Archive for category Child Porn Witch Hunt

Sexting: Courts victimize Teens with child porn charges for exchanging their own nude photos

More child porn insanity! Children nowadays need legal counsel to know if and how they can photograph themselves or have relations with other teenagers, or else they can spend years in jail and remain the rest of their lives on sex offender lists.

US court on ’sexting’: Child porn or child’s play?
01/15/2010 PHILADELPHIA (AP) — The first criminal case involving “sexting” reached a U.S. appeals court on Friday — a case that asks whether racy cell-phone photos of three girls amount to child pornography or child’s play.

A county prosecutor in northeastern Pennsylvania threatened to pursue felony charges if the girls skipped his “re-education” course on such topics as sexual predators and “what it means to be a girl in today’s society.”

The photos show two 12-year-olds in training bras at a sleepover and a topless 16-year-old stepping out of the shower.[. . . ]

“You’re going to see more provocative photos in a Victoria’s Secret catalog,” [ . . . ]
newsok.com/us-court-on-sexting-child-porn-or-childs-play/article/3432301

Feminist “Logic”

Analogies

“Naked pictures of children on the Internet draws predators the same way a swamp draws mosquitoes,” argued lawyer Michael Donohue of Scranton, who represents the prosecutor’s office. Authorities must sometimes protect children from themselves, he argued. newsok.com/3-face-charges-in-texhoma-sexting/article/3480534 “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” movies really attract chainsaw murderers like a swamp draws moskitoes.

Cop Killer rap music really incites violence against police and school authorities.Soccer stadiums attract violent hooligans like a swamp draws mosquitoes. Let us close down all soccer stadiums.

Photos of knives, swords, and guns attract murderers.

Actually, the analogies are much more convincing then the lawyer’s statement in column 1, which is devoid of any logic or scientifc support. Pure manipulative nonsense. It is intriguing how utter nonsense is socially acceptable whenever it is  backed by feminism and women’s studies. No clue about logic and scientific method. But absolute masters in manipulating public opinion.

Here is the root of the insanity.  Unproven hysterical statements, with no scientific backing, are the excuse for a witch hunt. Feminists use real predators, real rapists, kidnappers and child murderers as an excuse for their political goals.  So innocent girls photographing themselves naked get arrested!  Why should it be a crime to photograph yourself? Maybe it is also a crime for the girls to look into the mirror?

I dare to say something really taboo:  what is the problem if dirty old men like to look at nude adolescent pictures and do absolutely no harm whatsoever. Why should they get 10 years in jail?

So even if it were true that naked pictures of children on the internet draw predators. For what? To look at photos in the privacy of their home? What is the problem? Maybe this is positive, so they don’t go out trying to check out what real adolescents look like naked.

Compare:

  • Supreme Court oks indefinite detention for possession of photos. But violent robbers get freed.
  • Pedophile witch hunt & underage sex law excesses: why the witch hunt and how to change it?
  • Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.
  • Years of Jail for “clicking on child porn link”. But lynching videos are legal.
  • There must be a special evolutionary skill how feminists manage to convince male law makers to support their warped feminist  “women studies” logic (Feminist arguments against prostitution debunked)

    Continue reading this article about sexting (courts victimizing adolescents)

    • Share/Bookmark

    ,

    1 Comment

    EU Requests To Retain User Data From Search Engines to protect children from pedophiles

    The most recent tension came from Pakistan’s decision that it will monitor Google, Bing, Yahoo (and other sites) for blasphemous content. Now it is the EU’s turn to try to impose checks on search engines through its controversial "Written Declaration 29."

    Written Declaration 29
    Italy’s European Member of Parliament, Tiziano Motti, is the author of the proposal, commonly known as Written Declaration 29, adopted last week. His aim was to protect children from abusers and paedophiles lurking on the web by requesting that user data from search engines be stored and used by governments to track sexual offenders.

    Source: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/100629-053942

    Don’t we have enough REAL problems?

    • A large percentage of children grow up in poverty stricken families, unintegrated into middle class society, condemned to low level of schooling and an unsuccessful life. 
    • Hundreds of millions of our children will live an unhealthy life and die early, due to obesity, wrong nutrition, lack of exercise.
    • Hundreds of millions of children also will be victims of bullying at school, threatened, intimidates, psychologically damaged.

    And now, search machines are supposed to become government spies? In violation of civil rights of hundreds of million law abiding internet users. With the intent to catch a few dozen dangerous "pedophiles" and entrap a couple of thousand harmless surfers who have bad taste and seek photos of young kids?

    Watchdog Privacy International immediately stepped up to the plate by issuing a joint statement with search engine Ixquick, entitled: Ixquick: Search Engines Should Become Government Spies, Says EU Parliament. Ixquick has built its reputation on not storing any user search data and therefore feels it has been singled out by the Declaration. For Robert Beens, CEO of Ixquick, Written Declaration 29 would jeopardize the privacy of over 500 million people across Europe when it should really uniquely concern known offenders. "Sex offenders exchange files through underground networks. They don’t find this stuff through search engines," Alex Hanff of Privacy International said in the statement. "I spent eight years helping law enforcement track down online sex offenders and never once did we see a case where search engine data was useful."

    Source: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/100629-053942

    Human-Stupidity wrote more about these issues are in these topics: Child porn wich hunt and Teenage Sexuality witch hunt

     

    1. EU Politicians Tricked Into Supporting Data Retention On Search Terms… ‘For The Children’ (techdirt.com)
    2. European MPs back web-search data retention plan (newstatesman.com)
    3. MEPs back web search history plan (independent.co.uk)
    4. Ixquick: Search Engines Should Become Government Spies, Says EU Parliament (eon.businesswire.com)
    5. Italian MEP Wants To Eliminate Anonymity On the Internet (search.slashdot.org)
    6. EU Request To Retain User Data From Search Engines Sparks Widespread Anger (searchenginewatch.com)
    7. EU Parliament plans Google-powered paedo detector (go.theregister.com)
    8. MEPs call for search engines to store web search histories for two years (telegraph.co.uk)
    9. EU Ministers Want ISP and Google Logs To Fight Paedos (dvorak.org)
    • Share/Bookmark

    , ,

    1 Comment

    Supreme Court oks indefinite detention for possession of photos. But violent robbers get freed.

    Indefinite detention for possession of photos ok’d by Supreme Court.  But violent Robbers must be freed after their term is over. Strange justice.

