Child Porn
 

I am sick of listening to the same old misconceptions about child porn on this board. Get to understand what CP is all about before you go ranting about sites that have been around for years and operate well within the law.

Paedophiles don't want to look at 16 year old girls, they are more interested in pre-teen and explicit child sex material which is what you guys should be fighting against. The number of pre-teen sites coming out of Russia has more than doubled since Oct 2001 and 80% are using US based billing systems and servers without hindrance.

Sites like Club17 and MET are not even close to child pornography, they simply cater for a fantasy shared by thousands of adult males.
Over the past 20 years, the age of puberty has changed, girls grow up more quickly and the age for presenting themselves as sexually available has in some countries fallen by up to 3 years. This change has greatly affected the way men perceive young girls and what would have been seen as outrageous 20 years ago is now an every day occurrence in the media world.

I have been promoting the Teen, Teen Sex , Lolita Fantasy niches for almost 2 years now and know exactly what kind of men sign up to sites like C17, they are not paedophiles.

If anyone here is having difficulty differentiating between what?s CP and what?s a fantasy dream, send me an ICQ and I will show you the difference.

No thanks, your freaking me out

And if you have CP on your computer then delete it you sick fuck, go promote a normal niche

What are normal niches - Schoolgirl Fantasy ?

The age of consent is determined by a political body in a given jurisdiction. There is nothing magical about "18." It is 16 in some other countries. As far as I know, there may be countries with no opinion on the subject. A lot of CP seems to come from Russia. I'm not sure if this is because they have no particular laws there or enforcement is simply lax.

The photographer David Hamilton takes lovely pictures of nude 12-15 year old girls. The photos are NOT pornographic by any non-hysterical standard, and are simply a celebration of the beauty of a girl at this stage in her development. It is the idea (which seems almost more common among guilt-plagued webmasters who want to divert attention from themselves) that ANY nude image of a sub-adult is pornographic which is pathetic. After all, there are nude children (cherubs) on the ceilings of
Catholic and Protestant places of worship all around the world.

By contrast, a depiction of a pre-pubescent child being subjected to or engaging in sex with an adult or another child IS patently obscene and revolting to anyone with normal sensibilities and any degree of empathy for children.

But even that is cultural to some degree.

There are cultures where adults introduce young adolescents to sex in a ritual context (not sneaking off and creating guilt and shame). This happens in some Pacific Island cultures, and did happen in some Native American tribes, in Africa, and elsewhere. The strange thing seems to be that, if you take away the guilt and shame, these practices actually seemed to cause no harm.

So, what does that tell me? That the culture which induces shame and guilt is as much a partner in the damage done to the child as the "perpetrator" himself.

Strangely and ironically, one of the ways we might reduce the damage done to children by pedophiles is to try to be a bit less hysterical about it.

And this is not to say that pedophiles are good. They are not. Just that there's enough blame to go around.

I'm from Holland and I believe that the legal age to act in pornmovies was 16 years and you had to be 18 to be a prostitute.
I believe that you have to be 18 now for both and I'm glad about that.
16 years and acting in porn is just wrong.
And if a girl behaves like an adult when she is 16 or so doesn't mean she can play in a pornmovie if she wants.
A kid doesn't belong in the pornbiz period.

And I would never want to make money with a site that "pretends" that they have young girls, lolitas etc."
Like some big sites promote the site "theincest"... might be legal but I would never want to make a dime of people that get a hardon from words like "young girls underage girls lolitas daddy fucking his girl etc".

My:2 cents:

Nice post unseen.

The laws in Russia are as strict as anywhere else its just that they don?t have the infrastructure or recourses to enforce them properly. Lack of money also plays a big part too of course.

What concerns me the most is the number of services supporting these sites with billing and hosting facilities

:BangBang: RUSSIA

SR

Underage and daddy fucking are both bad news words but "Lolita" has become a fantasy word which like "Young" can be interpreted in many ways. I totally agree with the rule of no pornographic sex until 18 simply because anything younger would open the flood gates for exploitation.

I have a 14 year old daughter myself, and would hate to think of her acting in pornographic movies at the age of 16.

You said you know what kind of men sign up to these sites? You don't know the slightest thing about them. Its not like you do fucking backround checks before you give someone a membership to your site...

anything below 18 is CP, thats my theory.

so, your theory should take precedence over law? context is what the CP laws are all about...so acording to your "theory" is the movie "Titanic" CP? The charcter Rose was only 17, yet the movie showed her nude and engaged in simulated sex...ever see a Porky's movie? Most of the "chacrters" were 16 and 17....

my problem with the under 18 "artistic" nudes isn't that they may or not be legally considered "pornographic", rather the way the sites are presented and advertised...

Reeeally?

* runs to video store *

Seriously though, Dopy knows her shit.
Interesting thread. :2 cents:

You also realise that 'rose' is like 25 in REAL LIFE? It doesn't matter if they say someone is 16 or 17, as long as they are obviously older.

You see, there is a difference between hollywood productions and real life. Same with the porn industry.

Do you even know what the CP laws are???

