If I had to guess, all producers of kiddie porn are pedophiles who are producing the material for their own gratification and distributing it on the side. Has there ever been a case of kiddie porn production where it was just a business or is that just a plot device in movies?
Thanks for your help,
Rob
IIRC there were adolescent (not really “kiddy” but young teen) porn mags &/or movies from some mainstream (for hardcore porn) company in the Netherlands (forget name possibly “Vivid”) that were part of some larger operation in the 70’s and 80’s that got shut down some time ago when this type of porn became illegal in their countries. The “legit” arm of the business is still in operation.
I don’t think it was Vivid–Color Climax maybe?
That wiki article doesn’t cite any sources. I’m skeptical that the company ever did that. How could they possibly get away with it?
Blue Orchid was an underground network in Russia that mass-produced child pornography. Other networks have taken their place, and many routinely get shut down, while others persist. It’s extremely tragic – most of the kids they abuse are taken from the streets, they don’t know any other life.
I could be wrong but I get the impression there were essentially *no *laws governing porn in Demark in the 70’s.
I remember a television movie frm the early 80’s that was about a young, suburban, middle class girl (like 12 or 13 years old) who gets drawn into the lurid world of child pornography. In this movie, kiddie porn was depicted almost as a normal business industry, with a quasi-production company and distribution deals and everything. Something that stuck out for me and struck me (among other things) as being wildly improbable, was that the kiddie porn movies were shown at public theaters and advertised on marquees. The mom of this kid finds out her daughter is doing pr0n by seeing her in one of these theaters (I think she was tipped off or something).
In the hazy mists of my memory, I thought the main heavy (the pedophile/pornographer who draws the kid in) was played by John Lithgow, but asearch of IMDB does not turn up anything like what I remember. Does anybody have any idea what movie I’m talking about? It was probably around '81 or '82. At the time (I was maybe 14 or 15) I thought I was seeing a depiction of the child porn industry with documentary accuracy. Although it stuck in my mind (mostly because the topic was extraordinarily edgy for 80’s network television), in retrospect, the whole depiction was ridiculous and I’m amazed that anyone found it plausible.
There were some infamous scenarios in the 70’s where adult looking teenagers (15-17 or so) Like Tracy Lords (I assume there were others) started doing hard core before they were of legal age & these films were mass produced and shown in theatres. This will get your head cut off in the current environment so porn directors are very careful re verifying IDs these days. Is it possible this is the scenario youlre thinking of?
The company is apparently famous for its vintage movies. From what is mentionned on various sites, I understand that under Danish law, the minimum age for porn actors was 15 until 1979 (some write until 2003, other that there used not to be no lower age limit, but I think “15 yo until 1979” is the most credible. I suspect it was identical to the age of consent, with no specific law for porn).
In any case, the fact that they used to produce child porn is mentionned on plenty of sites (porn movie forums, blogs about recent law cases in the US, books critics, etc…). Just google the name of the company + child pornography. So, I would assume it’s true, especially since the claim isn’t outlandish. It’s not like child pornography was as closely scrutinized in the 70s as it is now.
[quote=“Diogenes_the_Cynic, post:8, topic:477241”]
I remember a television movie frm the early 80’s that was about a young, suburban, middle class girl (like 12 or 13 years old) who gets drawn into the lurid world of child pornography.QUOTE]
Googling ‘child porn “movie of the week”’ gets this
Fallen Angel
And, I think the name of the Mag was “Fifteen”, supposedly showing 15yo girls. So,at the time, they weren’t “kiddy porn” anymore than a Modern Porn that advertises “18yo” models is.
The only other “real” kiddy porn I remember seeing in those days was “naturalist” magazines, some of which specialized in younger nudists. Those can possibly be legal today, but it’s too risky to print in todays climate, methinks.
No, I’m aware of the Tracy Lords scandal. This was a completely fictional depiction. The kids were really kids, not just underaged performers in nominally adult films (and if I recall correctly, Lords deceived her producers with a fake ID. I don’t believe anyone in the industry knew she was underaged until it was too late).
In the universe of the movie I saw, kiddy porn was available and advertised as kiddy porn in the old school, shady porn theaters.
[quote=“astro, post:11, topic:477241”]
That was it. Thanks. I guess it was Richard Masur, not John Lithgow.
Teenage jailbait, I can believe. I would think that publicly peddling porn featuring actual, prepuescent children would have still drawn law enforcement in any country, though – at least if it depicted any contact with adults. Maybe they could have gotten away with just nude photography.
I think (actually : I do hope) that nude photography of children is still perfectly legal in most places.
You, sir, are a far braver man than I.
It is, but the laws can be extremely subjective. FWIG, it often boils down to a judgement call by the court on whether or not the image is designed to be sexual in nature. We were advised in a photography class to verify ID’s for all nude models, and that while babies and toddlers were fair game, photographing anyone from say 4-17 was asking for trouble.
In any other thread, I doubt I would have had the “eww eww eww” reaction I got from reading this.
I imagine in the days when all pornography was illegal, and alot of the industry run by organised crime, quite a bit of child pornography was produced (a mafioso running an illegal porn studio is hardly likely to check ID).