    People who watch tasteless photos (youth erotica, or real child porn) in the privacy of their own home, first spend years in jail, then can be held indefinitely, the US Supreme Court confirmed. People who rob, threaten, pick fights, bully, hurt children while driving drunk, these offenders are set free after their prison term is over.

    The Supreme Court ruled Monday that federal officials can indefinitely hold inmates considered “sexually dangerous” after their prison terms are complete.[...]

    “The statute is a ‘necessary and proper’ means of exercising the federal authority that permits Congress to create federal criminal laws, to punish their violation, to imprison violators, to provide appropriately for those imprisoned and to maintain the security of those who are not imprisoned by who may be affected by the federal imprisonment of others,” said Justice Stephen Breyer, writing the majority opinion.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37192279

    So far, so good. I wonder, though, why don’t you add dangerous violent people, who habitually commit violent robberies, habitually drive drunk and get involved in accidents, gang banger bullies who will return terrorizing others on the street. The idea is good, just why exactly worried about sex offenders  only?

    The act, named after the son of “America’s Most Wanted” television host John Walsh, was challenged by four men who served prison terms ranging from three to eight years for possession of child pornography or sexual abuse of a minor. Their confinement was supposed to end more than two years ago, but prison officials said
    there would be a risk of sexually violent conduct or child molestation if they were released.

    Here is the serious problem: People who possessed computer files, a set of 0’s and 1’s that decode into the depiction of some nude teenagers, can be detained indefinitely? Even if it were the rare and unusual case that they possessed real violent rape photos of 5 year olds, what danger do these people pose to you, me, or our kids? Did they abuse? No! did they even take the photos? No! So why all the fuzz?

    So the Supreme Court legalizes locking up, indefinitely, people who in the privacy of their home look at pictures? To protect whom? I worry about being run over by a habitual drunk driver, my kids being beaten up by a gang bully or robbed by a violent drug addict in urgent need to rob 5 times a day to support his drug addiction. But why should I care about a guy who stares at child porn in the privacy of his home? No matter how gross the pictures might be! And one can go to jail for nude photos of 17 year olds.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    • Share/Bookmark

    , ,

    2 Comments

    Pedophile witch hunt & underage sex law excesses: why the witch hunt and how to change it?

    An ephebe kisses a man. Tondo from an Attic kylix, 5th c. BCE by the Briseis painter. At the Louvre.

    Ancient Greek Pedophile art: An ephebe kisses a man. 5th c.. At the Louvre. Proof of age not available.

    Isn’t it strange? For traditional feminists who want female equality, freedom and self determination, it looks amazing

    • feminists don’t oppose the burka and are quiet about Muslim repression of females (because Muslims successfully keep women away from the eyes of the feminist’s spouses)
    • feminists successfully restrict women’s right to choose sexual services (prostitution) as a profession. that often pays lots more money then other work. Of course, men who can pay $100 to an attractive prostitute are less likely to marry an average looking fat aging woman who later will take away half their property and demand half their income.
    • I got convinced that the antifeminists hypothesis is the most parsimonious explanation for these apparent contradictions.

    Feminists conspire to increase their sexual value by eliminating female sexual of competition

    What feminists strive for Explanation
    (increasing their own sexual market value by reducing competition)
    Feminists even repress women,
    to foster their reproductive goal of reducing sexual options for their own men
    feminists don’t oppose the burka and are quiet about Muslim repression of females because Muslim’s repression of women successfully keep women away from the eyes and hands of the feminist’s spouses
    feminists don’t promote women’s right to free choice, rather they successfully restrict women’s right to choose sexual services (prostitution) as a profession Of course, men who can pay $100 to an attractive prostitute are less likely to marry an average looking women who later will take away half their property and demand half their income for life.
    Prostitutes are non-Union picket line violators, they give away their work cheaply
    decrease age of consent to eliminate competition by very young attractive women (age of consent used to be 12, is now 18 everywhere and there seem to be plans to increase it to 21 worldwide)
    prohibit erotic art, photography, pornography Under the guise of protecting porn models (who did not ask to be protected and do not want to go back to menial jobs) feminists want to avoid men seeing attractive women naked, getting distracted, spending time and money.
    prohibit sex dolls, sex robots, but not vibrators

    Pedophile witch hunters & feminists are NOT concerned about children’s well being

    If draconian child porn laws were to protect children, why then videos of real child killings are legal?
    Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.

    Congratulations to the antifeminist blog, they are the only ones that give a sensible explanation for this: feminists want to cut of competition to their sexual monopoly so men will continue paying high prices for sex (marriage with life long support and half of all property on divorce).

    I quote the antifeminist blog, I could not say this any better.

    Why do I think you are obsessed with criminilizing everything and only those things that harm your particular, selfish reproductive and sexual needs? Because that is all you seem to be interested in. What about teenage girls bullying and beating each other up on video and then having them uploaded to websites that make money from advertisements? Naahh, no sexual threat, therefore nothing to say. What about teenage girls and even 10 year old girls appearing on reality tv shows to be exploited for commercial gain by adults and clearly suffering psychological distress as a result? Nope, no specific sexual threat to your reproductive interests so you have probably never given it two seconds thought. A 17 year old who likes to screw older men? You don’t want your man running off with or even looking at a hot 17 year old, so therefore 17 year old girls can’t give meaingful consent and older men should be criminilized.[...]

    Can 17 year old girls make meaningful decisions about whether or not their unborn babies should be killed? Is having sex really more complex than deciding which political party is best able to govern? Surely if an 18 year old can vote, a 17 year old can fuck? And how come she can consent to sex with another 17 year old and not a 25 year old??
    http://www.theantifeminist.com/the-chilling-banality-of-evil/comment-page-1/#comment-2452

    Read the rest of this story f more provocative Devil’s Advocate Ideas

    • Share/Bookmark

    , , , , , , ,

    4 Comments

    Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.

    After showning examples on the unrelenting persecution for "child porn", let us compare child porn to crime videos.

    Years of Jail for "clicking on child porn link". But lynching videos are legal & Border arrest & instant jail for owning DVD with young looking 19 year old porn star. Any honest citizen risks jail

    .Depictions of violent child & adolescent beatings and killings are shown on prime time TV.  Tasteful nude photos of adolescents are VERY illegal, a crime, a terrible felony.

    Unconscious stupidity and taboos analyzed

    Why different standards for clicking and linking to various illegal material

    Would someone be sent to 5-45 years of jail for CLICKING drug or prostitution LINKS?

    • click here for illegal prostitutes (over 18)
    • click here to buy hemp seed legal in Holland
    • click here to buy cocaine
    • click here to get info where to buy cocaine & crack

    But clicking on “Click here for illegal child sex” is a crime.

