Wetlook World Forum

Current time: Fri 19/04/24 00:03:32 GMT

Translate page FROM -> TO

Translate page TO <- FROM

Message # 18062.2

Subject: Re: All of this blather about underaged models

Date: Mon 05/09/05 07:33:24 GMT

Name: Roscoe B.C.

Email:

Website:

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help
with running costs: (you can change amount)

There are two factors that set my kiddie porn alarm off, intent and encouragement. If someone takes a picture of a kid having fun in a fountain because it looks like they are having fun, that's not porn, because the intent of the picture (and the behaviour) was probably not to create sexual arousal. When someone posts that picture to a forum where the intent is to post pictures that others will find arousing, the intent is kiddie porn, and will be seen that way by society. It very much parallels the fine line between fine art nude photography and Hustler magazine. The difference is mostly in the intent, not so much the content.

The second issue is encouragement. Posting pictures of underage people in a forum that is all about sexual arousal, may just encourage someone with pedophile tendencies to feel it's more acceptable, and act on those tendencies. I don't know if data supports that, but I guarantee people will think that. That's why the laws exist, people have been arrested and their computers confiscated for viewing, and forums have been closed.

For this very reason, I don't like candid stuff where the people in the picture were not trying to be seductive, and I get angry when someone posts images of underage kids. Healty adults instinctively want to protect kids from pedophiles.

The law considers intent. The difference between an accidental death and a murder is just intent.

If this was a forum about fountain design, maybe the rules could be different, but it's not.

In reply to Message (18062)

All of this blather about underaged models

By Sopping - katakai1@verizon.net Mon 05/09/05 04:29:24 GMT

Website:

I don't get it.

I am not talking about national laws here, just common sense. It is OK to take and publish a picture of an infant, a young child, a lovely young woman---of ANY age...As long as she is, playing in the park, petting a small dog, sucking on an ice-cream bar, or sitting on a fence wearing a bikini etc etc. - whatever. No problem, no porn, no nothing.No cries of alarm!

Why can said young lady be innocently wading in a lake? Is it OK for her to be standing by the lake then? Or possibly just getting her feet wet? At what point does she wade to sufficient depth that the button of the "anti-porn police" is pushed?

There is not the slightest element of porn in these pictures.You know it, I know it, we all know it.

But, on this site, we have postings by slobbering voyeurs of "Busty,Sexy teen-models" and similar porn-come-ons all the time. Big time! If I were to waste my time on these sites, I am sure I could identify some underage bimbos. But why bother.

Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs: (you can change amount)