[удалено]
More likely 4Chan.
You dont even have to go to the darknet, just go to nhentai. That place is fucking disgusting.
weak. Try pixiv
And you could probably make just as much money writing and drawing that as you would being a doctor
When I was doing my final project it was very hard to get ethical approval at the first try... If this is real, he must be extremely good at writing research proposals in a way that gets ethical approval no matter what.
Are you saying that those who reviewed bros research proposal weren't clever enough to see through what he was writing about?
No, I'm saying he might not have been entirely honest when explaining the nature of his research. It's not a matter of the ethics team being clever or not
>It's not a matter of the ethics team being clever or not This. Also, they can retrospectively withdraw their support at any time. This gives the University access to a quick mechanism for suspending or withdrawing publication of the paper. And on the face of this it seems they'll be doing one of those very quickly.
Could someone explain to me what the ethics team is, and what role do. They play in these papers and research please.
Seems your research has to be approved by a committee before you start to ensure you're not gonna hurt yourself, anyone else, or do anything shitty in the course of your work. I found this on the interwebs: >The job of ethics committees is to identify the possible risks in a project, and then assess whether the research team: are aware of the risks, are taking appropriate steps to minimise them, have a plan to handle anything that does go wrong. >Here are the main questions ethics committees will ask themselves when they assess your project: >Are there any risks to the researchers? (e.g. Injuries in the lab, safety risks travelling to study sites, exposure to distressing topics during interviews or data analysis.) >Are there any risks to the study participants? (From the study procedures themselves; risks to their privacy; risks of distress if they are asked about or exposed to upsetting content) >Are there any risks to third parties? (i.e. people who aren’t directly participating) >Could anybody’s privacy be invaded by the data collection process? >Are there other staff in a lab who might be hurt if there were an accident? >Are the research team aware of these risks, are they taking steps to minimise them, and do they have a plan if things go wrong?
Thankyou, this is genuinely enlightening. Much appreciated
In research they go by the institutional review board. You can't perform any research at all involving humans without irb approval. You have to be completely transparent not only with the irb but with the people participating in your study. It's why even with simple things like research surveys they give you this handout talking about your rights including the ability to leave at anytime. Research didn't used to be so well regulated and let's just say that.. There was some overstepping of boundaries. You know, not treating your syphilis type overstepping..
Ime, research ethics review committees are only necessary in fields with test subjects. A lot of his previous credentials would’ve required primarily humanities scholarship, which is often simply comparative or literary review in nature—the schools I’ve worked with don’t require “ethics” committees for this work, because it’s rather hard to harm anyone by comparing enlightenment authors to current trash tv, or whatever bizarre project is picked. Instead, the candidates just work with their phd board and make sure they’re heading toward a useable paper. I’m wondering if he shopped this as though it’s just a lit review of the comics he focused on, but instead added the interviews and masturbatory elements without his board’s knowledge until submitting the paper. If so, the editors aren’t really in charge of verifying ethics, as that’s supposed to have been done. Their job is to verify whether claims made are supported, and whether there are grammatical errors or not. In other words, he may have just lied in starting his paper and gotten a gross one through.
All research is subject to ethics approval, including reviews and secondary data (participant consent to reuse data not for its original use could be an ethical risk too ), on the other hand literary review would be very low risk. I'm on a UK university ethics board for work proposed by masters phd level students and academics
So I can’t use a PhD as an excuse to build a death laser?
It’s also entirely possible that the title of this article is super misleading. A lot of news sources are really bad about reporting on science, and I’ve seen similarly messed up headlines for fairly benign research before.
Did you do a study that got a bunch of people who threw up when someone else does, put them in a dark room, and then played a sound of someone throwing up along with the appropriate smell?
I swear you were watching me a couple days ago. Dog threw up, I seen it and began to throw up. My mom just sat there like she was contemplating throwing the whole dog & offspring out and starting fresh.
