Pornography - are you for or against it and why?

[tackattack]

@ Sarcasm- I see your point sarcasm and it's a good one. I completely agree with "the person who buys this video treats this the same as if he had bought a video of pedophilia. Because of that i think it shouldn't be filmed, not that the actual filming or acting is wrong."

I haven't advocated once that anyone go to jail, even though I find it very morally wrong. I've been advocating heavy regulation and tracking. I wish that it wasn't a category of legal porn and the legal producers of such porn are actually doing some societal harm by increasing the demand by condoning and supplying the substitute. The actual act of filming isn't illegal or wrong, but the purpose of the producers are clear.

If I made a cocaine substitute that was legal, but was pretty much exactly the same,only pink in color. Then I went and sold it to my friends as a legal cocaine substitute. I should hold some accountability (at the very least I would have severe guilt) for someone dying from an OD or going on a murdering rampage because of the stuff. It would also become fairly illegal fairly fast. I don't see any remorse or concern for society at all from corporations in general, and it's no different for the porn industry, it's only about catering to the demand and making money. If you make your money by raising a generation of rapists and pedophiles though, shouldn't someone at least try and stop it? I know it's a bit sensationalist, but it's how I feel about the situation.

For instance, Pot is illegal, spice was a legal substitute(whether it actually had the same effects or not is irrelevant). Spice then became illegal, product was seized, taken off the market, and distributors were fined, customers were fined/tracked and it was put on their record. I don't think anyone has yet to go to jail for selling or buying spice here in VA. I think it's pointless to waste the city money on jailing these people supplying or demanding the product. I think though that a stand should be made saying "fantasizing about pedophilia is wrong whether it's faked or not". It is similar to a thought crime which I know RevJ will jump all over. You can't prosecute intent, you can shape society by establishing boundaries.

---

@-Ashendant- You already stated that child pornography further victimizes the victim, but not how. I asked for specifics and you ignored the question.

---

You're confusing my points so I'll try and be concise.

All right Tack. I'm going to do this one more time, and I am going to try to be as sensitive to your wording as possible.

1)There are laws against pedophilia

Yes, generally speaking in modern society, yes.

2)There are laws against filming pedophilia (or there are laws against filming minors having sex... whichever wording you prefer, they're the same).

Yes

3)there are no laws against consenting adults pretending to have sex with a minor..

Look, I will give you the benefit of the doubt in this question. Yes. An adult can "pretend" or "act" like they are younger and have sex with other consenting adults.

Point A)
You're confusing 2 and 3 above.
I said
Quote: Why is it illegal to both actually commit pedophilia and watch or film the act of someone else's pedophilia act?
I was talking about 1 and 2.. there are laws for both.
What is the purpose of child pornography laws?
So far the only answer the other side has given is to protect the victim.

If the victim has already been victimized... what protection is there? I then proposed several alternative reasons why there are child pornography laws. The key of which is that society doesn't want these images publicly available. There are several reasons for that which I clearly stated. .

Okay. The laws DO protect minors from being victimized as far as laws are concerned these days. They give HARSH penalties for people who do such things, regardless of pornography (filming or pictures) or just the sex act in general. They protect the victim as much as any other law can. There are laws that say murder is illegal, and that HARSH consequences will follow those who are proven to do such a thing. Does the law protect everyone? No. Its going to happen, but some people get caught and their punishment is given. Thus our current system of law.

Why is it illegal to both actually commit pedophilia and watch or film the act of someone else's pedophilia act?

That is a good question. These laws are drawn from many people over several years. I cannot know why, nor you, except for their wording of the law. Perhaps it would help if you actually posted a law, instead of a generalized question. But, in spirit of the discussion, I will try to answer your question - It is illegal to commit pedophilia in this American society for many reasons IN MY OPINION: Society considers an older person who is emotionally secure taking advantage of a younger person who is emotionally immature to be wrong. A grown woman of 30 years becoming pregnant with a 13 year old boys baby is stressful to society and the "vicitm" (who knows..maybe he likes having a son..I dont know) in our current technological level. In earlier societies, a female reaching the age of puberty was married off as soon as possible because of the level of that societies advancement and life expectancy of the time. Now our society is much more advanced to where, even though they are capable of physically reproducing, it would cause an undue strain on society for them personally, and socially as a whole. Also, the reasons why we cannot WATCH the act (the REAL act, not AN "act") is to protect the victim. Can you imagine if you were molested as a young boy by a gay man (and please, I do not think all gays are this way..it is merely an example for discussion, and I support gay rights) and it was completely legal to see it? You would NEVER be able to go anywhere, or work anywhere without someone finding that video and using it against you. You were victimized at a young age, and wether you liked it or not being a young boy at the time, or wether you even wanted it or not (which is a WHOLE other can of worms that, as I said before, I DONT want to get into and why I made this poll generalized instead of specific) because your "victimization" (as I said, ether you liked it or wanted it or not at the time) is based on a media trail that can follow you into your adult life and very likely adversely effect your social and private life later in life. Our society, currently, tries to protect the youth and their decisions (wether they liked doing them or not) from adversely effecting their ADULT life. Therefore we "seal" a minors criminal records. This is MY OPINION of the laws. I may be dead wrong, but it is my opinion.

