XBIZ News: Website Operator Indicted for Obscenity Over Stories About Children

[Stephen]

XBIZ News: Website Operator Indicted for Obscenity Over Stories About Children

A federal grand jury has returned an indictment for a woman accused of disseminating allegedly obscene fictional stories on her website describing the torture and sexual abuse of children.

> FULL STORY

[xanx]

scary precedent they are trying to set, what's next? thought crimes?

[SteveLightspeed]

Thought police?

[jcknwprt]

thanks for the useful stuff!

-Squishypimp

[JD]

Originally Posted by jcknwprt

thanks for the useful stuff!

-Squishypimp

[sextoyking]

Originally Posted by SteveLightspeed

Thought police?

See you won't see most "normal / mainstream" ppl stick up for someone who has child crap in there text stories, etc but this can be a fine line here... Once you start on text and words, shit.. Lady Chat. Lover and many books way back when were called porn... I hope the first ammed ppl and the aclu jump on this one.

Again, I think abuse and sexual stuff about kids and ppl under 18 is crap and BS but if you think about it, big brother and the doj can reach from there into other matters.

[tony286]

i wonder if the aclu will get involved

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by tony404

i wonder if the aclu will get involved

probably. the stories "involved the kidnapping, torture, sexual molestation and murder of children nine years and younger" which is the kind of thing that they support. of course, I'll still be sending them a Christmas card.

Beyond that, did you see the "risk to reward" ratio: she had 29 members paying $10/mo. That's less than $3500/yr. and for that, she's facing 30 years in prison and a $1.5 million dollar fine. I wonder how many affiliates / part time gallery submitters and other struggling webmasters would consider that to be "worth it"?

[sextoyking]

Originally Posted by Stephen

probably. the stories "involved the kidnapping, torture, sexual molestation and murder of children nine years and younger" which is the kind of thing that they support. of course, I'll still be sending them a Christmas card.

Beyond that, did you see the "risk to reward" ratio: she had 29 members paying $10/mo. That's less than $3500/yr. and for that, she's facing 30 years in prison and a $1.5 million dollar fine. I wonder how many affiliates / part time gallery submitters and other struggling webmasters would consider that to be "worth it"?

I send in every yr also

While I would never support that bs, First "bad text - stories" what is next for the written word.

The risk to reward isn't worth it....... I just hope some pick up on this... Can they go from these Unpopular words to others that they find unpopular... 1ammed. is to protect unpopular speech.... though for me it's tought to support this kind..

[Brad Mitchell]

Originally Posted by SteveLightspeed

Thought police?

Right out of the movies!

[ronaldo]

"A federal grand jury has returned an indictment for a woman accused of disseminating alleged obscene fictional stories on her website describing the torture and sexual abuse of children.

"Use of the Internet to distribute obscene stories like these not only violates federal law, but also emboldens sex offenders who would target children," Buchanan said."

Can someone, ANYONE tell me how anything WRITTEN could be worse than this... http://www.nydailynews.com/news/goss...p-367837c.html

"The screenplay for "Hounddog" - a dark story of abuse, violence and Elvis Presley adulation in the rural South, written and directed by Deborah Kampmeier - calls for Fanning's character to be raped in one explicit scene and to appear naked or clad only in "underpants" in several other horrifying moments."

Would THAT not "embolden sex offenders who would target children?"

Somehow I just don't see any obscenity charges stemming from that. The US is becoming more fucked up on a daily basis it seems.

[sextoyking]

Originally Posted by Brad Mitchell

Right out of the movies!

Brad,

Kind of Orwellian (sp), 1984 ish....

As I said for yrs, new and high tech stuff is cool but with more tech comes more big brother.. not really to do with this case but you know....

[latinasojourn]

only in the microcosm of GFY will you find rationalization to try say this sort of shit if really OK, and no controls should be on it.

government exists to control the actions of fools.

when you kids actually grow up and have children to love maybe you will get the idea.

there are a billion ways to make a buck in this world, spending a nanosecond trying to posture ANY sort of defense for this shit is a waste of precious life.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by latinasojourn

only in the microcosm of GFY will you find rationalization to try say this sort of shit if really OK, and no controls should be on it.

government exists to control the actions of fools.

when you kids actually grow up and have children to love maybe you will get the idea.

there are a billion ways to make a buck in this world, spending a nanosecond trying to posture ANY sort of defense for this shit is a waste of precious life.