    What problem is there in possession of pictures of lawful events, or linking to them

    filming and photographing FACTS that happen anyway
    • teenagers filming themselves naked
    • teenagers filming themselves having the sex they have anyway and they can legally have because of similar age
    • toddlers filmed naked by their parents

    Nobody gets harmed, nothing illegal happens. Why are there enormous penalties for possessing depictions of legal non-violent events?

    Posessing depictions of real sexual abuse like sex play with a toddler carries much worse then REAL physical abuse

    Even possession of REAL child pornography of the worst kind, while in bad taste, does not warrant higher penalties then allowing REAL child torture. A mother got 6 months in jail for allowing and watching her boyfriend torture her 3 year old child regularly with burning, drowning, locking into the freezer …. The penalty for the real perpetrator and torturer (5-8 years?) is way less then the 20 years expected for possession of a DVD with 23 year old Little Lupe Porn

    6-foot, 210-pound Piskorski spanked Noah with a belt, forcibly held the child under 130-degree water causing extensive second-degree burns and pressed the child’s hands against a wall heater until grill marks were burned into Noah’s skin http://dailyme.com/story/2010050800001108/oregon-city-man-convicted-scalding-beating.html#ixzz0nj4shULq

    Normally the criminal gets punished, not the person having depictions of the crime.

    Proof: see two videos and some pictures below, of maiming, lynching, mistreating real people. Nothing about the pictures is illegal, they were transmitted by prime time Television.

    Why are depictions of sexual activities so much worse then depictions of killing children and violence against children?

    (1) Whoever violates, or attempts or conspires to violate, paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection (a) shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 20 years, but if such person has a prior conviction under this chapter, section 1591, chapter 71section 1591, chapter 71, chapter 109A, or chapter 117, or under section 920 of title 10 (article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), or under the laws of any State relating to aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, or abusive sexual conduct involving a minor or ward, or the production, possession, receipt, mailing, sale, distribution, shipment, or transportation of child pornography, or sex trafficking of children, such person shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for not less than 15 years nor more than 40 years. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2252.html

    Would someone be sent 5 to 45 years in jail for for "production, possession, receipt, mailing, sale, distribution, shipment, or transportation of depictions of extreme violence and extreme physical abuse of a child"? NO! See examples below But there are jail terms for having 2 grainy low resolution photos of a nude teenager in a thumbnail database. That is a terrible crime.

    Sorry for posting very tasteless violent pictures and movies, but I am trying to make a point. You may want to skip the movies

    This link is perfectly legal

    • Youtube Videos: Nanny beats Child .
    • Now it would be totally illegal if I had a link: Nanny fondles baby’s private parts
    • nanny fondling 16 year old caught on film

    I would be jailed, instantly, and anyone clicking on it would.

    very graphic, I suggest you do NOT watch. If customs catches you with the video, maybe you need to prove that the victim is over 18 years old?
    Whipping of a minor by the Taliban. Do we need to prove she is over 18? Otherwise the entire might of interpol will hunt us down for having a copy in our computer’s cache or trash? No, if it is violence towards adolescents, it is ok. But nudity or sex, that is a heinous crime.
    • One can show, store, possess, distribute a video killing a child (16 year olds nowadays are called children).
    • If he were naked, masturbating, or making love to his girl friend, then this would warrant 5-45 years of jail.
    • but a movie of him clubbed to death, that is perfectly, see below
    Atrocities towards minors can be shown legally (warning: graphic violence)
    Verbal description of atrocities shown in pictures
    Beating Death Of Derrion Albert,16,Caught On Video Cell phone footage showing a group of teens viciously kicking and striking a 16-year-old honors student with splintered railroad ties has ramped up pressure on Chicago officials to address chronic violence that has led to dozens of deaths of city teens each year. The graphic video of the afternoon melee emerged on local news stations over the weekend, showing the fatal beating of Derrion Albert, a sophomore honor roll student at Christian Fenger Academy High School. His death was the latest addition to a rising toll: More than 30 students were killed last school year, and the city could exceed that number this year.[...] Albert was knocked unconscious when Carson struck him in the head with a board and a second person punched him in the face. Albert regained consciousness and was trying to get up when he was attacked a second time by five people, struck in the head with a board by Riley and stomped in the head by Shannon, Simonton said.
    • Share/Bookmark

    , ,

    2 Comments

    Years of Jail for "clicking on child porn link". But lynching videos are legal.

    Years of Jail for “clicking on child porn link” & possessing 2 grainy tiny  thumbnail pictures of nude adolescents. But lynching videos are legal.

    Possession of videos depicting vigilantism, lynching mob killing people, child beating, gang killings, and Hollywood movies glorifying gore, torture, and violence, that is perfectly legal! Real physical toddler torture and abuse gets less punishment then possession of nude adolescent photos. Human Stupidity at its worst.!

    Roderick Vosburgh, a doctoral student at Temple University who also taught history at La Salle University, was raided at home in February 2007 after he allegedly clicked on the FBI’s hyperlink. Federal agents knocked on the door around 7 a.m., falsely claiming they wanted to talk to Vosburgh about his car. Once he opened the door, they threw him to the ground outside his house and handcuffed him.
    Source: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9899151-38.html

    Raiding the house of a suspect of nonviolent crime. Throwing him on the ground and handcuffing him instead of a dignified arrest notice. The government specifies the amount of jail he can get:

    If convicted, the defendant faces a maximum possible sentence of 45 years imprisonment, a mandatory minimum of 5 years imprisonment, a $750,000 fine, 3 years of supervised release, and a special assessment of $300.
    Source: http://www.justice.gov/usao/pae/News/Pr/2007/mar/vosburgh.html

    This is totally insane witch hunt, I have no better words for this. Criminalizing ATTEMPTS to get DEPICTIONS of nude teenagers where nobody was harmed and where nobody committed an illegal or dangerous act.

    Vosburgh was charged with violating federal law, which criminalizes “attempts” to download child pornography with up to 10 years in prison. Last November, a jury found Vosburgh guilty on that count, and a sentencing hearing is scheduled for April 22, at which point Vosburgh could face three to four years in prison.

