Rise in CP created by children

Here's a link to a story about the rise in CP created by children.

http://egomoral.com/rise-in-child-porn- ... -children/

I did know that a good deal of male CP is self produced and felt I understood why that is. I did not know that girls did it on this scale.

Which begs a question, if it is becoming increasingly "normal" so far as the youth are concerned, how to stop it? It can only continue to increase into the future. Since you can't stop the production, it stands to reason that they only go after the viewers. But this will surely become eventually unmanageable also.

Seems to me the cats out of the bag and it ain't going back in any time soon.

Why do people insist on referring to naked pictures of 15-17 year olds as "child" porn? They are underage adolescents, not children.

That bitch aside, I love how they have to come up with new labels "child sex abuse images"? Seriously? It's not like the term "child pornography doesn't rile up people enough.

In any case, I'm not that surprised. Sexting has been around forever and it's not going away. People need to just accept that.

Gemini_Incarnate wrote:Why do people insist on referring to naked pictures of 15-17 year olds as "child" porn? They are underage adolescents, not children.

That bitch aside, I love how they have to come up with new labels "child sex abuse images"? Seriously? It's not like the term "child pornography doesn't rile up people enough.

In any case, I'm not that surprised. Sexting has been around forever and it's not going away. People need to just accept that.

Don't get too upset at the subtle distinction. One reason for the nuance may be to distinguish between the digital depiction of abuse in progress and the semantically re-defined "nudist" poses, which are becoming ever more explicit. In other words, it may be another way of accepting nude photos as universally benign. Just a theory on my part.

In the UK it all comes under the heading "indecent images of children" - which includes a 16 yr old in swimwear at the pool/beach. Hence some men are being prosecuted for non pornographic images and this is being reported as "pervert had sick child rape images".

I read the report in full a few months ago. Any of you read it?

Didn't need to I saw the results. I was well aware as soon as webcams came in that young boys were getting on them. They sought out cam sex as much as any of us did.

I believe that at the rate with which computeresc devices are put in the hands of progressively younger children it is enivitable that they'll be used more and more innappropriately. Little Betty didn't make those videos because she was forced to. Naahhhh, she just did it because it was fun. She likes the attention. Same thing for showing off the family photobook and letting the world know how mommy looks like a bridge troll and how the father seems to always be absent from the picture.

We're at the point where we're running commericals for machines that rock your baby for you so you have another excuse to horsearound somewhere else and not have to pay attention to the little burden. It all just sends negative signals to me, that's all.

I strongly advise perusing the report, as the results have been rather selectively reported.

I did read it. I did not get the scandal value of the original report.

But I do love how Anglo-Saxons play moralising word games. "Child sexual abuse images" is so cute it must have been devised by a hired external consultant. When one receives funding from a Big Corp that wants their name on some concerned report -- 'see, we care about the kids!' -- one had better deliver appurtenant results; results that augment future funding; and CSAI will no doubt do that. CSAI is new, is scary. And novel, child-threatening phenomena need further investigation.

I wonder what they call images depicting a child firing an assault rifle at some all-American shooting range. "Child virtuous upbringing images."

When I was a kid, and was involved in cp, porn was called porn because it was porn. But times change, I guess.

Who or what do you mean by 'Anglo Saxons'?

I'm a white British man who lives in London, but I'm not an Anglo Saxon, and I'd like some clarification on who you're sticking it to here.

I don't know anyone from any demographic (and believe me, there's a good mix in my neighbourhood) who thinks sticking guns in kids' hands is a good idea. Rednecked gun nuts in America don't represent anyone else but themselves.

On the subject at hand: I think viewing material voluntarily submitted by an underage exhibitionist is obviously a much lesser sin than viewing scenes of statutory rape, and maybe the law should reflect this by introducing categories of such pornography. I'm not defending or condoning anything here. I'm just making what I think is a reasonable comment based on my observations. At present, I think the law is too 'one size fits all', especially in the UK where cartoon drawings can qualify as child porn, and somebody who wouldn't dream of watching an actual scene of a child being shagged by an adult can have their lives ruined for being caught with a stupid manga cartoon on their computer.