Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojiita
Well here is where we disagree-where to 'draw the line' so to speak. And the burqa thing was just making a point. At what point do you draw the line? Pedo's can jerk off to practically anything..just given the choice and opportunity, of course they are going to go for what is more 'explicit' and is closer to what they want (sex with a child)..hence their desire for child porn. But again if what they really want is not available(kiddie porn, or worse yet, a real live child to abuse), then they will settle for the next best thing. The problem comes up when the 'next best thing' for the pedos is what a normal person(not EVERY normal person mind you) could consider to be 'art'.
If you keep banning things that can turn a pedo perv on..then where does it end? Eventually the 'next best thing' for the pervo ped will simply be a child in a bathing suit. What to do then, ban children in bathing suits? It would never end.
*this whole thing SUCKS cause it almost seems like I am defending the peds! WAAHHH!!  |
Well, a pink taco shot of a five year old. That's where I draw the line.
I'm super liberal with this kind of thing. In Europe all the kiddies are naked all the time. It was on American tv that I first saw a blurred out butt crack of a baby, and I found that disturbing. Why blur a butt crack?
Anyway, this is an explicite pose. Her spread out vagina is the center of the picture. Naked kiddies running around in natural poses - no problem. As I said, I have a million naked pix of my nephews.
If this is art and the vagina of the girl plays no role in it, why not take a shot where it isn't spread open wide? It's a scheme. Overstep boundaries and you're considered an artist. I say: If you can't be an artist without exploiting children, you're no artist to begin with.