    The implications of the FBI’s hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or child pornography–and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the “unlawfulimages.com” domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on.
    Source: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9899151-38.html

    Vosburgh was convicted on these counts: “clicking on an illegal hyperlink” and “possessing a hard drive with two grainy thumbnail images of naked female minors (the youths weren’t having sex, but their genitalia were visible)”  “From the FBI’s perspective, clicking on the illicit hyperlink and having a thumbs.db file with illicit images are both serious crimes.” (all quotes from above cnet article)

    Read the rest of the story

    Read the rest of this entry »

    • Share/Bookmark

    , ,

    1 Comment

    25 hottest sex offenders any boy wishes to become a rape victim of

    25 sex offenders that are the wet dream of any boy during puberty, or man in adulthood, or old age. Rare a boy that does not desire to be a victim of one of these heinous predators.

    And yes, consensual sex with minors is called (statutory) rape. So these kids are actually being raped by these monstrous women.

    Thank God, we have equal rights. So a few women go to jail too, for just being people and having normal consensual relationships. Happens to men all the time

    Still, many people think that maybe boys are not victims, but of course girls are victims of predators. Jail to the child rapist below! And may they be forever in the sex offender list so other innocent boys will be protected.

    pamela_rogers_sex_offender

    1. Pamela Rogers

    Rogers is a former elementary school physical education teacher and coach at Centertown Elementary School in McMinnville, Tennessee. She was also the Ms. Monday Nitro in WCW at Spring Break festivities.

    Her Crime: At age 29, Rogers was charged for having a sexual relationship with a 13-year-old male student. She and the boy performed both vaginal and oral sex more than a dozen times, in the school, in her house, and in the teen’s home during the three-month relationship.

    Verdict: Seven years in prison.

    stephanie_ragusa-sex-offender

    24. Stephanie Ragusa

    Ragusa is a former teacher at Davidsen Middle School in Tampa, Florida.

    Her Crime: At age 28, Ragusa was arrested three times and charged with having sex with two 15-year-old students.

    Verdict: No verdict has been made yet.

    amber_jennings-sex-offender

    4. Amber Jennings

    Jennings is a former English teacher at Shepherd Hill Regional High School in Dudley, Massachusetts.

    Her Crime: At age 32, Jennings started having sex with a 16-year-old student in 2003. They videotaped their romps and e-mailed naked photos and messages to each other.

    Verdict: Two years probation for disseminating harmful materials to a minor. She was not required to register as a sex offender.

    Mary Kay Leturneou-sex-offender at age 47!

    15. Mary Kay Letourneau

    Letourneau is most infamous female sex offender in the 90s. She is a former elementary school teacher in Shorewood Elementary School in Burien, Washington. She was the daughter of John Schmitz, who ran for President of the United States in 1972 on the American Independent Party ticket.

    Her Crime: At age 34, Letourneau was charged with statutory rape involving her 13-year-old student, Vili Fualaau. She later gave birth to his daughter while she was in prison. After her release, they got married and had more children. In the photo above, she is 47 years old, depicted with her “victim” at 26 (?).

    Verdict: Seven and a half years in prison.

    christine_marie_johanson-sex-offender

    6. Christine Marie Johanson

    Johanson is a former teacher’s assistant at Hudson Park Elementary School in Rainer, Oregon.

    Her Crime: At age 35, Johanson was charged for having sex with a 15-year-old male.

    Verdict: One year in jail

    carrie_mccandless_sex-offender

    14. Carrie McCandless

    McCandless is a former English teacher at Brighton Charter High School and wife of the school’s principal in Brighton, Colorado.

    Her Crime: At age 29, McCandless was charged with having sex with a 17-year-old male student during a school-sponsored camping trip to the Rockies.

    Verdict: Five years of supervised probation.

    Most pictures & text quoted from this very true article, consult it to find more hot offenders
    Source: http://girls.gunaxin.com/teacher-appreciation-week-25-hottest-sex-offenders/7531/trackback
    Thanks to http://www.crimeandfederalism.com/2010/05/25-hottest-sex-offenders.html that linked to this list.

    Unconscious dogmas & stupidity analyzed

    All this is the result of feminist politics, in collaboration with religious fanatics, who wage a world-wide war against men having sex with younger women & girls. The girls on this list are “collateral damage”. It is much rarer that older women have relations with young boys, so this damage is small compared to the terror that is sowed among men who get years of jail for merely trying to get into minor’s pants or for possession of a DVD with doubtful sex movies

    Very strict laws and insanely high penalties, for “crimes” that actually have absolutely no victims (except feminists who do not like men to have access to any competitors, teenage girls, prostitutes, foreign brides, …).

    Acts that were normal behavior over thousands of years, and in the last 25 years became crimes. Systematic increase of age of consent. Draconian enforcements of laws that before were only on the books, or not even on the books. Any man in his right mind, 50 years ago, would send a woman to jail for having been seduced by a 13, 15, or 17 year old football player boy, taller and heavier then she is?

    An entire generation brainwashed, that “pedophilia” (in the warped definition of modern feminist inspired laws) is a heinous crime.

    Maybe some of this behavior is in bad taste. A misdemeanour, deserving a slap on the wrist. But not years in jail! Maybe there is a problem when teachers and students have sexual relations.

    Suggestion for better laws

    If there really was concern about minors being taken advantage of, or undue influence on school issues because of teacher-student relationships, what about these suggestions:

    • minors, before having sex, should have a 30 minute mandatory counselling session, with a 1 day cool off wait period
    • teacher-student relations must be disclosed to the school board or some authority.

    This would take care of all concerns, and would be much cheaper and more humane thant today’s witch hunt prosecutions.

    • Share/Bookmark

    2 Comments

    Border arrest & instant jail for owning DVD with young looking 19 year old porn star. Any honest citizen risks jail

    Any law abiding citizen can end up in jail at any time

    The child porn witch hunt endangers any normal law abiding citizen. One may be arrested and kept in jail at any time for no fault. This is why the term witch hunt is appropriate.
    Simon-Timmerman, an American pizza delivery guy, bought a bootleg DVD in Venezuela. It has sex videos of 19 year-old teen Little Lupe.

