Fun Stuff > CHATTER
Child Pornography or Art? Is there a line, if so where?
axerton:
No, because sexual desire of an adult woman is something that can be satisfied legally.
ackblom12:
Then how about scenes of murder, rape, torture, etc. which are most certainly not illegal to portray?
ledhendrix:
Thats true but people are still driven to rape.
Edit: Someone beat me to it.
axerton:
Why do people always look for a perfect solution. We are in an imperfect world; there is never a perfect solution.
ok, with most non sexual violent crimes there are going to be even less people who want to go out and put it into practice in real life.
Also I don't want to be callus but with almost every crime the victim and their family/friends grieve then move on, unless the crime is murder, but then the victim is dead and it doesn't really matter to them. This is not the case with victims of child molestation, I can't explain it, but unless you've met, and truly cared for someone who was abused you don't understand just how much it affects them.
Lines:
There was an artist, I forget her name, who photographed her own children naked (non-erotic/pornographic) and people wanted to charge her for making child pornography. The photos do have a weird, unseen element to them, but they are by no means pornographic. Also, if any of you know who Balthus is, he's one of my favorite painters, but his main themes dealt with prepubescent/young teen girls that were either partially naked or completely naked and were sometimes positioned in ways that could be seen as erotic. However, the images are not pornographic, though some people are awkward around his art. There is a difference between erotic art and pornography.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version