Nifty.org - Pedophilia Central?

[Skittles075]

I think you had better do some homework on that one. Sex does NOT have to be involved, and simple nudity is NOT protected. In fact, nudity isn't even a necessity here at JUB. Any posted photos of fully-clothed children in this forum can get the owners into some serious shit.

And what about the father who took pictures of his young sons sharing a bath? He took the film to a photo development place and the technician turned him in. He was arrested and charged for child porn.

Sex doesn't need to be involved. Otherwise, all solo porn in any magazine would not be considered porn.

Stop trying to defend child pornography. We 'oldies' here at JUB already know what that's all about.

I can careless about the rules at JUB; those are not important. In the real world, the law states that sex or sexually suggestive poses must be involved to fit the legal definition of child pornography. This is why naturism films are allowed in the United States.

http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/citizensguide_porn.html

I am not trying to defend child porn. I am defending the First Amendment; I never once said child porn was worth defending. It's vile and disturbing that adults would force children to lose their innocence. This affects me personally because I know firsthand the kind of damage this can do. However, I reject that innocent nudity, be it childhood or adult, should be considered porn. Solo porn magazines become porn when the pictures are sexually suggestive; describing the person in the picture spread in a sexually suggestive manner makes the picture sexually suggestive.

 

[Skittles075]

It should be considered child porn. Do you know where tumbler is located? I'd report them to state/province and national authorities.

Yay; go police the internet against cartoons!! Why not hunt down the real violators, that would make more sense and do more good.

 

[Skittles075]

If only the Supreme Court would rule that simple real-world nudity was protected by the First. <sigh>

In Oregon it's protected -- I camp nude regularly.



And those are fine. But if you've read through the thread, you'll have seen that we had at least one defender of rape porn. Authors of such stories should be prosecuted, regardless of the age of the characters.

Dude; it's a story, not porn. It's not real, just words. I don't like violent porn, myself, but if the stuff is obviously fake, the actors are 18+, and they tell us this in advance, then what's the problem.

 

[Skittles075]

A related topic...I recently was looking through tumbler.com sites and came across one that seemed to specialize in gay pornographic cartoons. But all the cartoons were about either adult males having sex with underage boys or father and son incest (where the son appeared to be underage).

How is this not considered child porn? It kind of turned my stomach when I realized what the content was.

Should a cartoon that features a character being murdered be reported? Should we report Stan Lee for portraying crime and violence in his comics? What about Alan Moore, Dave Gibbons, and John Higgins--their graphic novel, Watchmen, was beyond disturbing. Where do we draw a line on what is free speech and what should be censored?

 

[18AtLast]

I find the site really creepy. The few stories I read were almost all child rape fantasies, gross.

 

[gsdx]

I can careless about the rules at JUB; those are not important.

Go ahead then. Post some pictures of young boys. Go on. I dare you. Heck, post a picture of Harry Potter in the bathtub with Moaning Myrtle in the Goblet of Fire. Go on. You'll see how important the rules are.

Taste the rainbow.

 

[Skittles075]

Go ahead then. Post some pictures of young boys. Go on. I dare you. Heck, post a picture of Harry Potter in the bathtub with Moaning Myrtle in the Goblet of Fire. Go on. You'll see how important the rules are.

Taste the rainbow.

Why so hostile? I think you forgot to read the rest of that post, so let me put it in laymen's terms: You're trying to compare the rules of a private forum to the rule of law; this is not applicable. We are talking about laws, not the microcosm of JUB.

 

[Kulindahr]

Dude; it's a story, not porn. It's not real, just words. I don't like violent porn, myself, but if the stuff is obviously fake, the actors are 18+, and they tell us this in advance, then what's the problem.

Are you maintaining that written words can't be porn?!

 

[Críostóir]

I find the site really creepy. The few stories I read were almost all child rape fantasies, gross.

There are some OK stories on the site. But all it takes is running into ONE of the ones you describe to give you an aversion. Stomach-turning.

Should a cartoon that features a character being murdered be reported? Should we report Stan Lee for portraying crime and violence in his comics? What about Alan Moore, Dave Gibbons, and John Higgins--their graphic novel, Watchmen, was beyond disturbing. Where do we draw a line on what is free speech and what should be censored?

Well, I'd draw it in a different place than the current state of the law. But the current state of the law is what we have to deal with.

Currently, you not only can't have porn where the ACTORS are underage, you can't have porn where the CHARACTERS are underage. Even in writing. Current law is designed to protect IMAGINARY PEOPLE from exploitation. Current law is designed to protect CARTOON CHARACTERS from exploitation.

Current law is fucking ridiculous, which is what you get when you let fear write law.

But you know what? A prison sentence for violating a ridiculous law is just as unpleasant as one for violating a reasonable law.

Are you maintaining that written words can't be porn?!

He does seem to be saying that, doesn't he. It's pretty weird. Some of the most exciting porn I've ever read one-handed is pure text.

