The Edges Of Child Pornography: What Should Be Legal, What Shouldn't?

[Dave1001]

What should be legal to own, what shouldn't, and why?
By child I mean someone under the age of 18. Feel free to make a separate distinction for someone under the age of 16, and under the age of 14.

1. erotic stories depicting child sex, with no illustrations or voices.
2. audio erotic stories depicting child sex, with an adult actor portraying a child's voice.
3. audio erotic stories depicting child sex, with a child actor's voice portraying a child.
4. Cartoons depicting child sex with no voices.
5. Cartoons depicting child sex, voiced by adult actors pretending to be children.
6. Cartoons depicting child sex, voiced by child actors.
7. live action pornography, with adults pretending to be children.
8. live action pornography, with children engaging only in simulated sex.
9. live action pornography, with children actuall having sex.

My own take: everything should be legal except #'s 3, 6, 8, & 9.

I'm also open to rasing the age at which anyone can consent to any of the things in #'s 3, 6, 8, &9 to 30 (and considering that the "adult" age for this purpose), because I think older people have a strong exploitation motivation to use less wise, younger people for sexual gratification. However, I would also envision an exception for someone that got two independent psychiatrists to produce an opinion that they are making mature, informed decision for their voice or image to be used for sexual media. That would hold for people as young as 18.

 

[hammegk]

Are you related to Genghis Pwn?

 

[Pyrrho]

If there weren't so many pervs running around, it wouldn't be a problem, but there are, so it is.

 

[Zygar]

I'm worried about you Dave. I really hope you don't live within 100 miles of me.

 

[Mycroft]

My own take: everything should be legal except #'s 3, 6, 8, & 9.

I tend to agree with you. So long as no children are actually involved in the production, it should be a freedom of speech issue.

At the same time, I think there will always be grey areas. What about a production of Romeo & Juliet where the main characters were 14 and 13 respectively, and played by actors of that age? I can see that making some people feel uncomfortable, and others being okay with it.

 

[geni]

At the same time, I think there will always be grey areas. What about a production of Romeo & Juliet where the main characters were 14 and 13 respectively, and played by actors of that age? I can see that making some people feel uncomfortable, and others being okay with it.

No actual sex though.

 

[brodski]

What about a production of Romeo & Juliet where the main characters were 14 and 13 respectively, and played by actors of that age? I can see that making some people feel uncomfortable, and others being okay with it.

It wouldn't be much worse than what you see on some soap operas and kids TV.

 

[clarsct]

What should be legal to own, what shouldn't, and why?
By child I mean someone under the age of 18. Feel free to make a separate distinction for someone under the age of 16, and under the age of 14.

1. erotic stories depicting child sex, with no illustrations or voices.
2. audio erotic stories depicting child sex, with an adult actor portraying a child's voice.
3. audio erotic stories depicting child sex, with a child actor's voice portraying a child.
4. Cartoons depicting child sex with no voices.
5. Cartoons depicting child sex, voiced by adult actors pretending to be children.
6. Cartoons depicting child sex, voiced by child actors.
7. live action pornography, with adults pretending to be children.
8. live action pornography, with children engaging only in simulated sex.
9. live action pornography, with children actuall having sex.

My own take: everything should be legal except #'s 3, 6, 8, & 9.

I'm also open to rasing the age at which anyone can consent to any of the things in #'s 3, 6, 8, &9 to 30 (and considering that the "adult" age for this purpose), because I think older people have a strong exploitation motivation to use less wise, younger people for sexual gratification. However, I would also envision an exception for someone that got two independent psychiatrists to produce an opinion that they are making mature, informed decision for their voice or image to be used for sexual media. That would hold for people as young as 18.

All of those thing would be considered pornographic, actually.

3,6,8, and 9 are obviously the worst of the bunch.
1,2,4,5 are things I would find questionable, borderline, if you will. It really depends on what you consider child sex. Child on child, child on adult, 6 mo old, 6 years, 16 years? Animals, BDSM...there are infinite variations that may dismay and shock some Americans.
I would think it would be a matter of degree.

