This focus on America is interesting. If a kiddie porn server is set up on international waters, can it be siezed/extradited? If it says (lying) that all models are over 18, have given written permission, etc, could people viewing the site claim that they thought it was legal, and avoid charges?
However, several Bookstores, including a Barnes & Noble- and some photographers have been arrested for “child porn” with simple fotos of nude children. I have no idea of the results of these arrests have been, but this is a problem- as many Lawyers don’t wan to defend these cases as a 'child porn" arrest looks so very bad. This is chilling. Thus, the Law has been intrepreted as including “naked pictures”. Some Foto developers have turned in such fotos, and the Father, etc- has been arrested, and the child taken away by CPS.
We REALLY have to get away from the notion that nudity is obscene.
What interests me at this juncture is the apparent fact–if fact it be–that males in general seem to lean towards a “what’s the big deal” tack on the overall issue, whereas females are very concerned, even militant.
I recall talking to a lesbian at a gay rights luncheon some years ago. I mentioned that I was distressed that a prominent founding figure in the rights movement had been summarily ejected from a pride parade because he held a sign mentioning various groups, one of which was NAMBLA (not spelled out–just the initials). Her response was that nothing would alienate lesbians from gay men more quickly than what she called “the chicken-hawk thing.”
In a way I understand, and in a way it seems very natural. (And I do know that many men and women do not fit the stereotype I’ve referred to here.)
Agreeing that we can all understand, just as rational human beings, why sex with a 5-year-old is almost certainly a harmful and assaultive act–let’s consider the case of a 14-year-old girl and a 30-year-old guy. Am I right that women (tend to) see a degree of horribleness in this that (many) men just don’t see?
(I have to wonder…I’m being vulnerable here!..do many women view the sex act itself as inherently assaultive or degrading…their own lover/spouse being the exception?)
Not always true. I had a severe crush on a girl named Josephine Riggs in grade 1. I expressed my love by squirting water that I had gathered in my mouth from a fountain all over her chest. She was not pleased and neither was the school principal. Furthermore, I’d been masturbating well before that time although I’d never considered at the time that the opposite sex could one day be integral to achieving satisfaction of that nature.
I think it really does depend upon the age difference. A 14 year old having sex with another 14 year old? Irresponsible? Yes. Downright creepy? No.
But 14 and 30? The thought of it sends shivers down my spine.
I’d like to see someone try to set up a server in “international waters.” You’d need one hell of a long modem cable.
But hey, maybe with Wi-Fi.
I assume you’re talking about servers in countries like Togo or Niue or Vanuatu, where enforcement is lax or nonexistent. AFAIK, this IS where much of the child porn resides, precisely because the US/UK/EU can’t shut it down by dropping a SWAT team out of a helicopter.
They can send notice to the country in question, which may or may not shut down the site. My understanding is that this is not a very effective method, which is why current stings are trying to find the end consumers and arrest them–kind of like the war on drugs. They can’t beat the FARC, so they try to fight the demand.
I suspect that many women justifiably perceive the normalization of the 14-year old girl with the 30-year old boyfriend as the extreme example of the Hollywood/Designer Fashion/Product Branding Youth-Obsessed culture which has, among other things, created a generation of women who will never recover from the psychological self-image damage of feeling like they are never pretty enough, never thin enough, never young enough, never desirable enough, and by extension never valued enough.
The thin red line of 18 as the age of acceptable sexuality has therefore become the last line of defense against this media-enforced tide of tyrannical beauty standards that has encouraged men to nurture their most juvenile instincts of unaccountable polygamy, shallow partner assessment, and hedonistic pursuit of the fantasy fuck–the manifestation of which just gets younger and more innocent as the existing template gets more commonplace and loses its “clandestine” value.
So yeah, maybe women are more appalled at the possibilities and cynical about the disussion, because it’s arguably part of a war they never asked for and which they’ve been losing for centuries. But I’m not a woman so that’s just a guess.
As for some men finding it no big deal, I would think it’s because
- They honestly see the sexuality of teenagers as biologically legitimate.
- They are sexually attracted to teenagers and would like to hve such feelings destigmatized.
- They’re fully in the grip of a culture that flaunts sexy teens in front of them constantly.
- They don’t have daughters yet.
That said, I think most men, myself included, would still say that we need to hold the line at 18 because we can’t be trusted to take it lower. It’s okay to WANT to do some things, like grope a developed 14-year old (just as it’s okay to WANT to kill Bill Gates), but the ability to collectively repress some basic instincts for a greater good is what defines us as a civilized society.
Or something like that.
I think this is certainly true as a default.
Welll…I think it is sometimes assumed so, but the actual law so far hasn’t born this out. DrDeth pointed out that lawsuits have been filed against assorted photographers and the companies that carry their books, charging them with distributing or creating child pornography. But so far as I know all of those lawsuits have failed.
