it all comes down to perspective. morality, good and bad, all that jazz are defined differently from people to people, culture to culture.
30 yr old women with 14 yr old boys is the norm in some places, and the younger male is definitely not being exploited.
On the other hand, the places where such is the norm also don't produce pornography. So maybe they don't count.
Seems the focus should be on the child predators, not the end users of their smut. Unless of course there is some undisputable evidence that the end users and child predators largely belong to the same demographic of sexual offendors.
Turns out there is some pretty good evidence to support that possibility, not undisputable, but pretty good. It's called mental conditioning. By participating in something, a fantasy or an *advertisement (or porn) you are conditioned to preference the object of the experience. If a person habitually gets their jollies viewing young children being exploited, it's only a matter of time before they will preference young children.
I wonder what percentage of the people who check out child pornography out of curiosity are intrigued enough to check it out again, and again, and again, etc. Until they decide to to physically enact their view of the world with a child?
As for kids making porn for kids as mentioned in other posts, where are their parents? If parents don't have enough time to BE PARENTS, well that's one more issue that needs to be thought about.
*the extent of your participation being the viewing.
Slashdot Mirror
I used to work with this man in a call center for Microsoft.
My question is: As a man who doesn't believe in taxes, and who doesn't pay taxes - why should we as a people trust you with OUR tax money?
I'm a true liberal, but like I said I've worked w/ Mr. Bagnarick, and he is very extreme in his beliefs.
it all comes down to perspective. morality, good and bad, all that jazz are defined differently from people to people, culture to culture.
30 yr old women with 14 yr old boys is the norm in some places, and the younger male is definitely not being exploited.
On the other hand, the places where such is the norm also don't produce pornography. So maybe they don't count.
Seems the focus should be on the child predators, not the end users of their smut. Unless of course there is some undisputable evidence that the end users and child predators largely belong to the same demographic of sexual offendors.
Turns out there is some pretty good evidence to support that possibility, not undisputable, but pretty good. It's called mental conditioning. By participating in something, a fantasy or an *advertisement (or porn) you are conditioned to preference the object of the experience. If a person habitually gets their jollies viewing young children being exploited, it's only a matter of time before they will preference young children.
I wonder what percentage of the people who check out child pornography out of curiosity are intrigued enough to check it out again, and again, and again, etc. Until they decide to to physically enact their view of the world with a child?
As for kids making porn for kids as mentioned in other posts, where are their parents? If parents don't have enough time to BE PARENTS, well that's one more issue that needs to be thought about.
*the extent of your participation being the viewing.