7 is probably the most interesting one, as the 'Catholic Schoolgirl' fantasy has been a part of mainstream media for quite some time, now, as has the 'Cheerleader' fantasy. Hustler makes quite a bit of money with their 'Barely Legal' magazine. While this is pornographic, I doubt even the wiliest prosecutor could make a child porn charge stick.

This is really about what society considers normal. In ancient Greece, it was normal for a man to have sex with a young boy. Then again, a lot of what those Greeks called 'normal' would be considered vicious and barbaric by our own standards.

In short, all are pornographic. Even skirting the edges of Child Porn is considered unacceptable behavior. On any but 7, you could, conceivably, face charges for it. You also have to account for numbers. How many of these are owned? Do you have a questionable file, or 3,000 of them? A pattern of behavior is taken into account.

 

[Kiwiwriter]

Child pornography? YUCK!

I agree with that Supreme Court Justice who said, "I can't define it in words, but I know it when I see it."

And as the father of a nine-year-old girl, I am infuriated by its mere existence.

My old high school, Stuyvesant HS in New York, had an assistant principal recently named Richard Plass. He ran the Biology Department, and drew rave reviews for his ability to win the school a lot of Westinghouse/Intel scholarships. He also drew a lot of red flags for allegedly harassing kids sexually.

The fertilizer hit the air conditioner when it was discovered that he had forced girls to watch dirty videos and would masturbate while in the presence of both. He got fired, fined, and lost his teaching license. He didn't lost his pension or his liberty, so he can go on the web all day long at the public's expense and trawl for playmates.

The other punch line: even though he had a lot of red flags, he was at the top of the list to become school principal when the incumbent retired.

When I heard about this, I was enraged. The school tolerated this pervert and was going to promote him, because he brought in the scholarship money.

I told my fellow alumni in that discussion group (how I learned of this) that if Mr. Plass did anything to my little daughter, the lawsuit would be the least of his concerns. Eating solid food would be the biggest.

I have no tolerance for child pornography or pornographers.

And that's all I have to say about that.

 

[Roadtoad]

Sorry, with so many freaks and pervs running around, I would have to go with banning all of the above. It's not worth the risk of even suggesting to them that child/adult sex is acceptable.

 

[geni]

All of those are potentialy illegal in the UK.

1 is availible on the net and appears to be accepted as legal under US law. 7 is legal under US law.

4 is going to be the one that the next fight is likely to arise over since the level of CG availible to the home user is increaseing fast.

 

[Merko]

I think there are legitimate reasons for writing fiction involving sex with minors. Incest victims may want to do it to get it down on paper. Probably wouldn't be that 'erotic' but I'm sure some people would turn on a lot reading such stories.

Anyway, I'm no expert on pedophilia. I don't know if reading child porn is likely to make people commit actual crimes. Obviously there is a correlation, but it might just be that some people will realise that there's something wrong if they keep reading such stories, and seek help. Well, I don't know. But I do know that some people do seek help. And that should definitely be encouraged.

 

[steverino]

This is really about what society considers normal. In ancient Greece, it was normal for a man to have sex with a young boy. Then again, a lot of what those Greeks called 'normal' would be considered vicious and barbaric by our own standards.

Not just in ancient Greece. When we were married, my exwife worked for the Catholic Archiocese of Chicago and we were well aware of certain priests that Cardinal Bernardin, and his crew, shifted from one city or suburban parish to another. Father Robert Mayer was a well-known sex-abuser, and we knew about it years before he was jailed. I would say there was a tacit acceptability of his behavior. In other words, it was "normal." This is however no longer the case in Chicago. And yes, there were/are such rabbi's and ministers, too. Merry Christmas.

 

[afinemadness]

Just wrong

It is actually very simple. If the word child is involved it is wrong. If an adult has any sexual contact with a child he or she should suffer the consequences. Let's face fact 16 years olds will match up themselves and there in not much we can do but in no way should an adult have contact with a child.

 

[The Atheist]

I'm worried about you Dave. I really hope you don't live within 100 miles of me.