Protecting Free speech is protecting the speech you hate not the speech you agree with. going against the written word is a slippery slope you dont want to go down. Considering she had ten members isnt wasnt for the money. THat kind of thing turns my stomach but its still protected.When you start picking and choosing the speech we will protect, thats a bad path.

[latinasojourn]

Originally Posted by tony404

Protecting Free speech is protecting the speech you hate not the speech you agree with. going against the written word is a slippery slope you dont want to go down. Considering she had ten members isnt wasnt for the money. THat kind of thing turns my stomach but its still protected.When you start picking and choosing the speech we will protect, thats a bad path.

true.

it is also illegal for someone to shout "FIRE" in a crowded theater in most parts of the civilized world.

and the prohibition is reasonable, understood by reasonable people.

government exists to control the unreasonable, the fools of society.

reasonable people need minimal government.

[After Shock Media]

Where are the obscenity busts when Hollywood does it in a film? It surely has a bigger reach than this persons stories. What about sites that sell such movies for Hollywood? They are also using that damn interweb to reach people.

Latter on I also expect Warner Brothers to get it for showing obscene content to children during child viewing hours on TV. You know, all of that cross dressing and homosexual behavior bugs bunny and others indulged in.

Music also needs to have a lid put on it. It is down right vulgar and promotes killing, violence, criminal life, and satanism.

Lastly I expect Dateline NBC to get served. They and others they are with are not only profiting off of such material. They are pretending to be minors and talking explicitly to other minors.

Speech is speech, no matter how vile it may be. I would never condone such writing, read such writing, nor encourage such writing. I would however defend such writing.

[RawAlex]

For those who missed the previous thread on this subject, let me make it clear as to the type of content that was on this site:

The most obvious was a series of stories on molesting a 6 month old child, including finger insertions and the like. Almost all of the stories on the site were about the youngest of minors (0 - 10 years old) in completely forced sexual situaitons, abuse, and even the suggestion of snuff.

This stories were written by someone with some sick, sick fantasies. Sadly, some people will read this stuff and think that their weird feelings are in fact normal, and start to molest children themselves.

I am all for protecting first amendment rights. But I can tell you that even a group of hardened porn people such as ourselves would be mightly offended and disgusted by this material, and we would be easily able to say "there is nothing good here". That this sort of stuff is tolerated even for a minute is beyond me.

Even in the most permissive of societies, someone, somewhere will find the line and cross it. I personally don't think it woudl do the porn industry any good to protect or support someone who is so far over the line.

[tom hymes]

Originally Posted by latinasojourn

true.

it is also illegal for someone to shout "FIRE" in a crowded theater in most parts of the civilized world.

and the prohibition is reasonable, understood by reasonable people.

government exists to control the unreasonable, the fools of society.

reasonable people need minimal government.

It's the SHOUTING of the word fire that's the problem. You can mutter fire all you want in a theatre, and it's no one's goddamn business. But if you shout it, the likely result is panic that could result in injuries or death, and that's why a prohibition against verbal incitements of that sort exists.

Obviously, from her comments, Mary Beth Buchanan is trying to make a similar argument, that this sort of writing "also emboldens sex offenders who would target children." But just think about that for a second, in the context of any thought, idea or suggestion that someone might decide to act upon. We are making the thoughts of a speaker responsible for the behavior of another. In the case of yelling "fire," the shouted word is the behavior. If I tell you to yell fire and you do it, I don't get prosecuted, you do!

No, this is the thought police in action, and all first amendment attorneys are going to be alarmed by the fed's decision to try to drag this country back in time by prosecuting written expression that we all here agree is disgusting.

Scary times, indeed.

[baddog]

I am amazed at the response of some people

[Quentin]

Seems like a good time/place to recommend a little pertinent reading....

