diana

How would you go about creating child porn in such a way that it wouldn't abuse the involved children, Mr. Kelly?

I define "abuse" as far more than mere physical violence. In my opinion, any sexual act that a child is coerced to perform or have performed on him/her is abuse, even if it physically feels good to the child, because of the long-term psychological damage it causes. (And I concur with Clarice that the "consent" of children is meaningless, as they aren't old enough to understand the implications of what's happening.)

Yes.

Note that he qualified his statement with "possibility." Again--although I suspect it is distasteful to you to do so--please put yourself in the child pornographer's position and ask yourself what you plan to do with the child after you've so flagrantly violated his rights and committed a felony that will provoke the prison population to shank you if they find out what you've done?

What keyser_soze did not do is make the strawman arguments you put in his mouth:

No. I think he said what he really believes, which makes me wonder where you got the silly ideas you attribute to him.

Mr. Kelly, I took his comments in the general "you" sense--not in the personal sense you apparently understood them as. I don't think he threatened or attempted to intimidate YOU.

It's clear to me that keyser_soze has seen the results of child abuse one time too many, and this is an area where he does know what he's talking about and feels almost uncontrollable frustration and anger towards perpetrators in general. I seriously doubt he's hiding behind the safety of his keyboard in making the comments he's made, that he has literally had enough.

There's really no reason, that I can see, for you to respond as though his comments were aimed at you personally.

d

Jacey

I may be in the minority, but virual child porn is.......ok by me.

The reason child porn is illegal in the first place is not because of the adults actions (masturbation, etc) but because the mere fact that pictures/video was taken is exploitation/abuse of the child.

To be honest, I'd rather have a potential pedophile whacking off to computer images at home then seeking out child porn (therefore encouraging more of it) or much worse.........

Ut

That's what I thought.

Usually discussion about the morality of computer-generated child porn evolve into a (somewhat) scientific discussion of whether it increases or not the likelihood of child abuse. Some argue that having pedophiles whacking off at virtual child porn save real childs from being harmed. Others argue that it only bolsters their impulses and encourages them to try the "real thing".

I think the US Supreme Court ruled that virtual child porn is protected on free speech grounds. But that does not help us to establish its morality.

yguy

An acceptable threshhold while we're conducting studies on this over the next generation would be what? 10 children molested per year? 100?

Screw that. Purveyors of this filth need a nice long vacation in Pelican Bay, should we be inclined vouchesafe them any mercy.

keyser_soze

Really??? Why don't you say what you really believe? All these kids were later abducted by aliens and dissected! (Makes about as much sense.) If we imprison people for looking at the wrong kind of pictures we can make sure all kids grow up to be productive heterosexuals... like George Bush. Right?

[personal attack deleted] Are you able to back up any of this with the least bit of logic or rationalism [personal attack deleted]?



If you were ever involved in any type of social work at a professional level there is little evidence of it in your post. Beyond that your anger or threats do not impress me as if there is any reason I should be intimidated. You and I both know the only people who resorts to such simplemindedness and the first to run when things heat up. [personal attack deleted] [/QUOTE]

I know these things because I dealt with the end results of it. I worked with dozens of children who lived through it. I worked with the perp as well as the family. That's what you do when you work with children who are in custody of the state. Most of the time, there is a damned good reason for it. I know these things because my sister lived through it, and hence I did. I like to think that I was a good social worker, but I am obviously not the layed back variety. My first month as a social worker I garnered the unique distinction of becoming the person that the other workers took with them when violence was a concern. Your opinions of both child pornography and the miscreants that deal in it are way the fuck off the mark. Do some research, don't look at the pictures first though, read some of the victims thoughts on the matter, then get back with me. Bring back an argument if you like, I NEVER turn away.

keyser_soze

Damnit, yguy, now I have to like you!

Capt_Drakes

Then what do you think about adult actors who look and pretend to be young children in adult films? Are they, or the viewers, criminals?

Pat Kelly

diana - It appears you could not help but respond to my post even though I did not respond to your email. Yes your decision to censor my comments that were clearly a response to keyser_soze's threats of physical violence was not even-handed. The fact you obviously disagreed with my views or stated position should not also be a determiner of which poster you decide to censor and which you decide to defend. It seems you may need some refresher courses in the infidels moderator class.

Anyway, you have taken a position and I will respond.

This is a good question. Even if I overlook the fact you have offered nothing to substantiate your assertion that child porn equals abuse I still find your question challenging. I will assume by child porn you mean photographs or movies of children engaged in some type of sexual behavior either with themselves or others.

I have worked as a news cameraman and been involved in filming people in many situations where the camera was intrusive and unwelcome. I have filmed a father whose daughter was just shot and killed in a gang related shooting. I felt uneasy doing it and did not want to add to his obvious pain. But that needs to be balanced against the possible good that can come out of others understanding the full depth and implications of gang violence. Perhaps someone would see the pain in the father's eyes and realize they should take steps to make sure no one else loses a daughter to gang violence.

The camera is a window onto our world that expands our reach and takes us closer into the lives of others. We permit the camera to witness and record virtually every aspect of humanity except the single taboo area of childhood sexuality. Is this logical? What is it about sex and more specifically childhood sex that causes people to react as you do and immediately assume horrible images of a small child being forced into sex by an old, dirty and ugly man? Why is your view of sex so skewed that you automatically assume a child will suffer a lifetime of pain if they engage in sex at a young age or god forbid engage in sex with an adult?

If the BBC or National Geographic wanted to do a documentary on the sexual behavior of children and filmed two thirteen year old brothers having oral sex together would you define this as child pornography? I highly suspect it would meet the definition of child pornography and people would wind up in jail if they aired or even filmed such an event. Does this mean 13-year old brothers do not engage in oral sex with or without a camera present? Of course not. Childhood sexuality is a reality even though our society has decided to make the subject taboo.

I will propose to you that the reason you have such a negative view when you consider a picture or film containing images of children behaving sexually is because you have never heard anything but horrid portrayals of sex through a media only permitted to show sexual horrors. It seems ironic that we can legally show a child's raped and murdered nude body on TV but could not show that same child smiling and enjoying her sexuality. I do not know how this strikes you but my reaction is there is something very wrong here.

With the ban on child pornography we have effectively cut ourselves off from all but the negative sensationalized horrors of childhood sexuality. We only have our own memories of childhood to counter a very one-sided and distorted view of childhood sexuality and those memories quickly fade. Anyway, this is getting too long and I do not have time to walk you through a logical course out of a sexually repressed society. It would be like attempting to deprogram you from an anti-sex cult that is no easy task especially since you sincerely believe your views protect children. The only thing I would suggest is that you try and keep an open and questioning mind like the one that once existed in a child’s body.

Opus36

You sir are the reason people don't like the media. You have no morals and don't have compassion for your fellow man. You can try and justify all you want. You could have coverd the story with out the film. That man was greaving you even said it was unwelcome and you did it anyway.


There is a world differance between child porn and what you describe. Child porn is for the sexual excitment of an adult. Your senierio is a documentery or research on human sexuality as an adolesent. It is not being made so some one can wack off at home.

Fred

Well mate I tell you what I think.
My two sisters were both raped repeatedly as children. I can see no good whatsoever with thinking of child porn. If you watch it you are supporting it. I also had people try to assault me when I was younger.
I admit that I am responding to the first post only, I simply cannot bare to read anymore. My sisters suffered for a long time, 8 years in fact and the recovery is endless.

Please think again, or at all.

[depiction of violent act deleted]