Kiddie Porn or Art?

[Fenris]

Several months back, A friend of mine and I stumbled across a rare, valueable book while out used book hunting. The store-owner had it marked at half-cover price. It was an early edition in decent shape and was prob. worth several hundred dollars. We bought it with the intention of selling it on Ebay. Normally, this would have been no problem.

However…the book was “Show Me” by Will McBride.

For those unfamiliar with the book, it’s a vaguely condecending…um…art book? educational book? um… In it’s own words “(a) book for parents who want their kids to grow up proud and unashamed of their bodies and sexuality. It is an explicit, thoughtful and affectionate picture book…”.

…and it is nude pictures of kids (some of whom are clearly aroused or being aroused)

There’s a picture of a nude daddy or big brother sitting on the floor, hugging his knees, as a young (5-8) girl squats beside him, one hand around his knee, the other, reaching under her thigh, finger inserted into her vagina.

There’s a close-up picture of a pre-teen (she doesn’t seem to have shaved) girl’s vagina being spread.

There’s a picture of a pre-teen’s penis, erect, with an undershirt draped over it.

All of it is beautifully photographed. The contrasts of shadow and light are wonderful…it’s obvious that the photographer was extremely talented.

(Note, to forestall the obvious: No, I have no problem with Michelangelo’s or Donatello’s David. Those, by my (and, I believe, any reasonable) standards are art.)

I sold it (and we made a bundle), and before I sold it, I wrote this post, but didn’t actually submit it for some reason. Anyway I stumbled across it again and thought it would be worth discussing. Some questions:

A) Where do you draw the line between kiddie-porn and Art? This book, to me, is tap-dancing right on the boundary.

B) Am I rationalizing when I think that the high price tag put it in the hands of the art connoisseurs and out of the hands of the deves? (I suspect I am…there’re rich deves, but presumably rich deves could get more…graphic material.)

C) Is it hurting anyone if a deve gets it? If a deve gets it, is it an encouragement or a cathartic release?

D) Like I said, I sold it, but what would you have done? And why?

Fenris

[Una_Persson]

A slight hijack, but this sounds quite a bit more disturbing than something that greatly bothered Una a few years ago - a large, coffee-table sized book containing nothing but black-and-white photographs of baby butts. Nothing but baby butts. Acres and acres of baby butts, shown in every way, shape, and form, with some graphic photos that included genitalia.

It was behind the counter at Barnes and Noble, and I asked them why the holy Hell they sold such a thing, and what sick slobbering pedophiles they sold it to. Their answer: typically women from age 20 to 30 bought the books, and they sold so well they were on back order.

:eek:

In the same vein as your book you mention, but nearly so bad. It still gave me the creeps. {{{shudder}}}

[xizor]

*Originally posted by Fenris *
There’s a picture of a nude daddy or big brother sitting on the floor, hugging his knees, as a young (5-8) girl squats beside him, one hand around his knee, the other, reaching under her thigh, finger inserted into her vagina.

This is child pornography and it makes me sick to even read it.

[Squooshed]

I have to agree with xizor. From a common sense perspective, this sounds like it definitely crosses the line between art and pornography. From a legal perspective, it may qualify as obscenity as well.

All in all, it’s not something I personally would want to be involved with. (Gosh that sounds prudish.)

[handy]

Discussed right here already:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=52230

[Gunslinger]

Simple guideline: legs together = art; legs apart = smut

[Kiki]

**There’s a picture of a nude daddy or big brother sitting on the floor, hugging his knees, as a young (5-8) girl squats beside him, one hand around his knee, the other, reaching under her thigh, finger inserted into her vagina.

There’s a close-up picture of a pre-teen (she doesn’t seem to have shaved) girl’s vagina being spread.

There’s a picture of a pre-teen’s penis, erect, with an undershirt draped over it.

**

This is pornography in my opinion and it’s disgusting. Mainly because of this statement…

**…and it is nude pictures of kids (some of whom are clearly aroused or being aroused)

**

It’s not art if these kids are aroused or being aroused. I completely agree with Gunslinger.

[handy]

“It’s not art if these kids are aroused or being aroused.”

They get aroused really easily, even newborns often get aroused. No shame in it really. I guess you’d have to have a boy baby to see my point, ummm I mean the point, whatever.

[TVeblen]

*Originally posted by Fenris *

**

There’s a picture of a nude daddy or big brother sitting on the floor, hugging his knees, as a young (5-8) girl squats beside him, one hand around his knee, the other, reaching under her thigh, finger inserted into her vagina.