Here's a great article on the topic of free speech. It includes examination of John Stuart Mills' "Harm Principle" as applied to the subject of 'pornography'.... good shit.

And a much shorter opinion piece recently published by Paul McMasters of the First Amendment Center about 'decency' and the media.

- Q.

[rowan]

Originally Posted by Stephen

probably. the stories "involved the kidnapping, torture, sexual molestation and murder of children nine years and younger" which is the kind of thing that they support. of course, I'll still be sending them a Christmas card.

Beyond that, did you see the "risk to reward" ratio: she had 29 members paying $10/mo. That's less than $3500/yr. and for that, she's facing 30 years in prison and a $1.5 million dollar fine. I wonder how many affiliates / part time gallery submitters and other struggling webmasters would consider that to be "worth it"?

Would it be too much of a stretch to conclude that she wasn't doing it for the money?

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by latinasojourn

only in the microcosm of GFY will you find rationalization to try say this sort of shit if really OK, and no controls should be on it.

I have to say that the overall tone is different at the other two boards I posted this at, were the common thread was "good, I hope she goes to jail"

[notabook]

A book is full of stories, some just longer than others. Just imagine the horrors that would have occurred if somebody had printed out these vile and vicious stories and then they chose to bind them together, forming a book. Can you imagine how many people would have suffered at the hand of that devious book? Tens of millions of people would have been forced at gunpoint to read the book, subjecting their minds to horrible stories of unimaginable vileness. Then after reading the book, they would have been so enraged and would stop at nothing from acting out those stories that they just got though reading.

Just look at how many people go on murderous rampages after playing Grand Theft Auto, look at how many people become Nazis after watching a documentary about Germany during World War II. Worst of all? just look at Hollywood for examples of true utter depravity. Remember how many people became gay cowboys after watching Brokeback Mountain? Remember how many started to drink shitty wine after watching Sideways? People are easily influenced by nearly anything and they must be controlled by a government with an iron-gripped else our society be thrown into complete turmoil!

[Wiggles]

huge moral debate with these types of cases, impossible to debate due to the nature of the content. anyone backing is labelled as sick pretty much even though they aren't condoning the actual act.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by rowan

Would it be too much of a stretch to conclude that she wasn't doing it for the money?

why should motive be a factor?

maybe she just wasn't any good at what she was doing

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by notabook

look at how many people become Nazis after watching a documentary about Germany during World War II.

Have you seen "Triumph of the Will"? MANY people have become fanatic Nazis after watching this film, both during the time it was made -- and since -- even up to the present day. But don't look to see it pretty much anywhere in Europe: the censors won't allow it.

[tony286]

the yelling fire doesnt work for this, it was a membership site. It wasnt like she was in the middle of the mall reading these stories outloud.if you protect free speech its all speech not only the kind that makes you feel comfortable.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by Stephen

I have to say that the overall tone is different at the other two boards I posted this at, were the common thread was "good, I hope she goes to jail"

thats the knee jerk reaction, they have to think about the bigger picture

[Kimmykim]

Originally Posted by notabook

A book is full of stories, some just longer than others. Just imagine the horrors that would have occurred if somebody had printed out these vile and vicious stories and then they chose to bind them together, forming a book. Can you imagine how many people would have suffered at the hand of that devious book? Tens of millions of people would have been forced at gunpoint to read the book, subjecting their minds to horrible stories of unimaginable vileness. Then after reading the book, they would have been so enraged and would stop at nothing from acting out those stories that they just got though reading.

Interesting, I read this paragraph and I thought there was going to be a punchline.

Strangely enough I thought it was going to be the Bible.

Originally Posted by RawAlex

I am all for protecting first amendment rights. But I can tell you that even a group of hardened porn people such as ourselves would be mightly offended and disgusted by this material, and we would be easily able to say "there is nothing good here". That this sort of stuff is tolerated even for a minute is beyond me.

Even in the most permissive of societies, someone, somewhere will find the line and cross it. I personally don't think it woudl do the porn industry any good to protect or support someone who is so far over the line.