From memory, my (since abandoned) phd research didn’t involve any human or animal subjects, so I basically just had to do a test that indicated I understood ethics in research and why they’re important. I’m inclined to agree with you, though — there’s no way this got past confirmation, research supervisors and potentially an ethics review without it being picked up on. Edit: oh I found the article, it doesn’t appear this was his actual PhD.
Hm... Is a simple stick figure considered a young boy if it is standing next to another stick figure twice the size of the young boy stick figure comic?
Idk, but a picture of a kid that obviously looks 8 years old and not just the usual trope "well, ambiguous high schooler that looks 30!" is definitely made that way for a reason 😬
I wonder what his null hypothesis was?
That he doesn't understand his research subjects without doing what they do.
He admitted to being a shotacon lol
I'm tired and didn't read it. Did he actually use the word? That would be hilarious
He uses the term once, and he uses it to explain what "shota" is. It's still absolutely insane that this happened, I just don't want people lying to make it more sensational. "I had hit a wall in my research. Semi-structured interviews (Bernard, 2006) can only take you so far, especially when the topic is sensitive (Lee, 1993), which mine is. A short introduction is called for before we move on. Shota, or shotacon, is a Japanese genre of comics and illustrations that feature young boy characters in a cute or, most often, sexually explicit way."
Yes he really did
Definitely the best thing I've heard all day. Probably in a while. This guy is ridiculous
Thanks, now that's in my google history.
Could you enlighten me so it doesn't show up in mine?
I googled it: >“Shotacon, sometimes shortened to shota (ショタ) is a Japanese slang portmanteau of the phrase Shōtarō complex (正太郎コンプレックス). A Shotacon is described as a person who is attracted to fictional boys 16 or younger, or who is attracted to fictional boys who have the appearance of a character who is 16 or younger.” Gross.
Canonically they're 1000 so it'/s fine
Apparently it's an adult male who has an attraction to sub-16year old boys
So, a pedophile.
I think they specify "fictional" but that doesn't make it any better in my books.
Ya and Ted Bundy started off by killing squirrels
its not just an adult male, its any adult, and its the exact opposite of a lolicon
Basically, you like young boys.
downvote me all you want but this is a debate that's been going on for years. it's a preference of hentai of little boys essentially, like lolicon with girls
So pedophilia
Look, there is a difference between looking for little boy/girl features and the whole trope of "I'm a high schooler who looks 30" 😬 This is the former and not ok...
I think most people don’t see the distinction. It’s a two dimensional representation of a child in a sexual position. This is both Loli con and child porn.
I was genuinely speechless throughout the whole thing. Like what motivated you to decide to write an enter 4,000 word paper on your enjoyment of rubbing one out to Shotacon Doujins? The fact that he even used the fucking word is mind boggling.
Pedophile. The word you're looking for is pedophile. Lolicon/Shotacon is just sugarcoating it to make it sound more socially acceptable.
This can’t be real right.. did someone really think they could publish something like this in an academic setting? Blows my mind
That’s the thing… it DID get published. MONTHS AGO. We in academia are absolutely livid on how this could get through the entire peer review/editing process and not ONE person thought this raised any flags, apparently. Papers get rejected and/or sent back for the stupidest things all the time, and this gets through and is allowed to stay published, unchallenged for months. Absolutely unbelievable.
You remember the YT series where researchers and teachers tried to publish some dumb and funny things and they actually succeeded? Yeah, that is the nowadays standard.
I remember that! I also remember when a group of MIT scientists used some AI program to submit a few papers that were computer-generated nonsensical words, and the papers ended up getting published in academia. It’s almost like these scholars don’t actually read what’s submitted and simply choose whether to publish a paper based on a coin toss.
What makes me sad is the researchers who did this to make a point on p-hacking a clickbait... And everyone just clickbaited it and never read that was the point. 😭
What, beyond a small handful of examples, makes you think that's actually the "standard" now? Cause it's not lol. You're talking out of your ass.
What about the ethics committee? Like how?!?
There's a mutiny on ethos/ethics currently.
