Tag: child pornography

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

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this story f more provocative Devil’s Advocate Ideas »
Pedophile witch hunt & underage sex law excesses: why the witc…
» continues here »

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.

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

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Years of Jail for "clicking on child porn link". But lynching videos are legal.” »
Years of Jail for "clicking on child porn link". But ly…
» continues here »

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

     

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Border arrest & instant jail for owning DVD with young looking 19 year old porn star. Any honest citizen risks jail” »
    Border arrest & instant jail for owning DVD with young looking…
    » continues here »

“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