Do you know what would happen if Unseen (strictly as an example) advertised a 16-17 year old girl (even though she may well be 18)? Even implying they are underage can get you in deep shit...
I think you need to look into what the laws really are...

heheh.. so true.. im sure in a lot of areas it's legal (like here) to fuck a 17 year old so why in hell would clubseventeen be CP??????.. sure it's illegal to sell content of 17 year olds in many places.. and thats cool - thats the law, in this field give it the utmost respect.. but i wouldn't consider it CP - you're applying cultural bias towards an offshore law. (just as i am)

18 is not that old.

some of the girls getting ass fucked on blacks on blondes etc. are only 18 or so. Legally fine. A softcore shoot of 17 year old coming from holland is not as morally challenging in my view.

I am from Britain originally, I grew up with topless 16 year olds in the top selling daily newspaper, but porn that we have on cable here in Canada is still illegal at home. No erect penises let alone, cum shots and all that.

Anyways, I seemingly have no point, but I think everyone agrees that whole russian industry is the problem.

yeah it's a pity.. lol.. j/k

Are these the moral equivalent of CP?

http://www.lilamber.com
http://www.mollirama.com

Can you imagine what kind of parent decides to let guys jack off to their kids to bring in some extra money?

now thats just sad..... gives you that sick feeling in the pit of your stomach..... it's only a matter of time before clothed minor sites get shut down in the states

Now they are both paedophile magnets !

Yes but the girl who played the daughter and flashed her breast in American Beauty was only 16 at the time of filming.

And as far as "it doesn't matter if they someone is 16 or 17, as long as they are obviously older." You should read a little bit more about 2257.
A porn site cannot in no way shape or form imply that their models are younger even for fantasy reasons.

This whole is it "art" or cp thing is such a tricky issue that it's best to stay away from it unless you have plenty of cash to fight off the government.

In one case discussed on Adult Web Law a man was arrested and convicted for receiving videos of young girls dancing in leotards etc. What made it cp was the fact that the videographer zoomed in for long periods of times on their genital and pubic area.

So even these so called "art" sites with nude modeling of girls under the age of 18 I'm sure are tested on this issue at all times so they must be careful of the context and the composition of their photographs.

As far as these girl model sites are concerned. You are not going to stop it. It is the most unadulturated form of pimping out your child legally, but it's still legal and it's making them shit loads of money.

One young girl they wrote about in an article on Wired had actually earned enough money to pay her entire way through college including medical school and she was if I remember correctly just entering into the 9th grade.

It's a sad fact in this world...it's a shame what people do at the expense of their child...but is it really any worse than parent's who pushed their children into acting in movies?

IMHO I don't think so...exploitation is exploitation...hell even if the child really wants it if the parents motives are anything other than keeping their child's best interests at heart then it is wrong.

Oh thank God! All this time I thought I was a dirty Pedophile!

what you guys fail to realize is that you must remember the INTERNET,,, the net is whole different ball game,,,
trying to compare Movies and other media is wrong

the reality is that surfers want something and they search for it,,,

hence getting target traffic,, as we all know there are plenty of them and are very specific ie...

movie traffic,teen traffic, asian, gay, and black traffic
these surfers are looking for particular sites,,,

lotta these sites give the perception of 'CP'
so what if there non-nude or the girls are really 25
perception is a muthafucker and i myself will not feed these sickos their desires

sorry for my non-artistic self,,, but if you ask me there is damn reason for a grown adult to see a naked 12-15 year old girl....

seriously,,, do you think a 12-15 year old has the mental capacity and be able make concious choice that they won't mess up there future by posing nude?

"The photographer David Hamilton takes lovely pictures of nude 12-15 year old girls. The photos are NOT pornographic by any non-hysterical standard, and are simply a celebration of the beauty of a girl at this stage in her development. It is the idea (which seems almost more common among guilt-plagued webmasters who want to divert attention from themselves) that ANY nude image of a sub-adult is pornographic which is pathetic."

I have to agree with playa. Art is one thing, but WE as Adult Webmasters, Run PORN SITES, and we send surfers (with the intention of jerking off) to Adult sites they can wack off too.

I have lots of friends who are artists, photographers, ect..,
and this issue of an ADULT site leading surfers to pics of underage
(you call it art or whatever) is hurting there industry as well. Someone
Makeing an art book is one thing, throwing that photograph on
page 53 of Hustler is another. There is a huge difference in
the traffic we work with and poeple who are simply looking
for Art.

My :2 cents:

okay, fuck it...Thora Birch was 17 and her parents signed a relaese and were on the set the whole time...damn

please continue...

only if you find yourself lurking around high schools after classes

That's great. Now if I buy a bunch of David Birch's wonderful artsy pics of naked 12 year olds, build a kick ass artsy paysite, and advertise it on any of a zillion TGP's, what do we have?

I wonder how many people still own Tracy Lords videos?

And are they child porn lovers, or just normal guys who didn't know that the video store was selling them kiddy porn.

Any "man" who desires to look at 12 year old to 15 year old girls naked are just plain fucked up. There is something wrong about it.

There is a huge double standard..... On the big screen it's okay for a sixteen year old to flash her breasts or a 25 year old to play the part of a seventeen year old girl in a sex scene.... But for a website to claim to have seventeen year old girls (that are really 18 and 19 years old) would lead them straight to jail.