There’s a close-up picture of a pre-teen (she doesn’t seem to have shaved) girl’s vagina being spread.**

This makes me queasy. Sure, children are sexual but they’re growing innnocents, dependant on grown-ups for guidance. NO 5-8 yr. old is an informed, willing partipant, nor is a pre-teen boy or girl. No matter the skill, that isn’t exploring or celebrating childhood sexuality; it’s exploiting kids.

Ignoring the fact that children are sexual beings is as bad as exploiting them, IMO. Sad to say, this sounds like exploitation; artful, skilled, suave exploitation. What’s best to do? I dunno. I’m pretty hardcore about censorship and the First Amendment…mainly because I’m not sure deves need encouragement, or if there’s a cause-and-effect relationship.

This didn’t add much, beyond my nausea over adult depravity that preys on children, no matter how artfully presented.

Veb

[handy]

“This makes me queasy”

This book might be at your local library. It was at ours, as I saw it but didn’t open it, until they didn’t want to buy it again & again after people didn’t return it.

Don’t judge a book by someone’s description.

[TVeblen]

*Originally posted by handy *
**“This makes me queasy”

This book might be at your local library. It was at ours, as I saw it but didn’t open it, until they didn’t want to buy it again & again after people didn’t return it.

Don’t judge a book by someone’s description. **

Oh, puh-leeze! I run the local public library–and before you ask, yes, we buy things I would rather gouge my eyes out with a salad fork than read.

Hate to break it to you, but we routinely “judge books by someone’s description”; they’re called reviews.

It should be plain that I stated a personal reaction: no matter how artfully portrayed, an adult male shoving his finger into the vagina of a little girl as an “exploration of childhood sexuality” makes me queasy.

Veb

[jb_farley]

There’s a picture of a nude daddy or big brother sitting on the floor, hugging his knees, as a young (5-8) girl squats beside him, one hand around his knee, the other, reaching under her thigh, finger inserted into her vagina.

It should be plain that I stated a personal reaction: no matter how artfully portrayed, an adult male shoving his finger into the vagina of a little girl as an “exploration of childhood sexuality” makes me queasy.

Does anybody read posts nowadays?

[yosemite]

I have to ask - how much did you make on the book?

And yes, it sounds very creepy. But kiddie porn? Yeah, maybe. But I’m a prude.

[Homer]

Her finger was in her own vagina.

When I babysat my cousin Daniel he liked to play with himself. Big deal. Kids do that.

–Tim

[yosemite]

Just for more info: I found this picture from the book, and it is also cited in this online book on pedophilia. (I skimmed through the chapter that mentions “Show Me” - it almost appears that this online book is *pro-*pedophilia, though. I get that impression.) I will have to take the time to read it further. An excerpt:

Of course, even positive erotica like Show Me! comes under attack from the anti-sexual lobby: this very book was featured in a picture in The Times of 8 February, 1978, immediately before the second reading of the Child Protection Bill. Holding it up for the photographer as an example of the iniquitous material that had to be stamped out was American anti-porn campaigner Judianne Densen-Gerber.

[sub]Hey, it’s a slow night, waiting to download something…killing time and fighting ignorance, OK?[/sub]

[Badtz_Maru]

I think that’s a beautiful picture. Nothing pornographic at all. If you can’t look at naked kids without thinking of sex, you are the one with a problem.

I do agree the described pictures with the children fingering themselves may be in a gray area, though.

[Badge]

Any portrayals of children in sexual situations (sex acts, as opposed to simple nudity) is child pornography, by definition. That’s Federal law and I imagine the same in every state. Possessing this book would be a crime, and selling it is a felony.

Of course, a well-fought court battle could find a judge and/or jury that would see it otherwise. The quality of the photography and the accompanying text could convince the trier of fact that the book is artistic or educational. That’s what court is for. But any cop I know would see this book on your coffee table and be reaching for the cuffs.

And yes, it is perfectly natural for children to become aroused and touch themselves and even others in a sexual manner. However, photographing this and selling the pictures is the problem.

[yosemite]

More time to kill:
Banned from Seattle library.
Listed in an obviously Pro-pedophile “Child-Adult Loving List”. (Ewwwwwwww.)

[xizor]

*Originally posted by Homer *
**When I babysat my cousin Daniel he liked to play with himself. Big deal. Kids do that.
**

The act in itself is not a big deal, but when you pose children doing it, photograph it and put it in a book for all to see, then it becomes wrong!

[Fenris]

*Originally posted by yosemitebabe *
**I have to ask - how much did you make on the book?

And yes, it sounds very creepy. But kiddie porn? Yeah, maybe. But I’m a prude. **

About $300 and change (but I split it with the friend who was with me in the bookstore. He spotted it and said “Bleah! Lookit this!” (Typical guy reaction: “This is disgusting. Here, look!” ) and I’d remembered how valueable it was, it was only fair to split the take.) so I netted approx. $150.00

Fenris