Alex, don't you think it's time you found something else to do for a living? Many years ago I agreed with you on a lot of issues and I still consider those points to be valid today. You've managed to become such a holier than thou conservative on every issue, even ones like this that are absolutely in need of defending, that it's obvious you don't like what you do.

And when I say in need of defending, I mean the written word. Not the content. Obviously there were very few takers on the content, which is a GREAT thing.

But the line isn't drawn in the sand on free speech and thoughts expressed on paper. It's a concrete line that has to be kept in place.

[notabook]

Originally Posted by Stephen

Have you seen "Triumph of the Will"? MANY people have become fanatic Nazis after watching this film, both during the time it was made -- and since -- even up to the present day. But don't look to see it pretty much anywhere in Europe: the censors won't allow it.

I have not seen it but I am sure it did! It was probably the Brokeback Mountain of it's time and ended up being one of the greatest facilitators of Nazism ever. The documentaries that play continually on WW2 turns out on average 6,000 new Nazis every year!

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Stephen

I have to say that the overall tone is different at the other two boards I posted this at, were the common thread was "good, I hope she goes to jail"

hmmm, maybe I am in the wrong place

[notabook]

Originally Posted by Kimmykim

Interesting, I read this paragraph and I thought there was going to be a punchline.

Strangely enough I thought it was going to be the Bible.

Of course not, there is no punchline here. Books remain one of the most dangerous inventions ever brought forth. Books want nothing less than to rape you and everyone else you have ever loved or cared about. Books are extremely evil creations and must be eradicated from this plane of existence with torrential waves of fire lest we fall to their kind.

[baddog]

Okay, there can be little argument that freedom of speech and expression should be protected, and if we are going to include writings, then shouldn't pictures and video also be protected?

So, why can you write about abusing a 6 month old, but it is wrong to take pictures of simulated abuse of that same 6 month old?

[tony286]

Originally Posted by baddog

hmmm, maybe I am in the wrong place

your kidding right, dont you realize once they start down the thought crime road.Eventually you can be one of the stops ? lol

If we are to stay a free country we must protect the speech we hate the most.Freedom of the written word is what makes this country great.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by tony404

your kidding right, dont you realize once they start down the thought crime road.Eventually you can be one of the stops ? lol

If we are to stay a free country we must protect the speech we hate the most.Freedom of the written word is what makes this country great.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showpo...8&postcount=33

[notabook]

Originally Posted by baddog

So, why can you write about abusing a 6 month old, but it is wrong to take pictures of simulated abuse of that same 6 month old?

Ugh? are you kidding right? Writing hurts no one whatsoever. Taking pictures of abused or even simulated abuse of a living breathing human being cannot even begin to compare.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by baddog

Okay, there can be little argument that freedom of speech and expression should be protected, and if we are going to include writings, then shouldn't pictures and video also be protected?

So, why can you write about abusing a 6 month old, but it is wrong to take pictures of simulated abuse of that same 6 month old?

Its not the same thing we both know that. this was all in somes head onto a computer. Now it makes me want to throw up but you cant only defend speech thats comfortable because after a while there will be less and less of it.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by notabook

Ugh? are you kidding right? Writing hurts no one whatsoever. Taking pictures of abused or even simulated abuse of a living breathing human being cannot even begin to compare.

How do pictures of a simulated rape hurt someone?

[baddog]

Originally Posted by tony404

Its not the same thing we both know that. this was all in somes head onto a computer. Now it makes me want to throw up but you cant only defend speech thats comfortable because after a while there will be less and less of it.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showpo...9&postcount=38

[tony286]

I hope your just being the devils advocate because if not its very sad. I hope one day someone doesn't decide the words you write on your blog are a no no. Things like this start with the worst stuff and grow from there.

[tony286]

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. ~Noam Chomsky

Take away the right to say "fuck" and you take away the right to say "fuck the government." ~Lenny Bruce

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. ~Voltaire

"What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist."
Salman RUSHDIE

[Platinum Lantern]

Lock that bitch up!