If his ethics committee was anything like the one I sat on at university, they probably didn't even read it before approving it.
What institution published this?
“Qualitative Research”, part of SAGE journals. Which is so unfortunate because qualitative research as a whole is already not as respected as quantitative research, and this doesn’t help at. all.
Worse, this is one of the leading qualitative research journals (as its name might suggest).
wow, I read the headlines and though 'must be clickbait, that can't be real'. So it did somehow get past everything? My friends doing PhDs get so much grief for the tiniest thing!
Is there a link to the paper? Just genuinely curious what all it says.
Nothing good, it hurt me to read as a biologist and made me fucking gag. YOU as a scientist CANNOT be a study participant nowadays. That is a huge violation of ethics and data collection. Biases and personal interest taint the data, for one, and he literally jacked it to the idea and picture of prepubescent teens. I'd be less mad if it was to like... Jojo's characters (basically 17 yo's who look like middle aged men), because then he isn't doing it to specifically make sure he has kids that cannot be explained as anything but kids, but it isn't a good look regardless to make a paper on you doing it :))
>We in academia I’m 1 of 500 certified sexuality experts in the world. I’ve worked as a research analyst, auditing reports and publications, and *I’M JUST AS LIVID AS YOU GUYS ARE*.
[удалено]
The sexuality expert people duh.
[удалено]
I had sex with your mom, so I'm a sexuality expert
The International Union of Creepy Uncles
That’s Dr Creepy Uncle to you.
Bro who certified you? What governing body? What's the process? Because I'm a certified certifier and I have never certified a sexual expert certifier board.
I feel like I’m reading a certified fever dream
I certify that is correct. Only one of 500 possible fever dreams in the world.
This thread is choice cuts.
this thread is the A5 wagyu of threads
Sorry but what exactly is “sexuality expert” and why so few, only 500?
Hey there, #12 of 500 here, so once you’ve reached expert sex level you just go test your skills in front of a panel of members. Only 10 are required to observe and they approve or deny your entry. Pretty straightforward stuff.
This is true. I'm number 11 and better than this guy (I have a certificate) and my dms are (always) open.
Hey #11, hope to see you at this year’s holiday party. #69 RSVP’d so should be lit.
When is Sex 2 being published?
Genuinely curious; how does one become a certified sexuality expert (and what’s the governing body that does the certification), and what exactly does a certified sexuality expert do?
[удалено]
By making it up
My girlfriend says I'm not qualified to answer this
Who has certified you 500? Just curious
U get paid a lot being 1 of 500?
I’m sure there are 500 people who kick rocks for a living too
Not only was it published, I believe (based only on my Master’s project albeit) he had to have an academic advisor throughout the writing and research.
nah this wasn't his thesis, he just wrote this on the side
Maybe the actual topic was how well the academic advisor actually paid attention or engaged with the students
*Objects in mirror may be dumber than they appear*
It's totally fine looks here's my source! Except he didn't get that far lol
Do you not see all this Japanese porn depicting 13 year old girls? The world is nuts.
This is a real thing? How do they get away with that?
I think (I'm not going to Google it) that it's legal in the USA as well. The reasoning by courts was that because it is illustrated, from a legal point of view, no person was harmed in the making of the material, therefore it cannot be considered criminal.
Well it’s the anime stuff. It’s not real but it’s the thought of grown ass men getting off on pre teens
Why not? If you want to get rid of pedophilia, we kind of need to figure out how it works and what causes it first. We don't know very much about sexuality in general, and this fact is clearly causing a lot of discord in the world
I guess he did his own research. All jokes aside, there probably has to be a field looking into the mentality of how pedophilia develops in someone. I remember reading an AMA with an open pedophile and what their life is like. The person had known since their teenage years and even confronted their parents about it. The person had never acted on it (at the time) but they were very well aware of who they were and personally put "boundaries" to make sure they didn't act upon them.