    1. nobody got endangered,
    2. no danger of intimidating witnesses, of damaging victims.
    3. No prior criminal record.
    4. No damage would be done leaving the “perpetrator” out of jail while investigating and during trial.
    5. Of course, alleged child molestors, kiddie pornographers are at special risk to be anally raped in prison.
    6. proof of age was right on Little Lupe’s web site’s 2257 declaration. It is insane to be arrested for possession of child porn with a 2257 declaration right on the internet. It is a witch hunt!
    • Carlos Alfredo Simon-Timmermann was lucky that there was only ONE well known porn star. Were this a movie with 20 girls, or a home video with unknown girls, he would be doomed. As I said: "guilty until proven innocent"
    • He could have bought a different non-sexual movie (for example, "Avatar") and by accident it was mislabeled and contained porn. Too bad, 20 years in jail!! "in dubio contra reo" (if in doubt, decide against the accused)
    • The video could contain old, formerly legal Dutch videos with 16 year old girls doing hard core porn produced legally 20 years ago. Sold inadvertently in a garage sale or by a pirate copycat. Doom. Life ruined, 20 years in jail. Even if it was inadvertent and he thought he bought the Video "Avatar".  More here: Child porn & underage sex witch hunt analyzed
    • He could have bought old collections of Playboy, formerly legal dutch magazines, a certain 1970′ies issue of the reputable German News Magazine "Der Spiegel" with a cover story about Lolita. Or a british tabloid from the 70ies with a 15 or 16 year old page 3 nude girl. Jail for child pornography. (yes I know, it is "adolescent erotic photography", but for the purpose of obfuscation and propaganda adolescents are called children and erotics are called pornography) see “Child Porn” Witch Hunt: Insane Laws
    • His daughter might have left some photos of herself on the computer. Or his son surfed some web sites and encountered child porn. 20 years in jail. Or he might have nude bath photos of his toddlers
    • It is almost impossible to be safe. Like a middle age witch hunt. It can get anyone, any time. There is no legal safety for good law abiding citizens. It can get anyone, even a middle aged feminist woman who bought a mis-labeled DVD or carries a computer she bought used or loaned to her porn surfing son.
    • This month, a Brooklyn pizza-delivery guy narrowly avoided a wrongful conviction for child pornography. Wrongful convictions might not be that unusual, but this case certainly is: the man accused has a porn star to thank for setting the record straight.

      In August when returning from a trip to Venezuela, Carlos Alfredo Simon-Timmerman was stopped en route in Puerto Rico when custom officers found pornographic DVDs in his backpack. One DVD was called "Little Lupe the Innocent — Do Not Be Fooled By Her Baby Face." Customs investigators reviewed the DVDs and determined that actresses in the films were underage. They charged Simon-Timmerman with trafficking in child porn. Nobody knew the ages of the girls or women in the films, but authorities decided to err on the side of assuming Simon-Timmerman’s guilt.

      It would eventually take Little Lupe herself flying from Venezuela to Puerto Rico, testifying in court and displaying her passport to prove her age to the judge and lead prosecutors to drop the charges

      Source:

      http://criminaljustice.change.org/blog/view/a_porn_star_stops_a_wrongful_conviction

       

      For further details, citations, and concise analyisis on why this is "human stupidity",

      blind unconscious thinking based on taboos,

      click on "more" right below

       

      Read the rest of this entry »

    • Share/Bookmark

    ,

    3 Comments

    Dangerous pedophile hunters threaten harmless pedophile

    Jack McClellan is a totally harmless child lover who refrains from acting out his impules. Most pedophiles are totally or fairly harmless.( But public opinion, on purpose, confuses the harmless  guy attracted to children or adolescents with  dangerous criminal child mutilators and murderers).. Pedophile hunters bash these people with baseball bats, murder them, threaten their lives, harrass them.  Talkshow hosts and youtube commentators threaten them with deadly violence. Non-violent "pedophiles" get put in jail for 70 or 240 years, without proof or with manipulated proof, where they are likely to get violently raped, Lightly fondling an adolescent carries much higer prison terms then torture, mutilation, and murder. Normal adolescent sexuality carries strict penalties,  too. And, unlike murderers, arsonists and robbers, the lifel long US sex offender registration prevents these nonviolent people from living normal lives, working, and puts them in risk of  vigilanteism. That I also consider (institutional) violence.

     

    "Law abiding pedophile" gets persecuted

    Jack McClellan publicly outed himself as a "law abiding pedophile". He admits feeling sexual attraction for children, but never touched one sexually.

    He took photos of cute children and put it on a web site for other pedophiles to delight in, but he always stressed that everyone should refrain from doing anything illegal.

    While it is perfectly understandable that parents worry about their kids, it is very clear that Jack McClellan is being singled out for thought crimes, for crimes he has not even committed and does not plan to commit.

    In California, he got slapped with a restraining order to stay 20 (?) yards away from children, which makes it impossible for him to even go to a grocery store or walk on a busy street.

    Why, on the other hand, do violent repeat offenders, like robbers, bullies, street fighters not get the same attention. There is no national robber registry.

     

     

    Why do we only have a sex offender registry? Why not one with ALL criminals online? Let us create an arson offender registry?

    Why do a repeat arsonists, multiple robbers, murderers not get registered?

    Why don’t we get warned if an arsonist or a child murderer moves into our neighborhood?

    This is a very legitimate question. Why should we not warned if really dangerous criminals live near us?

     

    The dangerousness of the pedophile hunters (see these youtube threats & comments)

    1. Note that these people want to kill Jack McClellan, the "law abiding pedophile"
    2. A harmless guy who enjoys young girls, but never harmed one and never touched a minor sexually.
    3. His main problem is that he is naive enough to be out of the closet. He is honest, he admits his sexual attraction to young girls 4-11. If he kept quiet, he would not have a problem.

     

    • Geitje007 @mumuluku123
      I would have done the same!!! Torture him foreverrrrr fucking bastard!!!! 1 week ago
    • MaIcoImZieI @mumuluku123 You are so full of shit. You act like this guy actually mudererd and raped people. Shut the fuck up man. I’m sick of people like you talking shit about how you are going to torture paedophiles. Shut the fuck up. 1 week ago
    • sarahsmith995 i hope he dies a horrid death! 1 week ago
    • Kingler91 do a suicide, and tell all ur subscribers at that fucking website of yours to do the same, and maybe people will let their children out.
      Hope you die with alot of suffering. Would laugh my ass off if i saw you dead in the street. Fuck you. Goodbye 2 weeks ago
    • TheN1PlaylistChannel @mumuluku123 i wish i would see this animal in the street so i could punch him so hard that he would end up like a vegetable in his death bed i hope he ends up in prison OF COURSE FOR ANOTHER CRIME AND NOT HURTING AN INNOCENT CHILD and ones this animal is in prison for all the inmates to rape him and stab him to death.THE WAY I SEE IT ANYBODY HURTS AN INNOCENT CHILD DESERVES A BULLET TO THE HEAD PERIOD NO MERCY 3 weeks ago

     

    Much more about vigilante "pedophile" hunters: Click on "More"

