(November 22, 2012 at 3:20 am)Daniel Wrote: Your victim argument doesn't hold as strong as you think it does for danish child porn. All of the "victims" were above the legal age of consent in denmark at the time, and I understand the bulk was underage sex between two underage people, not an underage person and an adult as you're imagining. The age of consent in Australia is 16, but the law states that performers in porn must be at least 18+. Why the arbitrary discrepancy?
Obviously, never having actually seen the Danish child porn, I wouldn't know as much about it as you do.
At what age does a person become mature enough to be considered to have consent willingly? Some are mature enough at 15, others not even at 25. The line drawn is arbitrary, but one is necessary and since we don't know of any definite criteria upon which to draw it, different countries choose different "arbitrary" lines.
I support the 18 yrs age line because that is the age at which an average person graduates high school and either goes to college or enters the work-force. In other words if they can become independent in all the other ways at that age, then they should be deemed ready to consent to sex. However, I'm also amenable to reducing the said age by 2-3 yrs if arguments such as "they become mature enough before actually leaving the house". As a matter of fact, I'm also open to issuing special "sex-permits" to the under-age who believe they are mature enough for sex (either with an adult or as a member of porn industry) and are willing to prove their position in front of an objective committee - though even I can see that that is a pipe dream.
Incidentally, what's the position on sexual consent among emancipated minors in US?
(November 22, 2012 at 3:20 am)Daniel Wrote: BTW you missed my argument. The BDSM material "legal in the USA" is illegal in Australia, the UK and most other places, when is the USA going to get their ass in gear and stop the extremely obscene material that depicts rape torture and pain instead of depicting consensual sex? I thought porn is supposed to depict only consensual sex, so why does the USA think it's okay to depict non-consensual sex in porn?
Why would you assume something so stupid? Porn is supposed to depict sex - of any kind. As for US, I hope it never bans the BDSM or rape porn. I hope that other countries follow its lead and make it legal.
Why does USA think its okay to depict non-consensual sex in porn? Because contrary to the depiction, the sex is actually very much consensual.
(November 22, 2012 at 3:20 am)Daniel Wrote: Oh and as if the USA isn't totally hypocritical by banning child porn but allowing porn to depict rape? By allowing extreme pornography and criminalizing prostitution? By being so out of step with the rest of the civilized world on these issues!
Yes, very hypocritical. They certainly should legalize prostitution.
(November 22, 2012 at 3:20 am)Daniel Wrote: You think I'm trying to defend her - I'm not. I think people who are overtly anti-gay without having the exact same attitude to all "fornication" are in err. I think it's ridiculous to stigmatise homosexuality over pre-material sex, promiscuity, rape, adultery, bestiality, etc, instead of seeing them all as an equal sin.
Add "married sex" to the list and then you can say what you actually do want to say - all sex is sinful.
(November 22, 2012 at 3:20 am)Daniel Wrote: Fine, if that's the case then tell the USA to decriminalize prostitution as well, because they are so out of line with the rest of the civilized world it makes them look like 18th century barbarians.
You write the petition, I will get the signatures.
(November 22, 2012 at 3:20 am)Daniel Wrote: So the paedophiles who watch child-porn are engaging in their own fantasy too, how is their watching the material any worse than those who engage in "rape fantasy"?
Its not "their watching" that is worse, "the making" of the porn that is.
