RealEstateKing Registered User
#46

(1) The main reason why pictures of naked children are illegal is because it involves the actual exploitation and brutalisation of a child to make them. If the picture in question is a drawing, then this doesnt apply, assuming it wasn't drawn from life.

(2) Second issue is how sexualised the picture is. There is nothing wrong with pictures of naked children per se - Western Art is full of Cherubs, Cupids and frolicking nymphs and so on to Nirvanas Nevermind. It is when the image is sexualised that it enters the greay area.

(3) The most controversial element is the sexualisation of young, but not actually pre-pubescent girls. We, have, for the sake of convenience, set a bar at 16 below which it is illegal to go. But of course this bar has no basis in nature: An individual only has mental problems if he is sexually interested in girls/boys below the age where they become sexually mature (13 or so). It is perfectly natural to have some sexual interest in Girls/boys after that age, though of course not entirely indicative of a healthy adult attitude to matters sexual. (i.e. it's a bit sad, but not actually sick)

The Japanese anime type stuff seems to be playing into this area of male sexuality. the desire for young, skinny, weak-looking teenage girls. Its not entirely healthy, but as long as the girls in question are sexually mature, and no actual girls are involved in the making of the pictures, I wouldnt worry about it too much.

o1s1n Registered User
#47

This really annoys me. People should be able to draw or create whatever imagery they want. It's just extending your ideas down on to paper. Banning it is verging on thought police.

In all my years in art college a lot of the imagery I saw created by students was extremely sexual. Some of it did involve what appeared to be children. No children were harmed or used as sources in the process. It was all from their (rather disturbed) minds. Therefore it is not child pornography.

This is just the usual 'OMFG CHILD PORNZ THINK OF THE CHILDERS BAN CENSOR AH AH AH' over reactionary bull. They need to go after actual child pornographers and leave these easy targets alone.

3 people have thanked this post
#48

o1s1n said:
This is just the usual 'OMFG CHILD PORNZ THINK OF THE CHILDERS BAN CENSOR AH AH AH' over reactionary bull. They need to go after actual child pornographers and leave these easy targets alone.


People love to hate pedos almost as much as they love chocolate.

1 person has thanked this post
minidazzler Registered User
#49

TBH, this is a humanities debate, it has more to do with morals.

I have no problem with it TBH, none at all. It's drawings of people who don't exist, noone is being exploited or hurt. I don't view it because TBH, I am not a huge art fan. But if people like it, then more power to him.

bluto63 Registered User
#50

Pornography has no artistic merit and is solely for the purpose of stimulating someone sexually. If that's all this image has done it is pornography. However, if this wasn't the purpose of the image well then it's art

#51

bluto63 said:
Pornography has no artistic merit and is solely for the purpose of stimulating someone sexually. If that's all this image has done it is pornography. However, if this wasn't the purpose of the image well then it's art


Yes, but the point is .. society does not always see it as black and white. Many people have done time over having 'art' on their PC.

Pygmalion Registered User
#52

sron said:
Isn't the point of criminalising paedophilia to protect children? If no children are being harmed, what's the problem? Just because you find what someone wanks over disgusting doesn't mean he should face a jail term. Edges on thought-crime in a way.

This.

Some 30 year old taking time out of playing WoW to wank over some badly drawn 7 year olds is pretty ****ed up, but no-one gets hurt by it and it'd be pretty unfair to treat him the same as a child rapist (obviously he wouldn't get nearly as severe a punishment and may not get jail time even, but once a newspaper picks up on the story everyone will be led to believe he's the evil offspring of Charles Manson and Josef Fritzl)

The_Minister Moderator
#53

Pygmalion said:
...[stuff]...


I would just like to say that considering the currant debate in this thread on the narrow difference between porn and art, your Username is brilliant.

1 person has thanked this post
#54

The_Minister said:
I would just like to say that considering the currant debate in this thread on the narrow difference between porn and art, your Username is brilliant.


I would like to thank the OP for raisin the issue !

7 people have thanked this post
#55

The_Minister said:
There was a case in Australia (I'm too scared to Google), where a man who had that picture of Bart and Lisa having sex was convicted of child pornography.


There is tons of Simpsons porn online. I have seen Marge gangbanged. Seen Homer and his sister in laws have rough sex. You name it. I wouldn't watch any Crusty The Clown stuff now though .. I'm not sick you know!!

/looks around all paranoid.

1 person has thanked this post
bluto63 Registered User
#56

OutlawPete said:
There is tons of Simpsons porn online. I have seen Marge gangbanged. Seen Homer and his sister in laws have rough sex. You name it. I wouldn't watch any Crusty The Clown stuff now though .. I'm not sick you know!!

/looks around all paranoid.


It's in ads on the side of the window too, so regardless of whether you wanted to see it, you did. Bart and Lisa gettin it on, Bart and Marge, all sorts of weird images. And there's also Disney porn...

#57

bluto63 said:
And there's also Disney porn...


Really?

*looks around nervous*

You got any Goofy on Minnie Mouse action?

1 person has thanked this post
GLaDOS Testing
#58

Pedophilia is not a choice. I've seen a documentry where people genuinly suffer with it because they know that it is wrong but they can't help being attracted to children. Imagine being told that being attracted to women/men is unacceptable? It isn't something you can turn off, even if you don't do anything about it, it's going to hurt.

Looking at it from that point of view, surely it's better for them to wank off to pictures rather than actual child porn, where children suffered?

#59

ScienceNerd said:
Pedophilia is not a choice. I've seen a documentry where people genuinly suffer with it because they know that it is wrong but they can't help being attracted to children?


Okay .. *puts serious hat back on* ..

I agree somewhat but let me ask you .. what's a child? There are people who say 16 year olds are kids and if you see one and think she's hot then your a pedo.

minidazzler Registered User
#60

OutlawPete said:
Yes, but the point is .. society does not always see it as black and white. Many people have done time over having 'art' on their PC.


Art is quite subjective though.

Look at Peewee Herman, he got fcuked becuase of Kitsch he had!!

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!