Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkReality
It's all about double standards, we can either choose to accept certain moral standards and stay away from material that violates them or we can say as long as it's legal, it's ok.
There are so many programs and sites out there with screaming and crying girls, groups of guys pissing and cumming on girls, girls vomiting from deep throat, almost bleeding gaping asses. "Daddy's little girl violated", "Destroyed pussies", there are thousands of slogans like these.
Bash any site or program you want, but ask yourself if you are really in a position to do so or if you are just jumping on the train because it's easy to do so.
|
The answer is exactly an issue of "jumping on the train"
Sure... this industry is as hypocritical as any other, - often due to two factors (a) lack of judgement by publishers and (b) desperation by the potless hoping to earn a dime.
On one hand, enter high drama over a CP website and five pages of "I hate pedos" and an online-industry slant to try and disown (or is it denial?) that we have anything to do with pedos - "We are the mainline adult industry!".
The flip side of the real "adult industry" is portraying talent as kids of around 12 years of age with hairclips and playing with teddy bears and coloring pens, but with a cock stuck in them.
Along comes screams of justification that "It's legal!" and "I've got 2257 paperwork!". Does the online industry think for one moment that they have generated an original idea by portraying legal talent as children and having dicks stuck in all orifices???? Nope - that level of pedo-marketing has been tried before the online-industry was ever heard of, and resulted in legislation in several western countries to prohibit this sales tactic. Obviously the industry is incapable of policing itself.
Currently there is reference in US law against "pedo marketing" (2257). In most other western countries, there is legislation specifically prohibiting the "styling" of legal talent to imply they are under legal age. Each country varies, but generally legislation falls under obscenity laws or laws related to child protection.
Do images of a carefully selected "small model" decorated with hairclips, pigtails with teddy bears and coloring pens suggest underage??? No, no... the toys just happened to be on the set and the girl just happens to be small in stature (we try hard to find small models). That must be the basis of naming a website "Little Lupe" The hypocrisy is oozing again.
In all countries on the planet, oddly, excepting the US, there exists an treaty in the form of the Convention for the Rights of the Child. The Convention was formulated to, basically provide basic rights to children globally and dampen elements of abuse (in all forms) and give respect to children. "Pedo pandering" by the mainstream adult industry is not exactly in keeping with the spirit of this Convention. It is unfortunate that the US appears to be unable to offer their children the same rights granted in all other nations or enforce the "words" already contained within US law.
Despite claims to the contrary of being "legal" - there are several specific laws stating the illegality - it is up to a jury to decide. Ironically, the offshore jurisdiction used by the operators of "Little Lupe" and where they are represented by Sampson Investments AAV, would not be amused - or care about the technically of laws.
Sure StarkReality - know what you mean about "slogans" - it's basically the same thing, and most prob stemming from an element of "amateurism", trying to be dramatic/shock and appealing to pedos to earn a living. It is amazing how naive and immature the "adult online industry" actually is - but, looking around, perhaps not
Only my
but meanwhile, I'll reject the kind offer of earning based on images of talent dressed to look like 12 year olds and continue to report CP websites to whatever relevant agency.