One famous example - When I was in college in the late 80’s a photographer named Jock Sturges was brought up on child porn charges after a photo developer took alarm at the film he had submitted for developing. Mr. Sturges specialized in artistic, mostly black & white shots of nude and semi-nude teens of various ages, mostly younger. I think most of them were taken on local nude beaches, with full permission and signed releases. My school put up a big exhibit of his stuff in the Student Union, presumably in support - He was something of a cause celebre for awhile because of the charges of censorship. Around the same time he, Sally Mann ( she exhibited shots that included among them nudes of her kids at play ) and some other photographers who names I don’t recall, had their various photo books attacked as child porn. That’s when the lawsuits were brought against Barnes & Nobles et al. I even remember a standup comedian doing a riff on the whole thing at the time.
But so far the courts seem to have upheld “artistic” nudes as being unobjectionable. Certainly that has been the case in films. As an earlier thread pointed out, the actor Thora Birch was underage when she did her nude scene in the film American Beauty.
So even in the U.S. there does seem to be a difference between child porn and simple nudity.
p.s. - Just as an aside, the reason I even bring this up is Monday I was in Moe’s Books in Berkeley ( a mostly used bookstore ) and noticed a copy of one of Sturges’ books on display on the wall behind the counter. I immediately flashed back to my college years and then to this thread ;).
- Tamerlane
Who are you to dismiss the sexuality of an entire age group?
Biologically speaking, puberty corresponds with the onset of sexuality. Your statement (and the rest of your post) seems to imply that you think teenage sexuality is a fabrication of Hollywood and Madison Avenue. Please tell me I’m just misinterpreting it.
Also, keep in mind that the age of consent isn’t 18 in most places… in fact, 18 is the highest AOC you’ll ever come across, unless you visit Tunisia or Madegascar. Fourteen is perfectly legal in Canada.
According to your profile you’re from Thailand, where the age of consent is 15. Why do you mention “holding the line” at 18?
Not to repost my question, but I am curious. Can a site claim that it’s legitimate to give its purveors a defence, since it knows that it can never be raided/investigated?
You are indeed misinterpreting it. Please refer to my first post in this thread (about ninth from the top), where I say, among other things,
**
In other words, I completely agree with your statement about biologically defined adulthood starting at puberty. The reason we “hold the line” at 18 is an (unfortunate, but arguably necessary) compromise based on longer life spans and the complexity of adulthood as defined in non-biological terms. (Post pubescent) teenagers are sexual creatures–they’re supposed to be (physically). Teenagers are sexually attractive–they’re supposed to be. We’ve legally defined adulthood at 18 (in the USA and other places, including Thailand FYI) because of a hundred reasons OTHER than sex. As a matter of consistency we apply it to sex (and porn) too. I know that many states and countries define legal sexual consent at 14, 15, 16, but participating in porn is a different issue because it widens the possibility of exploitation and generally we protect those under 18 from exploitation in other areas (like not being bound to contracts, or military service, or having credit cards, for example.)
But I am most certainly NOT dismissing the entire sexuality of an age group–quite the contrary. What Hollywood has done, IMHO, is taken this gap between what we can “acceptably” find sexy (over 18 only) and what we “naturally” find sexy (anyone who’s pubated) and used it for commercial purposes. And this exploitation makes it just that much harder for us as a culture or society to explore natural healthy sexuality that may or may not involve people over or under a certain age. That’s all.
Interesting link, BTW.
If a website posting illegal material knew it would never be raided or even investigated, why would it care to make claims about being “legitimate”? If they’re immune to prosecution they need no defense. Wouldn’t such a site just say “Get yer child porn here”?
And I’m pretty sure any such site WOULD get raided, even on Vanuatu.
I think the difference is instead that many men do not really understand that a sex act can ever be assaultive or degrading, because they have never experiences sexual victimization and can live their lives with no expectation that they ever will be. This is not the case for any woman. We know that sex crimes are a big deal because many of us have been the victim of them, and all of us fear them. Men in general do not. In fact, I think the experience is so foreign to so many men that they are incapable of imagining what sexual victimization is like. They can’t understand how it is different from normal sex. They can’t understand that their adolescent fantasy of gettin’ it on with sexy young teacher Miss X has nothing to do with the reality of girls who were terrified that Mr. Y would ask them to stay after class.
(I don’t mean to neglect the suffering of the many men who are the victims of sex crimes; it may be even worse for them than it is for women. But these men are by far in the minority, and the attitudes of most men do not reflect their experiences.)
Until children reach the “age of majority” their consent cannot be said to have meaning. If we allow children to be held responsible for their sexual decisions through the law, then what follows is that they ought to be treated as adults in all other situations as well.
