# Virtual child porn - free speech? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 23, 2008, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370 "2008-05-23T16:04:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![TV\_time](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f17d59/32.png) [@TV\_time](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TV_time)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/1 "2008-05-23T16:04:00Z")
I am a big advocate of Free Speech. However, I think the line must be drawn someplace, and child pornography is definitely across the line. My argument always has been if it victimizes someone, I mean, it forces someone to do something they don’t have a voice in, then it is wrong (like children in pornogrophy). A person I was having a discussion with said, “Well, then virtual child porn is OK since no cartoons were actually forced to have sex?” I had to admit I was not certain. I looked at some virtual porn on the net, and I still don’t know. Her argument against it was that it (simplisticly put) makes men lust after children after seeing them as cartoon sex objects. I told her I thought this was a sexist statement because I was no more aroused than she probably was after looking at the cartoons. And why should anyone make that leap from cartoon to real life. Still, some of the images were very disturbing, but my stand on Free Speech has always been, disturbing should not necessarily make it illegal. Please weigh in with your points of view. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/2 "2008-05-23T16:21:27Z")
[QUOTE=TV time] A person I was having a discussion with said, “Well, then virtual child porn is OK since no cartoons were actually forced to have sex?” [/QUOTE] IIRC, it’s legal for this very reason. I recall a brouhaha in the news about this several years ago. It doesn’t harm anyone to produce virtual porn, so there’s little reason to legislate against it, even if the subject matter is in very bad taste. ---
**Author:** ![Zebra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c0e974/32.png) [@Zebra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zebra)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/3 "2008-05-23T16:23:14Z")
It is legal to make virtural child porn (VCP) but not to sell, which is a weird distinction. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/4 "2008-05-23T16:27:08Z")
I suppose that some argument might get floated out that if virtual child porn was about as “mainstream” as regular (consenting adult) porn, the potential pediphile might get the idea that pedophilia is more acceptable, permissable, or whatever. But I hesitate to legislate morality, as it seems to become a slippery slope sometimes. That’s a tough call. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/5 "2008-05-23T16:50:28Z")
Are you illegally in possession of child porn if you have a picture you took of yourself doing something lewd when you were 17? To answer the OP, animation is fake, so no harm, no foul. ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/6 "2008-05-23T17:57:09Z")
[QUOTE=TV Time] …Her argument against it was that it (simplisticly put) makes men lust after children after seeing them as cartoon sex objects. … [/QUOTE] That’s a severely flawed arguement. Child porn, like all other porn, does not “make” lust in the viewer that wasn’t there to begin with. I’m not attracted to child porn, and I wouldn’t even know where to find it. However, I have seen depictions of things in porn that I had no lust for (“rape” scenes, and sex with pain, for example.) All they did was spoil my mood. ---
**Author:** ![Onomatopoeia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/onomatopoeia/32/4145_2.png) [@Onomatopoeia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onomatopoeia)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/7 "2008-05-23T18:09:05Z")
[QUOTE=AskNott] That’s a severely flawed arguement. Child porn, like all other porn, does not “make” lust in the viewer that wasn’t there to begin with. I’m not attracted to child porn, and I wouldn’t even know where to find it. However, I have seen depictions of things in porn that I had no lust for (“rape” scenes, and sex with pain, for example.) All they did was spoil my mood. [/QUOTE] Yeah, like feet porn, or whatever the heck you call it. How someone gets off by watching women’s feet is beyond me. I’ve seen some and it freaks me the heck out. I mean, come on, it’s someone’s feet. ::blech:: Why would anyone want that anywhere near their junk? Anyway, by the logic of the OP’s acquaintance and others, by looking at feet porn, I should miraculously become attracted to feet which, I gotta tell ya, aint gonna happen. ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/8 "2008-05-23T20:02:33Z")
[QUOTE=TV time] Her argument against it was that it (simplisticly put) makes men lust after children after seeing them as cartoon sex objects. I told her I thought this was a sexist statement because I was no more aroused than she probably was after looking at the cartoons. And why should anyone make that leap from cartoon to real life. Still, some of the images were very disturbing, but my stand on Free Speech has always been, disturbing should not necessarily make it illegal. [/quote] Looking at “virtual child porn” doesn’t make someone want to have real-life sex with children, anymore than playing Grand Theft Auto makes someone want to light real-life hookers on fire. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/9 "2008-05-23T20:17:22Z")
In my view, as long as there’s nothing real involved it’s free speech. It’s just a fantasy on a screen or paper, not reality; no one is hurt. As far as any argument about it’s morality goes, that kind of argument reeks of thought crime. Who doesn’t have fantasies ( sexual or otherwise ) that it would be immoral or stupid to actually indulge in ? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/10 "2008-05-23T20:30:27Z")
Well, if you have those kind of perverse fantasies, it’s probably better that you be allowed an artistic outlet, rather than sublimating it. It definitely should not ever be condoned as a normal part of society however. Social Pressure is powerful. If they ever cross the line from the virtual to the real, they should be nailed. ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/11 "2008-05-23T20:54:46Z")
[QUOTE=LilShieste] Looking at “virtual child porn” doesn’t make someone want to have real-life sex with children, anymore than playing Grand Theft Auto makes someone want to light real-life hookers on fire. [/QUOTE] I like this. Breaking News. Teens found compulsively jumping over barrels after playing Donkey Kong. Story at 11. ---
