virtual child porn | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
Now online (2)
DADONCK
belb
...and 227 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2613457
Today 3
Topics 127500
  
 
Messageboard index
virtual child porn
 

offline nanotech from Sukavasti Amitaba Pureland (United States) on 2002-05-11 06:00 [#00214753]
Points: 3727 Status: Regular



ok, with the recennt topic i thought it apropiate to create
one dedicated to the US's congress saying that "virtual"
child porn is ok. By virtual, i mean the 100% senthetic 3d
models of children acting in sexualy expilcit manners. No
human children models, just 3d renderations...

i'm not sure, but this topic does sound familuar as i'm
wraaping things up...maybe we already talkied about it...if
so...sorry...:( if not...what are you're opinions?


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2002-05-11 06:05 [#00214755]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker



Anyone who would get off on a 3d rendering of a young child
in sexually suggestive/exploitive actions/positions/manners
deserves to be shot for the sheer tastelesness of it all.

I don't really see why the gov't feels the need to interfere
with what people do in their everyday lives anyways. Its
like, as soon as you turn 18, you shed one set of parents
and gain a new set.


 

offline Ubik from United States on 2002-05-11 06:11 [#00214756]
Points: 662 Status: Lurker



they probably are trying to use "virtual" child porn as a
lure to identify those who are interested in child porn...
then try to sell them real child porn... then prosecute
them... then brag about how they caught more child porners


 

offline Inverted Whale from United States Minor Outlying Islands on 2002-05-11 06:20 [#00214760]
Points: 3301 Status: Lurker



The anime lobby must've got hold of this one. ha ha, just
kidding ...


 

offline Zombiekev from Ardmore (United States) on 2002-05-11 06:36 [#00214769]
Points: 2857 Status: Lurker



have you ever noticed that most asian porn stars look really
young, but they are probably in their late twenties and
thirties.

asian porn is good enough.
i guess virtual is okay.
but children, that's completely out of the question.


 

offline pachi from yo momma (United States) on 2002-05-11 06:37 [#00214770]
Points: 8984 Status: Lurker



:O - save the women and children!!!


 

offline nanotech from Sukavasti Amitaba Pureland (United States) on 2002-05-11 07:02 [#00214784]
Points: 3727 Status: Regular



you guys are looking at the here and now of things...i'd
totally go out and buy a movie that featured an extremely
life like digital child-pron star...look at the final
fantasy movie...the main charecter is going to star in other
cg movies to become the world's first digital actress w/ a
portfolio. Just picture a very hot 15 year old doing
porn...

btw, i'm hardly 20 years old...and two years ago i dated and
had sexual relations w/ a 15 yr old...so it's not that huge
of a age gap...infact i'm barlely an "adult" myself...


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2002-05-11 07:14 [#00214789]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker



I had a sexual relationship w/ a 15 year old when I was 19.
But like I said, that kinda shit is legal where I live. She
was also more mature than a lot of 20 year old chix I
know...

When I was 21 I had a short relationship w/ a 37 year old
female...

Thats the furthest I have been from my own age in both
directions.

I don't necessarily feel that say, cgi porn with 15 year
olds is necessarily tacky. Well, all cgi porn is pretty
absolutely tasteless. But its when the characters get
younger, then it gets gross.

But on the flipside, I don't believe in government control
of things like sex, drugs, entertainment, religion, or any
mix of those or related subjects.

I think that people should learn to act w/ a bit more
responsibility in the way we carry out our sex lives. Most
adults act as tho they 14 year olds when it comes to this
kinda shit.


 

offline titsworth from Washington, DC (United States) on 2002-05-11 08:48 [#00214852]
Points: 14550 Status: Lurker



stop preying on little girls, they don't know better


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2002-05-11 08:49 [#00214855]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to titsworth: #00214852



Who are you talking to?


 

offline titsworth from Washington, DC (United States) on 2002-05-11 08:51 [#00214860]
Points: 14550 Status: Lurker



the both of ye.. restrain yourselves, take responsibility


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2002-05-11 08:55 [#00214866]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to titsworth: #00214860



Are you drunk or something?

I was just ranting about how people have issues taking
responsibility.


 

offline titsworth from Washington, DC (United States) on 2002-05-11 08:57 [#00214871]
Points: 14550 Status: Lurker



wasn't referring to that, just the whole underage girls
thing


 

offline john is fast from sacramento (United States) on 2002-05-11 08:59 [#00214873]
Points: 638 Status: Regular



virtual child porn might interest a few nasty old men and
then they will look for the real thing and real children.
its like holding plastic meat that smells real in front of a
dog, eventually its going to try and find real food once it
gets its saliva going.


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2002-05-11 09:02 [#00214877]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to titsworth: #00214871



What are you talking about???? Are you on crack?


 

offline titsworth from Washington, DC (United States) on 2002-05-11 09:03 [#00214880]
Points: 14550 Status: Lurker | Followup to john is fast: #00214873



tru dat

taxi: i was mostly referring to things nano said, but also
something you said in the other thread.. nevermind tho


 

offline john is fast from sacramento (United States) on 2002-05-11 10:47 [#00214954]
Points: 638 Status: Regular



we dont agree with my thoughts on virtual child porn tax?


