Quote:
Originally Posted by DMcCunney
Precisely. Among other things, the answer to "How old is old enough?" may change, and can be different in different regions within a country.
For example, in the 1950's, country singer Jerry Lee Lewis was a rising teen pop star, mentioned in the same conversation with Buddy Holly, Richie Valens, and the Big Bopper. Then the word got out that he'd married his thirteen year old cousin. That was both legal and accepted behavior in the area he came from. He found out the hard way the rest of the US did not share those perceptions, and his career came to a screeching halt.
In the late '60s and early 70's, it was legal to produce child pornography in Denmark, and legal to sell it in the US. Magazines like "Lolita Love" and "Piccolo" were prominent examples. (And scans from those old publications still float around the Internet.)
I don't believe Russia has laws specifically prohibiting child pornography, so there a variety of subscription oriented websites hosted in Russia and the Ukraine featuring softcore nude photos of underage girls and boys. How long they last seems connected to how good they are about greasing the right palms.
And Japan used to have a thriving industry in publications sold on newsstands, devoted to photos of underage girls and boys, from preteen on up, both clothed and nude. The Japanese government made it illegal a few years back, but my impression was that their motivation was far more concern with what other countries might think than with any with any inherent feeling it was wrong.
As mentioned upthread, there is a website devoted of photos of the faces of people having orgasms. The "clearly under the age of consent model" gets thorny if the woman looks young enough, and most sites in that territory keep careful documentation and signed release forms on file.
The US is very much in an anti phase about anything that might be considered child pornography these days, regardless of how innocuous it is. There are an assortment of child model websites offering subscriptions to photo shoots. The kids are either fully dressed or in swimsuits, with no sexual content, but they get flak apparently because someone out there might find the photos arousing. "It's porn because the perv down the street might get off on it!" seems to be the definition.
Someone in New York State noticed that people were posting kiddie porn images in unused Usenet binary newsgroups, and announced an investigation. The ISPs all promised cooperation. Some blocked the specific groups used, or stopped carrying the binary groups. Mine decided the simplest solution was to stop carrying newgroups entirely, of any kind. That didn't much affect me, because most newsgoups I read come from dedicated servers unconnected with Usenet or my ISP, and I only had to find a new source for one group dedicated to sysadmins, but that sort of action is annoying.
And there are occasional protests around here by people upset that Barnes and Noble carries work in the Photography section by Sally Mann, Jock Sturges, and David Hamilton.
I hope we get over that particular hysteria sooner rather than later.
______
Dennis
|
Absolutely ... no argument with any of that. I really doubt whether any rational person in any civilized country (or even an uncivilized one) would try to defend photographic images of a four year old being forcibly raped as anything other than porn ... and a crime against the child.
Now, marriage to your 13 year old cousin may be taboo in some places, and totally accepted in others.
Another good reason to do a bit of research before you find yourself in jail in another country for doing something that wouldn't even cause a batted eyelash in your own.
And, honestly, there is no good going to come of anyone whining and moaning about it. I could bitch to the high heavens about my "right" to take a Bible anywhere I want (although I am emphatically not a Christian ... I still find the tome fascinating and do, at times, read it ... if only to silently argue with Saul of Tarsus -- St. Paul to those of you not acquainted ... a bit of a misogynist IMO), it's not going to change the policies in Saudi Arabia.
Getting up in arms about a new US Customs policy, instead of understanding it .. what it is attempting to do ... and what, if any, practical impact it will actually have on you, is counterproductive and tends to lead to a bunch of people being convinced that their ebook reader or laptop is going to be confiscated because they can't absolutely PROVE they legally purchased their copy of "Huckleberry Finn."
Ummm .... they are not going to do that, if you really believe they are going to do that, do NOT .... I repeat ... DO NOT even think about leaving your home ... ever. You are not completely equipped to deal with the outside world. Make yourself a nice foil hat and join the rest of the crowd in paying pshrynk's laddie at the door.