The oddest part of it all is what "we" decide the legal age of consent is. A 17 year old girl can't get naked for my camera, yet that same 17 year old girl is "mature" enough to drive a guided missle down our streets..... We give teenagers the right to drive a car, puttin the lives of my family in their hands, but they can't drink, buy a pack of smokes, or get naked. If the legal age of consent is 18, then they shouldn't be able to drive until they are 18.

No Exxxotica you are normal, its those that deny looking that worry me.


From the office window where I used to work I have watched a complete construction site come to a halt when the local school emptied, I wonder whats must have been on those guys minds, perhaps they were all potential peds LOL.

I just kept thinking that one day they might visit my site and act out the fantasy. :)

my all time fav is a site that links to a huge list of "yahoo briefcases" which are of course real teen girls email "profiles" which contain a briefcase full of images, thats just a bit too far.

And WHO messes up their future? The kind of people who make them feel ashamed.

Had you familiarized yourself with the subject (David Hamilton's photography), you'd realize it's not what the true pedophile is looking for. The photos are murky and leave much to the imagination. If you are in the porn industry, you realize that frequently the difference between porn and art is how sharply focused and well-lit the photo is.

What's your point?
And according to Gear Magazine March 2000 page 46 first paragraph it states "But at 16, Thora Birch was harmlessly topless in the context of realism in American Beauty."

My point was just letting someone know that even though the character in Titanic was played by a 25 year old that there was someone much younger flashing her tits in American Beauty...and let's not forget the Movie Lolita...Dominique Swain did some partial nudity in that film at the age of 15 as did Brooke Shields at a much younger age in the critically acclaimed Pretty Baby of which I have seen all three...Lolita Sucked...American Beauty is an instant classic and Pretty Baby is a classic plain and simple.

So is Brooke Shields life ruined by her nudity? Not necessarily...I would probably assume no.

But look at someone like Drew Barrymore who was obviously exploited by her mother Jade without any nudity...and it totally fucked her up. She may have her head on straight now but it took some wandering through the desert to get there and I may be mistaken but I do believe she still doesn't speak to her mother.

I mean there are tons of child stars to prove that point...what chew talkin' bout Willis? LOL

I think if a parent's intentions are to only help their child to fulfill their dreams and NOT THEIRS BY LIVING VICARIOUSLY THROUGH THEM OR THEIR PAYCHECK. Then it's okay within reason.

But it is clear that in the so called artistic sites coming from Russia it's someone exploiting poverty and a child's lack of a future...as is probably the case with these child model sites.

eros

Here is my thought... Having models that are 18+ and advertising that they 18+ keeps me out of jail. This is a very good thing and plenty of reason for me to avoid the issue like the plauge!

If they sleep with them = YES!!!! What I dont get is why those of
us who Dont exploit children are considered the sick ones with you?

Fantasy is one thing - acting on it is another = DUH!

Art is another thing = masterbateing to pics of naked children is fucken sick.

Another thing I dont get is how you cant see that!?!?!?!
Selling memberships to sites that do that is just as fucken sick.
And those that support it are trully the twisted ones here, dont
go telling me that because I choose to protect instead of exploit
children that I am twisted and in need of help. Fuck You!!!

I skimmed the end of this thread, but I didn't see anyone mention that CP laws and Sexual Consent laws are two ENTIRELY DIFFERENT THINGS in most countries. For example, in Canada, CP is images of girls under 18, but the age of sexual consent is 14. You can have sex with a 14 year old legally, but photographing it will land you in jail.

Kind of weird to call someone as sick fuck for promoting the youth "fantasy" when you live in a country where the law says you can have sex with 14 year olds .

Basically, I couldn't agree more. I was writing to make a distinction between art and porn and not lumping anything depicting a nude child as automatically pornographic. Pedophiles seeking porn are looking for what all people seeking porn are looking for: something which is shocking, without anything obstructing the view, and lit so that nothing is left to the imagination. Looking at David Hamilton's work, for example, it is the absolute opposite of that. I urge anyone wanting to voice an opinion on the subject to seek out Hamilton's work via the search engines before voicing an opinion. BTW, in a less hysterical time, my wife of the time gave me two of his photo books for my birthday. SHE (the mother of our daughter) thought the pictures were beautiful herself.

Of course, as some are saying, presentation has much to do with it. A site with more explicit material truly qualifying as CP might include some David Hamilton material to pretend at having some artistic merit. That is sad and unfortunate.

"Of course, as some are saying, presentation has much to do with it. A site with more explicit material truly qualifying as CP might include some David Hamilton material to pretend at having some artistic merit. That is sad and unfortunate."

Yes I agree UnseenWorld,

That was the destinction I wantd to make. I have no problem with art. :)

Theres nothing wrong with a nude human body no matter what age. It's all about the intentions of the photographer or painter.

TopTGP
Would you really put a guy in jail who had sex with Traci Lords when she was 16 ? Nobody knew how old she was, she was blowing 5-6 guys at a time. How could he know ? I dont think there was much "child" left to her by then and she made those choices on her own.