What Is Grey Area Child Pornography?

If you research pedophiles, you are going to end up on pedophile bulletin boards where pedophiles talk about their sexual orientation. It’s one of the best ways to study these people, and on open boards, 50% of the posters are pedophile-haters threatening and abusing the pedophiles, so it hardly makes you a pedo to go to such sites.

In terms of images, Open Internet pedophile forums are generally pretty clean. There are lots of pictures of little girls, but these are mostly completely legal photos of fully clothed girls. Nevertheless, it is still a bit disturbing at least for me to look at that photo of that little girl and realize that the men on that site regard her as a sex object. It’s a weird, creepy feeling.

There are images on these sites, but it is all or almost all gray area stuff. This is good because it means you can use these sites for research without worrying about going to jail for “illegal looking.” Most of the gray area stuff is clothed posed models and cartoon child pornography. While both of these types of images are disturbing, at least to me, they are generally legal.

Clothed Posed Models

A clothed posed model is what to me looks like a little girl dressed up in very sexy clothes posed very provocatively. The girls are fully clothed, and the FBI has long stated that if they are posing  alone and they have all their clothes on, it’s not child pornography. Nevertheless, I find the clothed models to be very disturbing to look at. I don’t mind looking at little girls, but not if they are dressed and posed like that. There’s something creepy about it. As far as whether it’s a turn on, I usually think,  “Why in the Hell would anyone get turned on by that?”

I’m not sure the age of the posed model girls. It may be 10-13. They are heading into puberty, but they are still disturbingly  young. Most of them seem to come from Russia, often the rural parts of Russia. Both the girls and their mothers are very enthusiastic about this modeling, probably because the mother can earn quite a bit of money that way and the girl gets to indulge her narcissism.

Many of the girls  have given interviews later when they were adults. In all cases, they vehemently defend their child modeling days. The mothers are all unrepentant too. I don’t quite know what to do about this. Maybe this stuff needs to stay legal even if it is creepy. There’s all sorts of creepy material like beheading videos out there that is 100% legal. It’s hard to make a case that clothed posed models are more disturbing or creepy than beheading videos.

Not one single person has gone down for mere possession of this stuff, much less for illegal looking. Two men have been convicted of mass distribution of clothed child models, but that case was extremely controversial because clothed posed models were not known to be illegal at the time and the state had to make a new case that this material was illegal. Many of the now-grown girl models have come to these men’s defense.

Both men had researched the law carefully and felt they were operating within the law as clothed posed models were legal at the time. They were legal at the time. They were legal until the state decided that they were illegal, which is messed up.

You can’t break a law that you don’t know exists. Vague laws are unconstitutional. Laws must be written so it is pretty clear to people what is legal and what is illegal. Therefore, citizens who wish to obey the law can know what the limits of the law are. If we don’t know what’s legal and what’s illegal, how can we operate in society. If everything is legal until the state arbitrarily and without passing a law decides something is illegal, this is not democratic, and you’re not living in a free country. That is totalitarianism.

In the meantime, clothed posed model sites are all over the Net as far as I can tell. They took down two of the toadstools, but 500 new ones have sprung up. Although clothed child models are disturbing images, I suppose they should remain legal. Just because something is creepy or disturbing doesn’t mean it should be illegal.

The threat of going to prison has not fazed many people though and it seems there are hundreds of posed model sites out there. Perhaps there is money to be made on the stuff.

Clothed posed models are essentially legal unless you are hosting a huge website grossing millions of dollars per year. But why anyone would want to look at such stuff is beyond me.

Cartoon Child Pornography

Cartoon child pornography is gray area legal, although I admit it is disturbing to look at. Some of it is actually rather horrible. As far as whether it’s a turn-on, my reaction is the same as above, “Why would anyone get turned on by that?” I actually like cartoon porn a lot. It’s one of my favorite types of porn. But not with little girls in it! Gross and weird!

The cartoons are not all little girls, and some of the girls are more teens with developing women’s bodies and breasts. I will admit that once the girls in the cartoons start looking like women, I start getting interested in them. A big market with this material has sprung up in Japan. I believe it is called Loli or Manga. I don’t need to tell you what the cartoons features. They’re hardcore pornographic cartoons with little girls. That’s all you need to know. Use your imagination.

The only cases tried so far are for the artists who draw this material. Obviously, all of these artists are pedophiles. However, some are married with highly supportive wives. There have been a number of attempts to try men for drawing cartoon child pornography, but almost all have been stricken down by courts who have decided that this material is constitutionally protected by the First Amendment freedom of expression. I believe in one case, a artist was convicted for drawing this material. However, that case has been quite controversial.

