Just to get this out first and foremost, child pornographers, exploiters of children, pedophiles and molesters all should be thrown in a deep dark pit, indefinitely, after being physically castrated!
I quit my last job and reported the owner of the company due to finding child porn on his computer.

Recently, in some random tv show, they were talking about the new child porn loophole the adult industry was using. I could not find specific information but this is apparently the fastest growing internet industry, there is great monetary stakes involved. They are taking 18 year old adults and with the magic of hollywood drop the age they appeared to be as low as 14 or use adults that 'really' looked very young, whether by disease or hormones. These films technically are not illegal, it is a grey area of the law that presently is under some degree of debate.
They do not advertise these films as being child porn, but any rational minded individual can see through the smoke.
I am going to make a leap of faith here and say I am totally against this false portrayal, even though no laws have been broken, technically. The reason I am even questioning this 'loophole' is if we apply this same type of scenario to something else, such as 'video game violence' (and I will use the term loosely to describe any shooting, killing, driving, etc.), it creates a problem to me. These are simulated acts of violence also and we are not just watching these, we are going through the motions!
But I defend violent video games and am an advocate for even more realism in the future, does this make me a hypocrite?
With technology changing becoming ever more powerful ever day I wonder if this is a precedent of what is to follow? What do you think?

Its Sick, but if they are infact 18 they are not breaking the Law i dont think theres anything that can be done

Originally posted by TedHodgson
Its Sick, but if they are infact 18 they are not breaking the Law i dont think theres anything that can be done

There's absolutely nothing that can be done legally.


And even if there was, people watching this kind of 'porn' would be more tempted to watch REAL 18- Pornography which would contribute to the exact thing OP is trying to fight again.

Originally posted by TedHodgson
Its Sick, but if they are infact 18 they are not breaking the Law i dont think theres anything that can be done

I agree with this, if you start prosecuting porn "actors" for looking too young, where does it stop? It's not really a loophole, it's just an immoral way to make money, nothing new there...

Plus I say it's better for sick pedophiles to get their kicks watching adults of any kind

So basically its porn films were the girls dress as schoolgirls!
Such films have been around since Adam was a lad... Check out the Japanese Manga sites... Now that's really disturbing the way they portray children as sexual objects but because its a cartoon they say no law has been broken.

If no law has been broken, and no child has been harmed boohoo cry elsewhere the world has real children to protect.

Sick loophole indeed but, 18 is 18. If some sicko has fetish for dressing his girlies up like Chia pets, Valkyries, Asian manga characters or last but not least....uhhg, a very young school girl what can you do?

I do not agree with such portrayal because I personally believe it will or at least could lead to someone extending their fantasies to the real world. Because after all 18 just isn't real enough right? just like an addict they will develop a tolerance to it and feel they need more. In this case more being a real 6 year old for Pete's sake.

But sick loopholes are what they are and they are everywhere.
Just look at NAMBLA ( National Man Boy Love association)
Or Nudist websites where children of all ages are portrayed in photography. Are you telling me that it's ok to post nude photos of children as long as they are a part of a nudist group? Ridiculous, I suspect that such websites as those and even groups themselves may be a means for pedophiles to supply themselves with their addiction in an off handed way.

Star and flag for pointing out the sickness.

If they are over 18, then it's legal. If someone doesn't like it, they don't have to look at it.
I think we have way more "moral" issues with TV and radio.
I did hear that people under 18 worked in strip clubs though, if this is true, that should be stopped.
But I think we need to have a solid defining year for legal, I mean, you can to Iraq and die, but you can't buy a beer. I also think in terms of "underage" sex, the years of difference between the "minor" and adult should have a set limit, 2-3 years etc. I mean, if an 18yr old had sex consensually with a 16yr old, that should be legal, but if a 14yr old had sex with a 58yr old, that should not be. And the laws should be the same for men and women.
I know I went a bit OT, but if porn performers are 18+, then it's legal, and of one doesn't like it, don't watch it.

In Germany they are now giving advice to peadophiles after the fact that they are getting REALLY close to legalising it.

Theres a few books out now to as to how to be a paedophile as well.

i dont see what the big deal is if an adult wants to dress up like they are young.


i thought the big bad evil behind child pr0n was the abuse of the child? if there is no child present then where is the abuse?

theres no manipulation of the law going on, just manipulation of thread titles.

Originally posted by AnteBellum
But I defend violent video games and am an advocate for even more realism in the future, does this make me a hypocrite?
With technology changing becoming ever more powerful ever day I wonder if this is a precedent of what is to follow? What do you think?

When the 3D graphics technology get's good enough and affordable for smaller companies.
We will most likely see 3D generated sex videos.
And what will it then become?
I mean we can't put a computer generated person in jail.
Hey, they can even make them look like whatever, and there will be more loopholes.

And in other news titanic hit an iceberg. This is just about as much news. There is some professionals on the industry who look much younger than they are. If you think 'child' when you see them having sex then perhaps the problem is somewhere else.

I have no disagreement with the general sense of the OP. It is unforgivable to exploit children PERIOD.....

But this issue has much deeper roots that we may not want to discuss because it will make us feel uncomfortable.

I agree the sense of the matter is repugnant and certainly questionable in regards to the morals of the consumer... but how far is too far and how far is far enough? What makes a theoretical prohibition, for example, of an adult, portraying a child in sex acts, more repugnant say, than a child portraying a serial murderer (or anyone portraying one, for that matter?)

We accept "acting" as a component of "theater" even in pornography; but I recall a ban on pornographic productions that simulated rape or abusive sex... ostensibly because it 'promoted or made acceptable' such behaviors in real life; completely discounting the reality that many couples might 'role-play' in that manner regularly. We don't use the same criteria for glorified violence, or even prohibiting manufacturers to market adult-type imagery to children to get them to buy 'make-up' or 'toys' that can be questionable because of what they might 'engender' or 'impress' upon young minds.

This is what some would call a very sticky wicket. I hope the dialog continues in earnest.

These people have desires, and currently we have no way to change that. Perhaps in future we'll be able to "cure" paedophilia, but right now we can't.

Everyone has urges, no matter what their sexual preference, so if they're going to watch porn, it's better that they watch fake CP than real CP.