 

offline Monoid from one source all things depend on 2002-05-11 11:57 [#00214973]
Points: 11005 Status: Regular



No no no, our society shouldnt accept any form of child
pornography !


 

offline smokehammer from Saigon (Vietnam) on 2002-05-11 12:08 [#00214976]
Points: 1463 Status: Lurker



the biggest problem with legislation is that no-one seems
able to define what "Pornography" actually IS .

Apparently the US courts agreed on a definition whereby "any
depiction of sexual activity..." = porn.

arguably therefore , nudity is not porn 'per se'.

Although if you live in the kind of place where a woman can
be arrested for breast-feeding her baby in a park, then
absolutely ANY image featuring human-beings could wind you
up in jail. People need to chill-out !!!


 

offline Ubik from United States on 2002-05-11 14:58 [#00215064]
Points: 662 Status: Lurker



society should just spay/neuter all humans over the age of
25 or 30, especially males, and society would be a much
better place... things like child porn would disapear,
everybody would get along better, everybody would be
happier....

i know that sounds like a stupid joke, but why do you think
they do it to dogs and cats?
male sexuality gets more and fucked fucked up the older guys
get


 

offline smokehammer from Saigon (Vietnam) on 2002-05-11 15:43 [#00215071]
Points: 1463 Status: Lurker



legislating mutilation to make things better ?

Oh boy, hope you never have to make decisions that affect my
life :((


 

offline Inverted Whale from United States Minor Outlying Islands on 2002-05-11 15:47 [#00215072]
Points: 3301 Status: Lurker



I think what it boils down to:

Is CG child porn offensive? To most people, yes.
Should you go to jail for distribution or possession? no.


 

offline Laserbeak from Netherlands, The on 2002-05-11 15:57 [#00215075]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker | Followup to Inverted Whale: #00215072



The problem is that it does give people an excuse to say "I
didn't know it was real" And how are the police going to
check if it's real or not?


 

offline Inverted Whale from United States Minor Outlying Islands on 2002-05-11 16:05 [#00215078]
Points: 3301 Status: Lurker | Followup to Laserbeak: #00215075



Ok, that's going a bit beyond my statement, which assumes
that the porn is definitely CG.

We have a whole court system with juries and expert
witnesses which can help with situations like these. That's
what they are for.

It may come down to CG porn requiring a digital watermark
stating the time and place of production and a responsible
person, in a similiar manner to the laws (in the USA)
requiring the producers of adult movies to keep records of
the performers' ages.


 

offline Laserbeak from Netherlands, The on 2002-05-11 16:25 [#00215084]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker | Followup to Inverted Whale: #00215078



That's how I meant it, I agree with your statement but it's
going to be a huge obstacle trying to prove someone did or
didn't know about the actual content of the material.


 

offline Paco from Gothenburg (Sweden) on 2002-05-11 16:36 [#00215085]
Points: 2659 Status: Lurker



The real question is, will it be
InteractiveTM??

-P


 

offline recycle from Where is Phobiazero (Lincoln) (United States) on 2002-05-11 17:55 [#00215128]
Points: 39976 Status: Regular



IF YOU HAVE ANY AFFILITION WITH CHILD PORN OR YOU HAVE EVER
LOOKED AT IT......YOU SHOULD BE SHOT DEAD !!! NO QUESTION
ABOUT IT.

THATS THE SICKEST SHIT EVER !!!!


 

offline B3n from Manchester (United Kingdom) on 2002-05-11 18:07 [#00215140]
Points: 4700 Status: Lurker | Followup to recycle: #00215128



what do you class as child porn then


 

offline recycle from Where is Phobiazero (Lincoln) (United States) on 2002-05-11 18:09 [#00215144]
Points: 39976 Status: Regular



B3n---if you even have to ask that ??? thats gross...

obscene pictures of any child under the age of 18.


 

offline Laserbeak from Netherlands, The on 2002-05-11 18:15 [#00215151]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker | Followup to recycle: #00215144



So virtual 17 year, 11 months and 29 days old girls showing
their breasts is worse than a real 18 year old girl doing
fisting and S&M?


 

offline Paco from Gothenburg (Sweden) on 2002-05-11 18:18 [#00215156]
Points: 2659 Status: Lurker



Absolutely. Once we start dilluting the lines, we'll turn
into Japan.

-P


 

offline recycle from Where is Phobiazero (Lincoln) (United States) on 2002-05-11 18:20 [#00215160]
Points: 39976 Status: Regular



in my opinion it is....

18 year old women (although they are still just girls) is
the legal age under law

once a male or female reaches 18 then they are considered an
adult (althought few ever act like one) and they may do
whatever they want under the law

SORRY TO GET ALL DEEP ON YA, BUT CHILD PORN OF ANY KIND IS
FUCKING GROSSEST THING IN THE WORLD !!