My reaction to this stuff is that why anyone who want to look at such cartoons is beyond me. A lot of them are rather sick.

Not one person has ever gone down for mere possession of this material, much less for “illegal looking.” Cartoon child pornography is quite disturbing, much worse than clothed child models at least for me. Nevertheless, they probably need to stay legal. You can’t make everything creepy or disturbing illegal you know. Still I would be terrified to put one of these cartoons on any website of mine. I don’t need to be hosting material like that.

Bottom line is that cartoon child pornography is basically legal, as creepy as it is. Even though it is legal, my understanding is that  almost zero websites in the US want to carry it. Even though it’s legal, they think it’s too messed up to put on their site. I don’t blame them. Most of the material appears to be hosted out of Japan.

10 Comments

Filed under Art, Asia, Child Porn, Eurasia, Girls, Japan, Law, Lolitas, NE Asia, Pedophilia, Pornography, Regional, Russia, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology

10 responses to “What Is Grey Area Child Pornography?

  1. Jason Y

    Though the law isn’t enforced much, technically a fully clothed child in a sexually provocative pose is pornography. However, with guys like Trump, and especially altar boy Pence in office, you can expect the law to be enforced more with less grey area. Note, these guys are always looking for scapegoats, and unlike with racial minorities and the handicapped, or even gays, it’s possible to feel zero sympathy for pedo creeps.

  2. Jason Y

    Another thing which is massively creepy and apparently legal, though maybe not in the future with Trump in office, is when some teenage bikini website also has adult ads. In other words, the 15-year-olds are not nude, but the ads have nude adults on them.

    • TJF

      To Jason Y:
      Another thing which is massively creepy and apparently legal, though maybe not in the future with Trump in office, is when some teenage bikini website also has adult ads. In other words, the 15-year-olds are not nude, but the ads have nude adults on them.

      Label it as art.. photos of nude teen women have been around for a long time — one of the most well known (notorious) photographer of the genre, David Hamilton, recently passed away.

      https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/nov/26/david-hamilton-found-dead-amid-allegations-of-historical

      The link below contains some of his work – NSFW:

      https://onlinebrowsing.blogspot.com/2010/03/david-hamilton-age-of-innocence.html

      National Geographic and similar publications for a while were another quasi socially acceptable genre for photos of younger teen women – because you know ummm.. anthropology and seeing people in their “native” settings. There were jokes dating back to the 50s that guys were looking at Natio Geo to examine aspects of the unclad native ladies. “No Joe, I’m telling you – brown boobies in the African or Amazon jungles are not the same as white boobies in New Jersey.” Never mind that we had plenty of black women in this country.

      • Jason Y

        Well, I’m sure at the David Duke annual Alabama Incest Conference 😆 such info would lead to a lively discussion, of course, after a nice country dinner.

        • TJF

          To Jason Y:
          Well, I’m sure at the David Duke annual Alabama Incest Conference..

          What did the redneck girl say to her lover after sex..? “Daddy get off me, you’re crushing my cigarettes!”

      • VampireGhost

        I remember looking at Nat Geo nudes as a kid, I think women look better in their ethnic dress. A bunch of pedos fawning over clothed children is much more disturbing.

        • TJF

          To VampireGhost:

          A bunch of pedos fawning over clothed children is much more disturbing.

          I suspect that we would be fully in agreement that pedophiles fawning over photos of children whether clothed in the US or unclothed/partially clothed children in Africa or the Amazon basin would be rather disturbing. My point to Jason was that nude/semi nude photos of under age people in certain contexts, have been legally available for quite some time.

          In reflecting upon Rob’s use of the term grey area, the photographer I mentioned above, David Hamilton sold millions of books and directed 5 films. Much of his work features women in various states of undress who be considered underage in many states in the US. For the most part he was considered a legitimate (but controversial) artist but on numerous occasions when pedophiles were caught with stashes of child pornography – Hamilton’s books have been found intermingled with more hardcore photos.

          His books are easily available on Amazon but there have attempted prosecutions of people who were in possession of the material:
          http://justicedenied.org/wordpress/archives/850

        • VampireGhost

          Nudity shouldn’t be the be all end all. When people put bath pics of their kids on social media it’s usually innocent. Pedos make things dirty that shouldn’t be.

  3. VampireGhost

    That was before the Internet made stealing Dad’s Playboys unnecessary. These days 5 years old children will see 15,000 13 inch black penises before they are 10.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s