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by Kimmykim

Alex, don't you think it's time you found something else to do for a living? Many years ago I agreed with you on a lot of issues and I still consider those points to be valid today. You've managed to become such a holier than thou conservative on every issue, even ones like this that are absolutely in need of defending, that it's obvious you don't like what you do.

And when I say in need of defending, I mean the written word. Not the content. Obviously there were very few takers on the content, which is a GREAT thing.

But the line isn't drawn in the sand on free speech and thoughts expressed on paper. It's a concrete line that has to be kept in place.

Kimmy, because of the way the US constitution is written (and interpreted) the adult industry finds itself standing in support of some very weird things to protect that concrete line. It is a concept of bizarre absolutes that makes me shake my head. It creates a horrible situation of having to support shit that most humans would find deeply offensive, revolting, and unacceptable to retain certain rights and freedoms. For me, that is a no win situation. To say I support stories of raping babies to protect free speech makes me ill. Something is wrong with a system that can't even draw that proper concrete line.

Until you can seperate the content from the implied freedom, we will always end up standing next to some of the most disgusting and revolting people and thoughts. That just isn't a very palatable situation.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by tony404

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. ~Noam Chomsky

Take away the right to say "fuck" and you take away the right to say "fuck the government." ~Lenny Bruce

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. ~Voltaire

"What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist."
Salman RUSHDIE

Tony, nice pile of quotes... would you feel the same if someone wrote a story about raping your child? Would you feel the same if someone drew pictures and explained how they would do it?

Why are images (especially computer generated, cartoons, or other art forms where no actual act occurred) illegal but the written word that describes them not?

Double standards that all the slick as sound bites in the world can't cure.

[notabook]

Originally Posted by baddog

How do pictures of a simulated rape hurt someone?

What? What about the person that got their pictures taken without permission? Their picture forever on digitized on the web, downloading on god knows how many computers. What if someone "getting off" to those pictures saw that person one day and decided to take action? Of course it can hurt someone! Text stories about fake people or fake individuals can't hurt ANYONE jesus fucking christ I don't see how you can even begin to try to compare the two, it is mind boggling. ALSO, I am talking about simulated scenes of kids. As for simulated rape scenes of CONSENTING ADULTS, that is fine imo.

[notabook]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Tony, nice pile of quotes... would you feel the same if someone wrote a story about raping your child? Would you feel the same if someone drew pictures and explained how they would do it?

That would be illegal if they used specific names and exact likeness, it could be considered conspiracy in many states/countries, so I imagine he could do what is appropriate and contact various law agencies to get it resolved.

[RawAlex]

notabook, so let's make the story about "child of tony403". Would that suddenly make it all better? That seems to be a fine line that doesn't cover what the content really is.

Alex

[notabook]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

notabook, so let's make the story about "child of tony403". Would that suddenly make it all better? That seems to be a fine line that doesn't cover what the content really is.

Alex

Again, getting into specific names/details could be considered the same thing as the drawings and as such could be considered conspiracy. If the story is using Plain Jane or John Doe names without any identifiable specific mentionables, then there should be nothing wrong with it.

[tony286]

If you dont protect it you lose it. What are you going to do if next they come after something you wrote in a blog or on one of your sites? Then say they come after unpopular political speech. This has nothing to do with me being in porn, I have said people arrested in nonporn friendly places that they caused their own pain so Im not blinded by my work. Free speech is what makes this country great and its not protecting only the nice pretty speech or the stuff you agree about. Its the stuff that makes you angry or makes you want to throw up or turns your stomach. Once they start creating a bar its easy to lower it. Please wake up and realize that.

[notabook]

Originally Posted by tony404

If you dont protect it you lose it. What are you going to do if next they come after something you wrote in a blog or on one of your sites? Then say they come after unpopular political speech. This has nothing to do with me being in porn, I have said people arrested in nonporn friendly places that they caused their own pain so Im not blinded by my work. Free speech is what makes this country great and its not protecting only the nice pretty speech or the stuff you agree about. Its the stuff that makes you angry or makes you want to throw up or turns your stomach. Once they start creating a bar its easy to lower it. Please wake up and realize that.

Very well stated, all walks of life can easily be affected by just this one precedent if it comes to it.