The Criminalisation of Child Sex Dolls: Justified or Impulsive Legislation?

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Oleson, James
dc.contributor.author Jones, Gayle Rose
dc.date.accessioned 2021-11-02T01:36:56Z
dc.date.available 2021-11-02T01:36:56Z
dc.date.issued 2021 en
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/2292/57168
dc.description Full Text is available to authenticated members of The University of Auckland only. en
dc.description.abstract Sex crime is an umbrella term encompassing a broad variety of behaviours. What is considered a sex crime is ambiguous, inconsistent, expansive, and continually widening. The outcome for those convicted of a sex crime is they become sex offenders, a highly problematic and stigmatised label. Most recently, child sex dolls (CSDs) have become subject to criminalisation as a sex crime. Globally, many jurisdictions have either criminalised them, typically under existing child pornography or obscenity laws, or are contemplating this course of action. While there is mass support for criminalisation, there is also pushback, particularly as there is no empirical research in this area. To determine the rationale for criminalising CSDs and whether this is justified or impulsive legislation, this thesis aims to explore this in more detail, specifically addressing the arguments made for criminalising child sex dolls and whether these arguments are valid; whether CSDs meet the threshold for criminalisation; whether CSD legislation is the result of a moral panic; and whether CSDs should be criminalised. To do this, two theoretical models were employed for analysis: criminalisation theory, and a moral panic framework. Other avenues of analysis were also explored including whether CSDs could be classified as child pornography, obscenity, or sex toys, in addition to critiquing the arguments supporting the criminalisation of CSDs and those opposing. It was determined from these analyses that CSDs do not meet the threshold for criminalisation. It was further determined that CSDs do meet the threshold for a moral panic, which often result in the implementation of ineffective and detrimental legislation. No evidence was found to support the arguments for criminalising CSDs; however, this was not conclusive for the arguments opposing criminalisation. There is preventative and therapeutic potential in CSD use which should be explored further. It was established CSDs scarcely meet the criteria for child pornography or obscenity, but rather, align more closely with sex toys. It was concluded that the criminalisation of CSDs, while underpinned by the intention to protect children, was rash, made in an absence of evidence, and may result in more harm than good.
dc.publisher ResearchSpace@Auckland en
dc.relation.ispartof Masters Thesis - University of Auckland en
dc.relation.isreferencedby UoA en
dc.rights Restricted Item. Full Text is available to authenticated members of The University of Auckland only. en
dc.rights Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
dc.rights.uri https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm en
dc.rights.uri http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/nz/
dc.title The Criminalisation of Child Sex Dolls: Justified or Impulsive Legislation?
dc.type Thesis en
thesis.degree.discipline Criminology
thesis.degree.grantor The University of Auckland en
thesis.degree.level Masters en
dc.date.updated 2021-09-23T23:29:35Z
dc.rights.holder Copyright: the author en


Files in this item

Find Full text

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Share

Search ResearchSpace


Browse

Statistics