Phew. Well I know he doesn't live within five THOUSAND miles of me, and I could not be happier about that. There are plenty of sickos live here anyway, our quota's full.

I'm gonna keep this short and sweet.

Child pornography: ZERO tolerance. The end.

 

[pipelineaudio]

number 7 is every horror flick ever made

 

[steverino]

number 7 is every horror flick ever made

Wish I'd have thought of that! Merry Christmas Pipeline.

 

[Merko]

Child pornography: ZERO tolerance. The end.

I don't think this kind of thinking is very helpful. I've read a few child porn stories to try and understand the mentality of these people. There basically seems to be two kinds of stories doing the rounds. The first one claims to be about children, but the "children" really behave like adults. The second, even more sickening form, is where the children behave like you'd expect raped children to behave. Eg, they don't exhibit any sex drive in the stories. I'd figure those who like the second kind of stories must be far more dangerous, while the first ones would probably just be likely to perform some role-play with their (adult) partners. After all, if you expect a sexual response from your partner, you're just not going to get it from a child. Of course, if they are really confused as well, they might still try it.

Anyway, I'm not saying that this kind of really obvious child porn stories are being of any great service to humanity. Not sure if I think the mere possession of one should be enough to put someone in jail or attach the stigma of pedophilia to them.

The problem comes with borderline cases. Henri Charriere's Papillon contains some fairly graphic scene where he has intercourse with a young girl (who becomes pregnant, don't remember her age, but definitely far below what would be considered acceptable). Yet the idea of banning this book seems very wrong to me. I think there's something in Casanova's memoirs that would also definitely classify as child porn. Stuffed in between all the stories where he rapes grown up women or pays prostitutes for sex.. it's really hard to imagine how he could go down in history as a great seducer if you see how he really describes himself. But banning it? Nah.

 

[The Atheist]

I don't think this kind of thinking is very helpful. I've read a few child porn stories to try and understand the mentality of these people
.... snip...
Stuffed in between all the stories where he rapes grown up women or pays prostitutes for sex.. it's really hard to imagine how he could go down in history as a great seducer if you see how he really describes himself. But banning it? Nah.

I think we actually agree entirely.

I wouldn't advocate banning Papillon either - context is important. Like a film censor, sex and violence have their place - in context. In some fiction, all sorts of perversion are quite acceptable. Stephen King's a very popular bloke and he has used child-porn-like scenes in several of his books. I wouldn't ban them either.

When the child sex acts are the story, it's a problem.

 

[Dave1001]

I think we actually agree entirely.

I wouldn't advocate banning Papillon either - context is important. Like a film censor, sex and violence have their place - in context. In some fiction, all sorts of perversion are quite acceptable. Stephen King's a very popular bloke and he has used child-porn-like scenes in several of his books. I wouldn't ban them either.

When the child sex acts are the story, it's a problem.

Well, I'm sure there's plenty of people in the world who'd call you a sicko just as you've called me in this thread based on this post of yours, given that you support keeping "perverted" child sex scenes that happen to be in fiction legal (so would I).

How about fiction written by an adult for an audience of other adults, that solely consists child sex erotic stories, without any expressed purpose of education, rape prevention, therapy, or art -the sole purpose is for erotic stimulation of the author and adult audience. That's what I meant in #1. Do you think such stories should be illegal? Or do they need to pass a threshold test of only being a certain percentage of a larger story or of plausibly being for some non-erotic purpose such as rape prevention education? I'll open up this question to the rest of the thread participants too.

Personally, I support such stories being 100% legal. I think it's our actions that harm or intrude on the privacy or liberties of others that the state should regulate, not the thoughts we think, or the thoughts adults share with other consenting adults -and erotic stories are nothing more than collections of thoughts.

[This is, however, of course different than adults communicating with each other as part of a conspiracy to engage in sex acts with actual children. I do support the state making certain types of conspiracies illegal, even if no one has yet been harmed, and I do support the state using communications (reflecting thoughts) as evidence to prove such conspiracies.]