(November 21, 2012 at 8:08 am)festive1 Wrote: No clue where that "invented" position came from? Bolding mine.So the child porn produced legally in Denmark in the 70's (which as I understand it remains the bulk of the child pornography in existence in the world today) was "automatically exploitative" because "children are incapable of giving consent"? Even though there were no legal restrictions in place preventing them from giving consent?
I've never heard of this "gonzo" pornography that you speak of. I'm sure if one does some digging they'd be able to find legal porn that uses exploited people. However, most porn, even violent, dehumanizing, and humiliating porn, is created by consenting adults. Child porn is automatically exploitative because children are incapable of giving consent.
How much violent pornography is produced with the female party under duress?