     

    Read the rest of this entry »

    • Share/Bookmark

    , ,

    No Comments

    "To Catch a Predator" witch hunt by NBC Dateline & "Perverted Justice"

    Let me, Devil’s Advocate, clarify

    The real issues here:

    • A minor issue: clearly consensual sex with fully conscious, intelligent, non-drugged adolescents gets heavily punished, totally blown out of proportion
    • while real dangerous violent totally non-consensual crimes like high school bullying, gang intimidation and violence only get minor attention.
    • additional issues were entrapment, vigilanteism, sensationalism, sloppy evidence gatering. The “perpetrators” get enticed by the “victims”, the fake young kids, who never resisted any advances, and came on fairly strongly: “bring condoms”, “yes, I let you f… me in the a… if you love me”
    • which comes back to the question if young kids of 17, 15, 13 years are really such helpless little creatures with absolutely no responsibility for their actions (in the same USA 12 year old criminals are often tried as adults, but they are unable to consent to sex)

    I agree that probably there needs to be some restriction on sexual interaction of older with the young, or sex between young people. But non-consensual violent behavior of high school bullies, neighborhood gangs, criminal organizations is 1000 times more problematic and inescapable.

    What about dedicating our scarce law enforcement resources to such uncontested undeniable problems? “To catch a highschool bully”, “to catch high school mobbing” or “to catch a gang assault”, or “to catch a rapist”.

    To Catch a Predator was a reality television show that featured a series of hidden camera investigations by the television news-magazine Dateline NBC devoted to the subject of identifying and detaining those who contact people they believe to be below the age of consent over the Internet for sexual liaisons. Men are lured to meet with a decoy under the pretense of sexual contact. The investigations, many of which have been reported by Dateline correspondent Chris Hansen and producer Lynn Keller, are conducted as an undercover sting operation with the help of online watchdog group Perverted-Justice. Since the third installment, law enforcement and other officials have also been involved in the operation, leading to the arrests of most individuals caught in the sting. In an interview with NPR’s Neal Conan on Talk of the Nation, Chris Hansen emphasizes that the subjects of his program should be labeled as sexual predators: “We don’t label these guys as pedophiles. Pedophiles have a very specific definition, people who are interested in prepubescent sex. What we’re talking about here are potential predators.”[1]
    Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Catch_a_Predator (worth reading in entirety)

    First a parody on “Catch a Predator” by NBC with the group “Perverted Justice”.

    I think the parody tells better what this whole TV series is about. A guy that thinks straight, like a normal person 25 years ago, before the onset of the witch hunt for underage Teen Sex.

    Wanting Sex with a willing consenting 17 year old, a heinous crime?

    Now if you got brainwashed by the regular press, you might agree with “to catch a predator”. That TV series catches guys who want to have sex with a 12-13 year old girl who shows great willingness to engange in a sexual encounter, who does not resist to the guy’s advances at all. These “victims” who seem to have quite a mature behavior, are just one step short of actually hitting on the guy to have sex (which would still make her a “victim” according to today’s laws, punishable by 5-10 years in jail and mandatory life long registration as a sex offender). Interestingly, it is a thought crime, apparent “intent to have sex with a minor” is enough to ruin a life forever, even if the decoy on the internet chat is an 18 year old girl, or a 47 year old guy.

    Why is there no registration for violent dangerous non-sexual offenders? Robbers, psychopaths, bullies, drunk troublemakers?

    The press, and government have been brainwashing the public by trying to equate having sex with a willing, horny, and consenting 17 year old (or 15 year old in Europe where the age of consent usually is 16, up from 12 a few decades ago) with violent rape and killings of 7 year olds (which obviously always was a crime)

    ‘To Catch a Predator’: The New American Witch Hunt for Dangerous Pedophiles

    Rolling Stone/July 30, 2007

    [...] Twenty-eight men are caught in the bust, and the local prosecutor’s office brings charges against all of them. If they’re convicted, their sentences for attempted sexual assault will range from five to ten years in prison.

    In direct response to the high-profile success of To Catch a Predator, laws against online predators have become increasingly hostile: Internet solicitation of a minor is now a crime in a majority of states, regardless of whether an actual minor is involved. By 2009, at least 600,000 of the country’s convicted sex offenders — including those who, like Donnelly, never met an actual minor — will be required by a new federal law, the Adam Walsh Act, to be listed on a national registry of sex offenders. There, on easy-to-navigate maps for the entire country, their photos and home addresses will appear next to categories such as aliases, sentence and “computer used.” Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch even thanked Perverted Justice for “directly impacting” the law’s passage.

    Twenty-four states now forbid sex offenders from living near a host of public places — including schools, parks, day-care centers and bus stops — effectively shutting them out of many cities. Florida and Oklahoma require some sex offenders to submit to GPS monitoring for the rest of their lives. Ohio lawmakers even tried to pass a bill in 2005 to force sex offenders to sport pink license plates on their cars, but pressure from Mary Kay cosmetics, whose logo is pink, stymied the plan. This year, legislators are trying again with fluorescent-green plates.

    This is much to the glee of Perverted Justice, which views child sex abuse as a vastly underrated evil, one deserving of harsher punishment. “I’m just a guy working within the Constitution to make the world a better place, using my freedom of speech to chat with individuals on the other end of the screen name,” says Frag. “How much more gratifying does it get than finding guys who are about to molest children and putting them in jail? Not many Americans have that.” http://www.rickross.com/reference/perverted_justice/perverted_justice36.html

    Former district attorney committed suicide when Swat raids his house

    Is it possible that Bill Conradt, an adult pretending to be a teenager, might have suspected, correctly, that “Luke” was also an adult pretending? Yes: Everybody knows that the Internet is a swamp of false identities. And is there any evidence that Conradt had ever acted on the longings that his chats illuminated? On the contrary, he chose not to when presented with the opportunity. Was it morally wrong for Bill Conradt to engage in online sex chats with an apparent child? Of course. But did his actions merit the response to them? Before answering this question, a man should take stock of the history of the desires he’s never acted on, and whether he should ever have to defend that history in court, or see it detailed on television.
    Read more:http://www.esquire.com/features/predator0907-12 a long article with 12 parts 1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12

    To Catch A Predator investigated by 20/20 pt. 1

    While NBC might actually be moved by greed, Devil’s Advocate admits that most people involved did the setup with good intent to rid the world of “sexual predators”. But the zeal seems to have gone overboard, they helped create the predators they were trying to extinguish:

    To Catch A Predator investigated by 20/20 pt. 2

    Arrested for desiring to have sex with a 21 year old decoy pretending to be 13

    After seeing the parody, be prepared for the real show. Here is a 21 year old “victim” actor, pretending to be a 13 year old boy. Still, just meeting him with an alleged intent to have sex with him is a heinous crime, punishable with 5-10 years in prison.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    • Share/Bookmark

    2 Comments

    Child porn & underage sex witch hunt analyzed

    A great article about pedophilia witch hunt: http://open.salon.com/blog/patrick_j_kelly/2010/02/19/the_pedophile_witch

    I recommend you read the original article, as it is full of very valid and strong arguments, including such points as:

    1. how can many people be criminally convicted for owning or watching multiple copies of one single 50 year old picture?
    2. how can 12 year old children be legally tried as adults, if they committed a crime, but they can only consent to sex when they are 18?
    3. how can 16 year olds be victims, if they enjoyed the act, if they actively sought it, repeated it?
    4. how can 16 year olds marry, have children, but legally not be able to consent to sex?
    5. how can a large part of the population be declared criminal, just for thought crimes like enjoying pictues of 17 year olds?
    6. why would people go to jail if there is no victim, if their crime (looking at a copy of a picture) did not harm anyone?
    7. how can people go to jail for something that 20 years ago was not even a crime?
    8. why is depiction, possession or looking at underage photos a crime, while depiction and consumption of murder photos is not a crime?
    9. how come that legal concepts like “innocent until proven guilty”, “guilty beyond reasonable doubt”, “penalty should be proportional to the crime”, “laws should not be arbitrary, discriminatory” are totally trampled and violated?

    The challenge of legally punishing people for engaging in sex with minors has long been filled with problems. Alleged victims have always been reluctant to testify against someone who more often than not turned out to be a parent or close family member. Some were also reluctant to accept the premise they were victims at all in sexual encounters they not only enjoyed but frequently played some role in instigating. Laws defining 18 as the age at which one is mature enough to decide who they want to have sex with evokes cynicism from sexually active teens and preteens who view such restrictions as outmoded and totally out of touch with the reality they know. It is not that uncommon for many of these so-called children to be married with their own children at 16 which also draws into question the viability of the government’s one size fits all attitude towards sex. And when government prosecutors fight to have 12 year olds stand trial as adults doesn’t this call into question the rationality behind laws that say when it comes to sex you must be 18 before you are old enough to decide?

    Read the rest of this entry »

    • Share/Bookmark

    1 Comment

    “Child Porn” Witch Hunt: Insane Laws

    “Child Pornography” is a relatively new crime, invented in the last few decades. Simple possession of “child pornography” in a computer cache (an automatic storage of browsers) can yield extreme jail sentences, higher then for crimes like non-sexual child mutilation, violent beatings, attempted murder. I will, however, list a host of absurd illogical facts and laws, mainly from Europe.

    1. Language gets distorted on purpose, for propagandistic effects, worse then under Nazi Minister Goebbels 
      • in most countries’ laws, children are under 14 years old
      • pornography normally are sexually explicit actions, not nude solo acts
      • now, suddenly, by definition, under 18 year olds are “children”, and nude photos are pornography. Well, erotic youth photos does not sound as jail-worthy as “child pornography”
      • in Europe, specifically in Germany, pictures of someone “appearing under 18″ (scheinjugendlich, scheinminderjährig) now is being redefined as “child pornography”. In other words, a young looking 25 year old, that looks like a 17 year old youth, is being called a child.
      • I write “child pornography” in quotes, because a picture that neigher contains a child, nor is pornographic can be called “child pornography”
    2. Until the 1980ies today’s “child porn” was main stream entertainment.
      • main stream Hollywood movies like the Blue Lagoon showed underage sensual nudity and and pretended sexual intercourse of underage actors pretending to be underage people. A clear case of child porn by today’s laws
      • British newspaper “page 3″ nude girls were routinely 16 years or older
      • German youth magazines had nude teenage photos, routinely, partially for sex education
      • nudes of all ages, 3, 5, 10, 15, 20 years old, were shown in publicly sold magazines about FKK, the german nudity culture
      • in Germany nude bathing is wide spread, on beaches and rivers even inside cities like Munich, nudes of all ages can be seen live. So photos of what everyone can see at any time didn’t really look like a crime.
      • Antique greek statues show little nude boys with their sexual organs
      • In Holland and Denmark, hard core porn with 16 year olds was legal. If someone legally bought or downloaded this, now he is a hard core criminal facing decades of jail. I wonder what the reason is for these laws. Who will be protected by these penalties? Interestingly, most of these movies were quite tastefully erotic, different from many abusive porn movies sold nowadays with over 18 year old actresses (for a negative example, do NOT look at germangoogirls.com).
    3. Why can a photo of a perfectly legal act be a heinous crime?
      • In Europe, Sex with 16 year olds is perfectly legal. So why a photo or movie of such a perfectly legal act is a very serious crime? Production, possession, passing on
      • maybe it is a crime if a 16 year old looks into the mirror while having sex? If he films himself and looks at the movie, obviously that is a heinous crime.
      • what if our 16 year-olds get caught by a surveillance camera. Who then is the criminal? What if security personell looks at the surveillance movie. Should they delete it or turn in to police?
    4. What is the purpose of these laws? Do they protect children or adolescents?
      • Prohibiting movies that were legally produced in highly civilized countries like Netherlands does not protect anyone. It seems that nobody got damaged when shooting the movie under such perfectly legal circumstances. If anyone got damaged, it is too late to fix it. The movie has been shot already, nothing can be changed. It only prevents the girls or the studio from receiving more income.
      • Prohibiting drawings, photoshop art, etc: no child was harmed producing this.
      • “watching photos or videos of nude adolescents makes people pedophile so that they will abuse and rape children”. A desperate attempt to justify the absurd. Problems:
      • no proof exists for that watching porn makes people rapists, nor watching child porn makes people child rapists.
      • It seems to be the opposite. , watching porn can be cathartic so people will NOT become violent
      • Why don’t laws prohibit violent movies, chainsaw massacres, shootings, beatings? I think it is very damaging to see movie heroes that never call the police but rather, as role models, beat up the bad guys with their own hands

    So much stupidity. So little time to write about it.