 

offline urb from Trondheim (Norway) on 2002-05-11 18:24 [#00215169]
Points: 568 Status: Regular



this is a very interesting topic.

I believe in freedom of expression, no matter how extreme.

Abusing children to make porn is disgusting, but what is
wrong with cg child porn in itself? And then there's
the discussion wether pedofilia is moraly wrong or just a
cultural taboo (ok, flamebait :).

we're going to have to deal with a lot of this stuff in the
near future when the boundaries between real and cg
disappear.


 

offline Paco from Gothenburg (Sweden) on 2002-05-11 18:25 [#00215170]
Points: 2659 Status: Lurker



Note, Laserbeak, showing breasts is not pr0n. There are
plenty of books where children are photographed nude. Your
example isn't really fair. Nude photgraphy isn't a crime
(yet).

-P


 

offline Laserbeak from Netherlands, The on 2002-05-11 18:32 [#00215187]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker | Followup to Paco: #00215170



Are you dilluting the lines? Are you approving
child-erotica?


 

offline recycle from Where is Phobiazero (Lincoln) (United States) on 2002-05-11 18:35 [#00215192]
Points: 39976 Status: Regular



internet or pics or the real thing....CHILD PORN IS FUCKING
SICK....


 

offline Paco from Gothenburg (Sweden) on 2002-05-11 18:38 [#00215198]
Points: 2659 Status: Lurker



It was a comment on your example. S&M performed by a child
is not the same as showing breasts. No I'm not approving
anything.

-P


 

offline Laserbeak from Netherlands, The on 2002-05-11 18:46 [#00215215]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker | Followup to Paco: #00215198



...and that's exactly what B3n meant by saying "what do you
class as child porn then?" part 1: what's a child?, part 2:
what's porn? Many people consider nudity as porn.


 

offline recycle from Where is Phobiazero (Lincoln) (United States) on 2002-05-11 18:50 [#00215218]
Points: 39976 Status: Regular



nudity for adults over 18 is great...but under 18 its child
porn


 

offline Laserbeak from Netherlands, The on 2002-05-11 18:54 [#00215227]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker | Followup to recycle: #00215218



Not (yet) in my country....


 

offline B3n from Manchester (United Kingdom) on 2002-05-11 18:59 [#00215234]
Points: 4700 Status: Lurker



"B3n---if you even have to ask that ??? thats gross...

obscene pictures of any child under the age of 18."

But it *HAS* to be asked, or else the laws would be
meaningless.

You really think that someone who has sex with a 17 year old
a day under 18 is SICK compared to someone who sleeps with
an 18 year old? That's just idiotic IMO, the law should be
adhered to, to protect those vulnerable and younger but that
doesn't make everyone who breaks it sick even if they still
deserve to be punished. I mean, I agree that we have to draw
the line somwhere but I agree with laserbreaks point of
view.

I was drinking years and years before I was 18 but I didn't
overnight get all mature and be able to handle alcohol
responsibly but there does need to be a law to stop people
harming themselves.


 

offline smokehammer from Saigon (Vietnam) on 2002-05-11 19:30 [#00215268]
Points: 1463 Status: Lurker



recycle>

my parents have family albums of me & my sister playing
naked in our garden during hot summer afternoons aged around
3-8. thats nudity. thats under 18. So they have child porn
in the house ? I have to admit, if anyone outside the family
were shown pics of me as a kid, it wouldn't bother me a bit
whether they were naked pics or not...I have no complex over
my childhood innocence whatever.

I just think you're being over-zealous. Nudity is fine, just
draw the line at actual sexual activity and lewdness
involving kids .....IMO.


 

offline recycle from Where is Phobiazero (Lincoln) (United States) on 2002-05-11 22:57 [#00215410]
Points: 39976 Status: Regular



smokehammer ----yeah all parents took the "funny naked
babies in the bathtub" shot and thats fine , but making
profit or getting off on that is fucked up


 

offline Mr_Flappypants from Louisville (United States) on 2002-05-11 23:21 [#00215441]
Points: 2796 Status: Addict



you're saying pictures of nude people under the age of 18 is
bad, even if there is no sexual stuff having to do with it?


 

offline mylittlesister from ...wherever (United Kingdom) on 2002-05-11 23:37 [#00215457]
Points: 8472 Status: Regular



i think those "pampers" adverts for nappies, with naked
babies should be taken off tv!

they're ALWAYS on tv!


 

offline mylittlesister from ...wherever (United Kingdom) on 2002-05-11 23:38 [#00215459]
Points: 8472 Status: Regular



do they always hav to stroke the baby's bum?


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2002-05-11 23:45 [#00215472]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker



Hey, have you guys checked out this topic here?
Its rad!!


 

offline astrid-gil-botn from Londinium (United Kingdom) on 2002-05-12 00:05 [#00215489]
Points: 1649 Status: Regular



our socitey loves child porn - britnety spears s club
juniors - child pagents where little girls are dressed up to
look like promn queens it's out there ----


 


Messageboard index