Point B)
If there is no victim for child pornography laws, other than society (as shown in A). Then society deems these images AND the acts of these images wrong. Faking those images with the intent to make them seem real would then defeat the purpose of child pornography laws. It would however alleviate any culpability in the victim area, but not the image area.

Okay. Look, I am going to try to go indepth with you as I possibly can. Besides, you cram so many questions into one question it is difficult to understand what you are asking. As far as your first two sentences of point b, I feel that I answered them already. In my own opinion, I broke down WHAT I THINK, basically, what laws such as this mean. I cannot go any further on those.

Now we are on "faking" images with "intent" to seem real would then defeat the purpose of child pornography laws.

I am going to flat out say NO. All parties are legal adults who consent to such acting, and therefore (as long as those conditions are met) is LEGAL and NOTHING to do with the pedophilia laws. In fact they are MILLIONS OF MILES away from pedophilia laws. If your wife says "I've been a bad girl daddy, and I need to be spanked" do you consider that breaking the pedo laws, as well as incest laws intent? Honestly man. There is no "alleviate any culpability in the victim area" because there is no underaged people to be vicitimized in adult play acting. Its not even a factor. Just ZERO!

No..just..ZERO...man..ZERO!

"but not the image area".- Look man. I cant help but think you are trying to convince me to throw grown, consenting adults in jail for play acting and ban any play acting in consenting adults sex lives. If this is NOT what you are trying to ask me, then I honestly cannot understand what you want me to answer.

If this is NOT what you are trying to say. Then I suggest you sit down, and REALLY try hard to get your wording correct. Write down WHAT YOU THINK. Please do not put it in the form of a question. Just flat out say what you are thinking and expect to be judged afterwards. I refuse to throw consenting adults into jail for play acting...wether on or off the camera.

---

I appreciate your patience in this discussion. I did post laws, but I'll post them again

US CEOS laws excerpt

---

"Child pornography is defined by law as the visual depiction of a person under the age of 18 engaged in sexually explicit conduct. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 2256(1) and (8). This means that any image of a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct is illegal contraband. Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. See 18 U.S.C. § 2256(2). A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive. In addition, for purposes of the child pornography statutes, federal law considers a person under the age of 18 to be a child. See 18 U.S.C. § 2256(1). It is irrelevant that the age of consent for sexual activity in a given state might be lower than 18. A visual depiction for purposes of the federal child pornography laws includes a photograph or videotape, including undeveloped film or videotape, as well as data stored electronically which can be converted into a visual image."

---

As you see none of the laws you'll find on child pornography talk about a victim of molestation, because that's what molestation laws are for. These laws are about visual depiction of a person under the age of 18. If your actress pretends to be 15 but never states her age and is in fact 18 then that is how they get around the laws, because the buyer assumes she's under 18, but the producer does everything they can to make her seem 15.

So you feel the media trail from child pornography damages a victim in their adulthood. I already talked about that scenario and it's highly unlikely that anyone will be able to identify them as an adult (unless they're name is given of course) and even if they were identified; to acknowledge that publicly or to the victim, would be admitting to possessing and watching child pornography. This reason is far more unlikely than "because society doesn't want to see the images circulating", but at least you're not distinguishing between the laws against the act and the laws against the image.

I'll answer my own question if that will help you. I think the main and glaring reason we have child pornography image laws to protect society from seeing these images, not to protect the child victim in them, although that could be a lesser reason/byproduct. If that is the main reason then faking the images defeats the purpose of the laws, could we agree on that statement?

I am not "trying to convince me to throw grown, consenting adults in jail for play acting and ban any play acting in consenting adults sex lives" I am trying to convince you that people use faked child porn like real child porn, it increases demand for child porn (both the legal and illegal) and that it isn't necessarily illegal to film it, it should regulated/tracked at the very least.