**Author:** ![Two\_and\_a\_Half\_Inches\_of\_Fun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea666f/32.png) [@Two\_and\_a\_Half\_Inches\_of\_Fun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/12 "2008-05-23T21:01:27Z")
[QUOTE=AskNott] That’s a severely flawed arguement. Child porn, like all other porn, does not “make” lust in the viewer that wasn’t there to begin with. I’m not attracted to child porn, and I wouldn’t even know where to find it. However, I have seen depictions of things in porn that I had no lust for (“rape” scenes, and sex with pain, for example.) All they did was spoil my mood. [/QUOTE] The whole Two Girls One Cup phenomenon backs this up. We have not seen a new fad of people copying the action of the video. It just made people feel sick. ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/13 "2008-05-23T21:03:24Z")
[QUOTE=Bearflag70] Breaking News. Teens found compulsively jumping over barrels after playing Donkey Kong. Story at 11. [/QUOTE] It was all fun and games, until someone picked up the hammer. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_C](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Captain\_C](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_C)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2008, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/14 "2008-05-23T22:04:01Z")
[QUOTE=Bearflag70] Are you illegally in possession of child porn if you have a picture you took of yourself doing something lewd when you were 17? [/QUOTE] Good question, one I would also like the answer to. You should start a GQ thread, we have a lot of lawyers in there. ---
**Author:** ![counsel\_wolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/65b543/32.png) [@counsel\_wolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/counsel_wolf)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2008, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/15 "2008-05-24T01:35:57Z")
[QUOTE=Captain\_C] Good question, one I would also like the answer to. You should start a GQ thread, we have a lot of lawyers in there. [/QUOTE] I hate answering questions without a cite to hand, but I’m fairly certain someone got prosecuted and convicted for exactly this. If memory serves it was a young lady with a web cam who was distributing pictures of her breasts. Edit: Some careful googling (god was I scared what I might have turned up) yielded [This case](http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1568/is_2_39/ai_n19344725) Not what i remember, but certainly matches the criteria. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Them](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/898d66/32.png) [@The\_Them](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Them)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2008, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/16 "2008-05-24T02:12:01Z")
IANAL, so I don’t know how to look for cites. However, a few years ago, it _was_ made explicitly illegal (in the US) to distribute pix of underagers, even if it was yourself. I know that, with the ever-greater ease of photography, there are some people out there with some _amazing_ childhood memories…Hell, I know of a few who have images from before digital cameras… Virtual kiddie porn? Why not? It’s virtual. Virtual murder is everywhere, and has been for a while. Actually, letting the creators of this shit _sell_ it might make it harder to get, since buyers would have to pony up their CCs, letting interested parties find out their deviant tastes. ---
**Author:** ![Gozu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gozu/32/6615_2.png) [@Gozu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gozu)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2008, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/17 "2008-05-24T03:17:49Z")
The way I look at it, if you want to jack off to some doodles, more power to you. Why should I care how good-looking the doodles are? buy them, sell them, destroy them, worship them. It’s all blissfully unimportant to me. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2008, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/18 "2008-05-24T17:29:06Z")
It would be a virtual crime and he should go to virtual court and go to virtual jail. ---
**Author:** ![threemae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@threemae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threemae)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2008, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/19 "2008-05-24T17:48:30Z")
I’m surprised that no one has brought up this recent SC ruling. Basically, if I understand correctly, it establishes that marketing something as child porn is still a crime, even if it isn’t really child porn. So, if I have a giant zip file of walrus pictures (taking a cue from my current desktop background) and say, “psst, hey, buddy, $100 and I’ll send you a .zip file with all of my child pornography,” you can still be prosecuted even if you’re only sending pictures of walruses. Obviously, this has significant implications for individuals that distribute virtual child pornography marketed as real child pornography; I’m less certain how this would affect someone marketing virtual child pornography as virtual child pornography. > **[Supreme Court Upholds Child Pornography Law (Published 2008)](https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/washington/20scotus.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=supreme%2Bcourt%2Bchild%2Bpornography&st=nyt&oref=slogin)** > > The Supreme Court upheld the latest Congressional effort to curb the spread of child pornography on the Internet. And now for some adorable walrus photos: > **[Who Is the Walrus? (Published 2008)](https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/science/20walrus.html?scp=1&sq=walrus&st=nyt)** > > Odobenus rosmarus is a magnificent creature, scientists say, and is in a category all its own. You’re welcome. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2008, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370/20 "2008-05-24T19:01:46Z")
[QUOTE=LilShieste] Looking at “virtual child porn” doesn’t make someone want to have real-life sex with children, anymore than playing Grand Theft Auto makes someone want to light real-life hookers on fire. [/QUOTE] So your point is that people cannot be enticed into wanting something at a higher level if exposed to the suggestion? Advertisers would disagree with you. while you might not want little children your mouth would salivate at the suggestion of your favorite food when you’re hungry. So how would you feel if someone made a computer generated image of your daughter being raped by other computer generated images? Free speech? How about if they animated her school? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virtual-child-porn-free-speech/450370.md?page=2)