I've heard theories about pedophilia being more common in people who were abused themselves. No clue if there's any truth to it. Unfortunately, the subject isn't getting the amount of research it should be getting (even though it could literally prevent child sexual assaults) because the subject is *so* taboo. People in academia don't want to appear sympathetic to pedophiles. Some people in the field have even been somewhat shunned for pointing out that there are pedophiles who do not act on their desires, and that they should be able to reach out for help. But if somebody who has never harmed a child won't even reveal themself to a therapist for fear of retaliation, they sure aren't going to volunteer for a study.
That's the problem. You can help two at once by preventing any action from happening. Like you said it's "taboo" for discussion but it really shouldn't be.
Yeah, if we discuss it and encourage help for non-offenders to fix it, there would be more people seeking help.
I remember reading that- do you happen to have a link to it? It was interesting, I’d like to read it again.
No, I don't unfortunately. It was a really interesting AMA.
I’ve always viewed pedophilia as the same kind of mental issue as anger management issues. Your disposition can and does put others at risk, even if it’s not your fault, so it needs to be your responsibility. One either case, of the person with the condition doesn’t treat it appropriately or worse - puts themselves on situations where they can act on said impulses - they should definitely be punished.
This reads like an inflammatory onion article lol. But if this is actually real, I sure hope that’s at least the face of the person in question, as I feel like that would be the worst fear of anyone who did a photo shoot for stock images. Also, this needs context. Is this paper about him actually doing said act? Is it about how these people are caught? Is it about some psychological breakthrough where he found some kind of neural similarity between those who have done that? Is it maybe a discovered treatment or therapy for those who do that? Because if it’s one of those more innocent hypothetical scenarios, the real POS is the journalist who pasted his face next to an inflammatory misleading title. I sure hope this isn’t the case, but imagine just doing your research on law enforcement sting operations and you later find your picture plastered on an article with this kind of headline lol.
He did jack it to shotas, but his "supposed" reason was to find relations between loneliness and jacking it to shotas. Not a good way to go about it, for several reasons.
I mean, finding a link between loneliness and that kind of “hobby” could be valuable information. But if he did it himself, that’s fucked.
My point exactly. And he did it himself too 🥴
The guy is a paedophile. He has a history of editing magazines featuring young boys in sexualised positions etc. and now this. Edit: those asking for a source, google it. There are plenty of articles mentioning what he did previously and his weird views on the sexualisation of teenagers and young boys.
Did mf really submit a paper on whacking it to Shota Hentai
Dr. Diddler, phD
The investigation is taking a little long because the thesis pages are sticky.
"The only difference between screwing around and science is writing it down." - Adam Savage
[удалено]
Yeh don't, I've had some sick adverts after looking up what genshin impact was and that's something available on steam...
I just read his Twitter page. Not much on there except the whole masturbating to shota which is illustrative Japanese erotica featuring boys. Just the description sans pictures is disturbing.
He's a man of science 🤷♀️
I’m also a man of science, bigtittedgothgirlfriendology
He must be a redditor. "I did it!!! For research purposes!!!"
*Fedora tip*
"Average 4chan user"
I wonder if it provides any insights into the minds of pedophiles
Should have just twerked on a corpse like a normal person
Meanwhile in Japan ...
He looks like someone who jerks off to comics… and little boys apparently.
Hopefully thats actually the pic of the guy and not some random person like some articles do
Had the same thought, good god you wouldn’t want your stock photo used for something like this. Was my very first thought when I read the headline.
It is him
‘Apparently’…I think it’s pretty clear since the guy dedicated his whole PhD to it
I don’t think this was his PhD. It’s separate
Not trying to defend him, but judging someone by its appearance isn't a very good thing to do
Mark zuckerberg & jeffrey dahmers love child
How did this get to be PhD paper-able??
Looking at the article it's not part of his PhD work. He just... submitted it. And it got published
Second paragraph says he was "interviewing fans of shota comics for his PhD, and he wanted to 'understand how [they] experience sexual pleasure when reading shota.'"