 

[Kulindahr]

Should a cartoon that features a character being murdered be reported? Should we report Stan Lee for portraying crime and violence in his comics? What about Alan Moore, Dave Gibbons, and John Higgins--their graphic novel, Watchmen, was beyond disturbing. Where do we draw a line on what is free speech and what should be censored?

I'll try this again: do those stories glorify the murderers, the criminals?

And has a link been shown in courts and research between such stories and actual crime?

As I said before, if these rape stories end with the rapist being shot by an angry boyfriend or sister, or even cop, or arrested and sent to prison, fine. Otherwise, according to the research, they are encouraging rapists.

 

[Kulindahr]

I find the site really creepy. The few stories I read were almost all child rape fantasies, gross.

And the authors should be prosecuted: stories glorifying rape encourage rape.

Try writing some stories making a guy who assassinates the president a hero and see what happens.

 

[Kulindahr]

Why so hostile? I think you forgot to read the rest of that post, so let me put it in laymen's terms: You're trying to compare the rules of a private forum to the rule of law; this is not applicable. We are talking about laws, not the microcosm of JUB.

Why so hostile?

You don't get it? really?

It's simple: you're defending rape and child molestation by defending stories that say those are great things. Those stories are fuel for rapists and pedophiles. It wouldn't be much of a stretch to say the authors are inciting crime -- which is a felony if the crime they're inciting is a felony.

 

[Críostóir]

You know, it occurs to me that some science fiction might fall into a weird gray area.

There was a Star Trek series called Voyager, in which one character came from a short-lived species that only lived about 4 years. Kes said things like "I'm not a child! I'm nearly two years old." She was a fully-mature adult, but the fact was she was a two-year-old having a sexual relationship with a character who was an adult by any standard (except arguably emotional maturity; Kes was the grownup in that relationship).

Then again, I've read a book where a completely artificial human based on a clone of a real person, with human (enhanced) DNA, was given artificial and implanted memories. The body was fully adult, and the person had adult maturity...but was only four years old in chronological terms.

And don't even get me started on time dilation.

 

[Kulindahr]

There was a Star Trek series called Voyager, in which one character came from a short-lived species that only lived about 4 years. Kes said things like "I'm not a child! I'm nearly two years old." She was a fully-mature adult, but the fact was she was a two-year-old having a sexual relationship with a character who was an adult by any standard (except arguably emotional maturity; Kes was the grownup in that relationship).

I remember that one kind of befuddled the official guardians of the airwaves. They finally decided, as I recall, that since Kes was not human and the viewers of Voyager were post-pubescent for the most part, it was okay.

I've often wondered what they would have done with an Isaac Asimov story -- written because a fellow author once said he couldn't write about sex -- where there were three genders, male, female, and incubator....

Not to even mention rishathra.....

 

[Críostóir]

I've often wondered what they would have done with an Isaac Asimov story -- written because a fellow author once said he couldn't write about sex -- where there were three genders, male, female, and incubator...

Naw, they were Rational, Emotional, and Parental. Sexist as all get-out, but consider when it was written.

 

[Kulindahr]

Naw, they were Rational, Emotional, and Parental. Sexist as all get-out, but consider when it was written.

I know, but I was trying to be descriptive for those who haven't read it.

Great book, BTW. The concept behind alien contact was part of the background behind my effective novel in the stories forum.

 

[ChickenGuy]

Ah yes, the Ocampa.

Then there was the episode with the alternate timeline where in just a few years, she had married Paris, and already had a middle-aged daughter, who had married Kim, and she had a grandson.

Actually she was going back in time from her death to her birth - I really liked that episode.

You know, it's a shame she left the show - she had already changed her hair to look middle-aged by Season 3, and I always had this scenario in my mind where she stayed on to the very end of the show in Season 7, and they could have done a wonderfully moving and touching emotional scene, where she died of old age in the finale.



What I actually came in here to say was....

Am I the only one who finds it deeply disturbing that a thread with the word 'pedophilia' in the title has got over 16,000 views?

 

[Críostóir]

I know, but I was trying to be descriptive for those who haven't read it.

Asimov was really trying not to make them one male, one female, and one Other. He failed.

 

[gsdx]

Why so hostile?

I'm not the one who is hostile. I was merely commenting on a statement you made to me. I shall remind you again what you said:

I can careless about the rules at JUB; those are not important.

Since you don't consider the rules of this forum 'important', I was challenging you to break the rule regarding underaged images and see how important the rules are. It would at least show me if you could or couldn't 'careless' [sic].

But, since I've come across others of your ilk here in this forum, I know it's a waste of my time to try to have a discussion with you.

So, I won't.

Have a nice day.

 

[Críostóir]

as far as pedophiles and child molesters are concerned, fuck the Eighth Amendment


castrate them and execute them

My heart is with you. My head knows that if we start there it would not end there.