“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

10 Comments

  1. Caroline Kaiser says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    Stimme überall vorbehaltlos zu, mit einer kleinen Einschränkung:

    Sex ist in D bereits ab und mit 14 jährigen legal, Einschränkungen des § 182 ausgenommen.

    Übrigens hat die Schweiz sich dem 18er Schutzalter bisher nicht angeschlossen.

    Die Aufnahmen sexueller Handlungen mit über 16jährigen bleiben legal, in einigen Kantonen wird über eine Erhöhung des Schutzalters für Prostitution auf 18 nachgedacht.

    Eine Differenzierung halte ich persönlich hier auch für vernünftiger.

  2. The Highwayman says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

    QUOTE: “What is the purpose of these laws?”

    Complete suppression of adult male sexual interest in young girls.

  3. Child Porn Laws Victimize Children and Adults says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    […] brain damage in infant: 2 years. Kills baby: 4 years. Man possesses photos: priceless (40 years)“Child Porn” Witch Hunt: Insane Laws”In reality, any rational child (and even rational adult) can see that teens are not victimized by […]

  4. sithalo says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    wow. that was the best thing i ever read. we really have no boundries for stupidity.

  5. Fat Robert says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Oh how I HATE it when comments are put up for “moderation!” It usually means that what you say will be subjected to the acid test of ridicule and vicious scrutiny! Too bad people are so critical and judgemental. I made some REALLY good and valid points. I guess since this is somewhat of a “skeptic”(meaning “atheist/rationalist ) website, I probably shouldn’t have mentioned “spiritual tools.” I have a customer where I work… nice guy, hey hey hey, but the instant someone mentions anything even “hinting” at anything spititual, he quickly tells you to change the subject. This man has a rather quick “Beethoven” type temper and will NOT be debated with. I’ts for that very reason he doesn’t like very many people! Before a person can get a word in edgewise, he’ll get up and march out on you! Many “skeptics are like that. They will NOT suffer those they judge to be “fools!” So… sorry for the offense. You knocked my last blog COMPLETELY off the website. Obviously a lot of what I said didn’t go over well. Sincere apologies. I can only ‘HOPE” I’ll be able to post SOMETHING on this forum now..

  6. Fat Robert says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Well, here goes a more “cautious” attempt at a successful “posting.” It’s interesting being an individual with a crystal clear unbiased analytical mind. I am a died in the wool old school “constitutionalist!” I don’t fit into ANY category per se. I am “on the fence” you could say. I see the beleifs of the extreme Right and the extreme Left. BOTH sides have believe in their fair share of fallacies. I soberly reject the fallacies and “keep” the truths. I do this carefully using the constitution as my guide. ( if I say “higher consciousness” I’ll probably get my comment “rejected” again, so I won’t. ). As a result, it seems I’ve been bastardised as a “traitor” by both sides. That’s the trouble with being a 110% sincere “constitutionalist! The trouble with the constitution is that if it were to be strictly and rigidly enforced, people would be offended to no end! There are things that it would defend that not too many people would STAND for!! Individual “opinions” ( not to mention “religion” )would keep people “at odds” with the tenets of the Bill of Rights. According to the Bill of Rights, People have a right to believe in that which is “important” to them. But many people won’t “tolorate” that. For that reason, I’ve been warned that If I should choose to actually DO the “CONSTITUTION DANCE,” I’ll probably be one of the most unpopular people on the dance-floor!!! And it’s true: ( Both the Right and the Left “pick & choose” to defend only those parts of the constitution that they “agree” with. )If you are a tried and true “constitutionalist,” you’re gonna have a hard go of it!! Like me, you’ll find yourself about 30% liberal ( does anybody remember the 60s “free-love” type Liberals?? ), about 40% Conservative, and about 80% Independant! Result: NOBODY’s going to tolorate YOU! Hey hey hey. Fat Albert is kindof like an unconventional “Charie Brown.” NOT popular. That’s the trouble with being an unbiased “sober observer.” You see all the flaws that nobody WANTS to see! You want to TEACH the people that there’s a better way! But when you try to point those flaws out, you’re told to SHUT THE F—- UP! That’s ANOTHER reason my comment got slam-dunked, I think. I don’t mind if these last two comments get trashed. They are “letters to the editors.” Anyway, I’ll try not to be TOO politically incorrect, and to minimise the “risk” of offending the folks on this blog, I’m only going to post a comment one time. This is obviously NOT the blog to be posting “politically incorrect” views. sorry about that. I’ll be more careful when I do my post. Constitutional-political-incorrectness is a painful road to travel.

  7. HotLittleStagg says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

    There’s something I think you better be “warned” about: If you’ve ever been to a porn site ( do NOT take your chances with online porn! It is NOT worth it! ), and say you clicked on a “questionable image” only to have your computer screen “flash” followed by nothing else, .. you probably just sent your own I.S.P address to the COPS or the FEDS! The reason it often takes two whole years ( maybe even THREE years ) for them to come knocking on your door is that they all have one VERY long list of I.S.P. addresses to go down! Eventually, they’ll get to YOURS! From there it’ll be a piece of cake to find out who you are and where you live!

  8. Alan Vaughn says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    @HotLittleStagg
    “The reason it often takes two whole years ( maybe even THREE years ) for them to come knocking on your door is that they all have one VERY long list of I.S.P. addresses to go down! Eventually, they’ll get to YOURS! From there it’ll be a piece of cake to find out who you are and where you live!”

    Well in that case if anyone has been there and viewed ‘questionable’ images – i.e. ANYTHING depicting a youngish looking WOMAN or looks like a teen: TOTALLY DESTROY your hard disk and any other media that anything from such websites was stored on.
    Don’t just erase data or format the drive, get a big hammer and smash it pieces – DESTROY IT.

    The cops DO NEED evidence apart from your IP address being found at the ‘questionable’ site, they have to have that AND evidence at your end to make the 2+2=4 DAMNING evidence. If they cannot find any trace of illegal imagery or other media on your computer, they have NOTHING on you. An IP address alone is not enough.
    So if you act quickly – DESTROY your disk or disks, you can beat them. But better still: JUST DON”T GO NEAR THOSE SITES AT ALL!

  9. Eric says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Alan & Stagg:
    And if they REALLY don’t like you, plenty of the evidence they’ve seized off other computers might happen to turn up on your own hard drives as well.

  10. Fat Albert says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    “Caroline Kaiser” thinks we’re all German! Hey hey hey. Anybody know what she “said?” Any TRANSLATERS here?

Leave a Reply