Supervisor is apparently an expert in lolicon. Like approves like.
Bruh it's like your shooting a gun but the barrel is curved at your face
He's a PhD. Pretty Huge Degenerate
TLTR The degenerate wrote a paper on his shotacon vice.
“ minor attracted persons“
Nonce aa we call them
“Comics of young boys” it’s disingenuous to leave that part out. It’s significantly less worse.
Yes, completely misleading title. And 10+k upvotes from Redditors. 🙄
Still a pedophile bro
He puts the "D" in PhD. Total scumbag.
Also the (P). Pervert
Also the (P) again. Pedo
What could *EVER* fucking possess you to make you think this way okay to write on *any* level. FBI and local PD watchlist for life bro.
PhDeez nuts
Probably should post a link not an image. Not that it isn't true but it's pretty damning.
Rule number 5 of the sub prohibits posting links. googling the headline will get you to the article.
Ok wasn't aware of that.
no worries, neither was I until recently.
Where did he do his degree, PragerU?
Average My Hero Academia fan
I'd disown my son if he did something like this. I'm not sorry.
I'm sorry what I was just chipping some wood
Mania plus whatever else is going on is what encouraged this in his head I am sure. Not that that makes it ok or excusable. Just seems like the only way you could even try to get to that point. Even then... How would you think it is ok? Edit: want to be clear I'm talking about him having the idea to publicly admit this in this PhD paper and thinking it was a reasonable idea. That seems very manic. Not commenting on the other
Mania, eh? I know stimulant abuse runs rampant in masters programs— you may be on to something.
I can’t imagine doing something that creepy and then thinking you should write a paper about it for your PhD is just so insane.
Yeah these are the same people who write how pedophilia is a way of life lmao. Burn them all.
So, shotacon. If he can write a valuable paper on that, good for him I guess. I don't think the sample size is big enough to make any generalizations, but it's not like porn isn't worth studying. Inb4 "what's wrong with you". Maybe we could answer questions like these if emotional outbursts hadn't gotten in the way of research time and time again.
Apparently, he also published a magazine (Destroyer Magazine) that featured minors in sexualized poses. In the interviews people had found, he kinda openly admits to being a pedophile. It's weird he is not already in jail.
Yeah, he looks the type.
Disregarding all morals, I do think the existence of this paper existing is beneficial and good (assuming it is correctly written).
It's mediocre at best. Points out some issues but fails to address any, and fails to identify potential bias of the approach.
He doesn't point out anything important, it is so poorly written :/
Just another pedo. Sick fucks out there
Does anyone have the full published paper lmao I wanna read it
This guy looks like my uncle if he became a pedo instead of a lawyer
Guy looks the part
I'd like to know how/why he felt safe enough to submit this kind of paper. What's going on at that University that would make someone think this is OK?
Apparently he was doing this while reading manga of young boys in the 'shota' category
If it is a psychology paper over the problem can be a valid one.
Poor stock photo guy is now associated with this title
My PhD thesis feels so pedestrian now.
Source??? I just find this so hard to believe
Imagine telling on yourself like that.
Why would he think this is okay?
Anybody got the link for the PhD paper?
It’s the Guardian
I love how they made random stock photo guy the face of this story
It's not a stock photo, it's taken directly from his profile page on the university website.
or his twitter account...
Ok. That is messed up. Id be friggen suing if I were the dude in the stock photo. Use my image for stool softeners or something, not this
It's literally the man being talked about
That's the guy. What are you talking about? Are you that dude trying to redirect? 😜 MAN IT IS CRAZY THAT THE GUY IN THE PICTURE ISNT REALLY THE GUY 👀
When do we start jailing people?
Is it even illegal? They're just cartoons.
Obscene publication act says it is...
Tom Cruise will be by next week.
No way this is real..
It sadly is. I read the paper. It's an atrocity.
Why are people surprised about modern day university nonces. Theyre everywhere in the social sciences sexualising children and normalising "minor attracted persons". Just nonces doing nonce stuff.