    Unfortunately, most of the literature I found is in German. Please post quotes of English texts.

    http://schutzalter.twoday.net/
    http://www.lawblog.de/index.php/archives/2007/01/12/kinderpornografie-ein-blick-ins-gesetz/
    http://forum.spiegel.de/showthread.php?t=12149 http://blog.beck.de/2008/11/06/jugendpornographieverbot-seit-05november-in-kraft

    • Share/Bookmark

    , ,

    1 Comment

    Pedophilia witch hunt discussed by academia and press

    1. First a story about a toddler that had to die because a man was afraid to help, due to the pedophilia hysteria.

      pedophilia_prejudice

      An extreme defense of pedophilia

    2. Then Professor Harris Mirkin’s thesis that criminalization of “pedophilia” is like gay criminalization and psychiatrization of homosexuality 50 years ago and that childrens’ right to sexuality should eventually win.
    3. Judith Levine’s book, Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex
    4. Alfred Kinsey a pedophile? He observed orgasms of children and adolescents during his University Research.
    5. More unbiased academic discussions about pedophilia
    6. And of course there is our prior article about persecution of academic research in the case of the Rind Study

    There was one small detail that jumped out at me in the tragic story of Abigail Rae, the two-year-old who wandered off from her village playgroup and ended up dying in a garden pond. Tucked away at the end of yesterday’s inquest report was a line about how Clive Peachey, a bricklayer, drove past a child on her own, whom he later concluded had been Abby.

    She was not walking straight, she was tottering, said Mr Peachey. “I kept thinking should I go back? One of the reasons I did not go back is because I thought someone would see me and think I was trying to abduct her.”

    The hysteria over paedophilia hangs like some dark cloud over almost every interaction nowadays between a man and a child that isn’t his.

    Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3352895/Day-of-the-dad-paedophilia-hysteria-leaves-men-afraid-to-help.html

    Professor Mirkin got himself into deep trouble defending that consensual sex with an adolescent is not the same as raping the same adolescent. Similar to a Dutch law, Professor Mirkin contends that the age of consent should be 12 years, as long as the adolescent’s consent can be proven.

    Click on MORE to read the rest of the story.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    • Share/Bookmark

    , , ,

    No Comments

    Family pictures of nude baby bath: ruinous child porn prosecution

    Innocent bath photo got parents on sex offender listChildren were taken from their parents into protective custody for over a month, because of pictures taken at bath time. Parents lost their jobs, spent US$ 75,000 and got registered as sex offenders. This is an example of how the child porn hysteria goes totally overboard.

    (This is not an isolated case, here a story about a snapshot of a mother breast-feeding her child got parents indicted by a grand jury as kiddie porn producers and child abusers ). But back from “breast feeding porn” to the “bathing photos kiddie porn” persecution.

    For A.J. and Lisa Demaree, the photos they snapped of their young daughters were innocent and sweet.

    But after a photo developer at Walmart thought otherwise, the Demarees found themselves in a yearlong battle to prove they were not child pornographers.

    Coppertone ad: cute in the 1970ies, now child porn and bestiality?

    Coppertone ad: cute in 1970ies, nowadays potentially child porn and even bestiality?

    “I don’t’ understand it at all,” A.J. Demaree told “Good Morning America” Monday. “Ninety-nine percent of the families in America have these exact same photos.”

    Sources:http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/arizona-couple-suing-bathtime-photos-prompt-wal-mart/story?id=8624533

    Read the rest of this entry »

    • Share/Bookmark

    , ,

    No Comments

    History of child pornography production and laws, told by an insider

    Found a ong, very interesting article by an insider in child porn. He makes a lot of interesting points

    1. from antiquity until a few decades ago, children’s nudity was object of arts, of photographers, painters, sculptures. Today’s witch hunt that jails children for photographing themselves in the nude and passing their own photograph to their boyfriends (sexting) is new.
    2. mainstream movies and magazines showed nude adolescents in scenes whose production or even viewing nowadays would be punished by decades of jail terms.
    3. actual child abuse was fairly rare, lots of models actually enjoyed the shootings (we are talking about posing and not acts that are totally unnatural for their age)
    4. Internet censorship and blocking programs don’t work because the child porn industry nowadays is so tech savvy that these measures only catch the amateurs.

    Source of the long article: http://wikileaks.org/wiki/My_life_in_child_porn Original german version of the source

    In the past, child and adolescent sex was considered normal.  Even exaggerated examples from religious books did not shock people

    Mohammed married Aisha at age 6 or 9 (http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/aishamarriage.pdf http://www.muslim.org/islam/aisha-age.htm )

    Many biblical commentators believe that Rebekah was still a child when she married Isaac, while Isaac was forty years of age ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham )

    Brooke Shields 15 years in PeopleMagazine

    Brooke Shields 15 years in People Magazine

    Since antique times, artists could show children and adolescents nude. Mainstream movies and magazines printed nude photos of 14 year old girls up to the 1980ies or later, which nowadays would be a crime punishable by many years in jail not only for the producers but also for the spectators and buyers. Actually, artists nowadays frequently get prosecuted for depicting children.( http://users.rcn.com/kyp/witchprc.html )

    Shields’ first major film role was her 1978 appearance in Louis Malle’s Pretty Baby, a movie in which she played a child who lived in a brothel (and in which there were numerous nude scenes).[1] Because she was only 12 when the film was released, and possibly 11 when it was filmed, questions were raised about child pornography.[7][8][9] This was followed by a slightly less controversial and less notable film, Wanda Nevada (1979).

    After two decades of movies, her best known films are still arguably The Blue Lagoon (1980), which included a number of nude scenes between teenage lovers on a tropical island (Shields later testified before a U.S. Congressional inquiry that older body doubles were used in some of them) and Endless Love (1981). She won the People’s Choice Award in the category of Favorite Young Performer in four consecutive years from 1981 to 1984.

    Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooke_Shields

    Nowadays, parents get prosecuted for taking nude photos of their babies in the bath tub, and teenagers arrested for taking nude photos of themselves.

    History of child sex and child porn

    Very interesting article by an insider from the child porn scene.

    Source: http://wikileaks.org/wiki/My_life_in_child_porn Original german version of the source

    In the Middle Ages, when the life expectancy was still significantly lower, the puberty began later than today and adolescents in the age range 12-18 years were set up for marriage. This changed increasingly. Naked, erotically depicted boys and girls have always been in the center of the art. As photography became popular at the end of the 18th Century, also erotic act descriptions with children and young people were made. At the end of the 60s there was a magazine called Lolita, produced by the Danish company “Color Climax”, that had sex between children and between children and adults as the subject. </ p>

    Read the rest of this entry »

    • Share/Bookmark

    , ,

    3 Comments