However, even though many of the arrests might not hav eled to convictions- the simple act of an arrest & trial for someone taking or pssessing “simple nudity” fotos costs into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. True sometimes the ACLU etc hepls out, but still…
Today in the San Jose Mercury News, local news section, it describes a man who was arrested for taking fotos of a 9yo girl- who was FULLY DRESSED, albiet in “sexy” clothes. He was also charges with child molestation as he “touched her while arranging her poses”- which having once been a fotog, is the standard. It did not say that he “touched her” in any “private places”, mind you. The police also were quoted as saying that “child porn” was found at his home when they raided it- which could have been, given the charges against him- fotos of underaged girls- fully clothed.
Dudes- this does not seem to be child porn, or child molestation- altho I can’t say for sure on the latter until we know where & how he “touched her”. Nor are those “art fotos” child porn, depsite the arrests.
The point I am trying to make is that we have a law which has good intentions- protect kids from being forced into hardocre sex acts- which has been used to convict dudes who made fils of Traci- who yes was under 18, but they did not know, nor was it “child porn”, for arresting sellers of “art fotos”, and for arresting this dude. It seems the Law has brought more evil than it cures. Maybe we just need to go back to “whoever makes hardcore kid <under16>sex porn is guilty”. Stop with the “teen porn” as “child porn” (they can still be arrested for making a film without informed consent, or sued, so there is still recourse). Stop with “nudity is obscene”. And maybe even stop with possession being a crime., as it seems to have brought more evil than it cures.
Isn’t it exactly the case in this “independant” country founded on the remains of a WWII british artificial port in the North Sea (can’t remember its name), and which is rented to a company to host servers which will be out of reach of various national authorities? I don’t mean these servers would be hosting childporn sites, I assume it’s more intended for financial companies or somesuch, but they’re actually installed in waters.
Another way (at least in some European countries) is to forbid the ISPs to give access to childporn sites (which is an issue since ISPs are affrraid to someday be held responsible for the content of sites they give access to)
I believe you are referring to the Principality of Sealand http://www.sealandgov.com/
I believe you are referring to the Principality of Sealand http://www.sealandgov.com/ an island which has a company that sells “colocation server space.” http://www.havenco.com/ which claims “Sealand has no laws governing data traffic, and the terms of HavenCo’s agreement with Sealand provide that none shall ever be enacted.” They use a fiber-optic cable coonnection to the mainland.
Incidentally, their Terms of Use state that chil porn, spam sourcing, and hacking is prohibited. But everything else is okay, including file-swapping and NSA cryptographic secrets.
As for holding ISPs responsible, their defense has always been that they’re just like a phone company, which is not responsible for what people say to each other…
You know, weird as this modern world is, I think it’s only a matter of time before there is such an Internet site. It would probably originate in a country where the age of sexual consent is around 14 (Albania, Austria, Columbia, etc.).
Worldwide ages of sexual consent:
http://ageofconsent.com/
I think for as far as I can speak of, Americans combine the act of sex far too often with nudity. Sure, one precedes the other and guys out there you know all the times you said nothing would happen and it d-id, lol… but the issue I’m trying to pin down here is that there happens to be more than one way of life at any age for people. And because there are photographs of a naked kids, it doesn’t mean it’s pornography. My girl did a whole MA thesis on pornography and I helped so look out chat board, lol.
Pornography is defined as “inciting arousal”. That also brings up the giant art vs. pornography debate, but I’m just sticking to my point which is beauty is not the only thing in the eye of the beholder… fill in the blank cuz really “beauty” used in such a way is synonymous with personal opinion. And it’s not every kid’s nor adult’s view that they are unwilling to be photographed in the buff…I believe pornography is when there is “appetite” to be absolved; a key motive in taking the picture. A photograph of a 11 year old girl sitting in a stream with her legs wide open, so what? It is perfectly beautiful and innocent to me…but some fellow passing by an up-and-coming photographer’s small shop window might peer in curiously and see this girl and spring a hard-on instantly off it. “Intention” is my point… not age, age is a number, there are 45 years olds I know that act like high school kids and elementary friends of mine that really make me think about difficult subjects in new ways.
I agree the majority of folks are perverts in the matter… but there are children with the right kind of encouragement that are proud of their bodies and completely comfortable with themselves. A photographer named Sally Mann has some series out, of her children… I find them quite beautiful… I stare at them sometimes and feel special that their trust is there as naked as they are and placed into the viewer’s hands. How will your mind process this?.. the innonence that is a two-headed coin… one side says “take adavantage” and the other could “never harm such a beautiful thing”… I am not a child pornographer, yet I am a human being and some part may say “full speed ahead captain” but the adult in me knows better… that such a thing could not ever satisfy the man I’ve become… why? Because it’s just a child… Lot’s more growing to do… all the $hit I went through… in the end it should be your prayers for her that she makes it as far as where you are standing and looking… not that your doogen gets slapped around or inserted in a place where it most probably won’t be appreciated. It’s just a child… get over it … I apologize if I skipped off the original topic’s point… but seemed like it needed to be said… thanks for getting to the end folks =)