Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

animated kiddie porn: legal or illegal?

17810121315

Posts

  • zerg rushzerg rush Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Ah, live action as in Broadway. I thought you meant live action as in cgi/animation -vs- live action.

  • emnmnmeemnmnme Heard about this on conservative radio:Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Adrien wrote: »
    Medopine wrote: »
    But hasn't violence against women been proven harmful to society? Would you support a ban of depictions of violence against women?

    If it has no aesthetic merit and doesn't express anything except "beating the shit out of women at random is fun", yes.

    So if it's child porn with a storyline, that's cool?

    Okay we'll do that.

    Michael Jackson molesting boys = wrong.

    An animated Michael Jackson molesting animated boys as a part of a scene in a peppy music video = ?

    easybossfight_zps4752c132.gif
  • Bad KittyBad Kitty Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    emnmnme wrote: »
    Adrien wrote: »
    Medopine wrote: »
    But hasn't violence against women been proven harmful to society? Would you support a ban of depictions of violence against women?

    If it has no aesthetic merit and doesn't express anything except "beating the shit out of women at random is fun", yes.

    So if it's child porn with a storyline, that's cool?

    Okay we'll do that.

    Michael Jackson molesting boys = wrong.

    An animated Michael Jackson molesting animated boys as a part of a scene in a peppy music video = ?

    I'm pretty sure that would be allowed as long as the animated boys aren't based on any real boys.

    While SCOTUS has declared unconstitutional bans on computer generated images, or of actors who "appear to be" minors engaging in sex, it allows bans on computer modified images of real children.

  • KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    And no I don't believe 100% of people who want to see a naked lady acting sexually go out to shows currently

    Pffh, who needs to do that when you have clubs and spring break?

    My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
  • redxredx East Bumblefuck, PARegistered User regular
    edited May 2008
    so you couldn't do something in the theme of a-ha's take on me, but with animated child love.

    All I've got is a snuggle hammer.
  • Bad KittyBad Kitty Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    redx wrote: »
    so you couldn't do something in the theme of a-ha's take on me, but with animated child love.

    Yup, roto-scoping a child's sexual act and somehow declaring it not "real child porn" wouldn't work. It's still a record of the continuing harm and exploitation of the child. I'll admit that it gets very silly, considering that drawing from memory an actual child engaged in sexual acts would be similarly banned.

    What makes that situation more difficult, and the point that VC was trying to make, is that drawing child pornography based on real children may not reflect or record any crime, but may still be harmful and exploitative to the child.

  • oldsakoldsak Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    I've peeked in an out of this thread and was surprised it got as much discussion as it did. I mean honestly, gamers arguing that something should be banned is Jack Thompson's wet dream.

    So VC's hypothetical: Someone films himself masterbating when he's 12, no one see's the video, and he sells it once it's 18.

    The logic for banning child porn now is that it abuses children and children can't consent. VC's hypo removes the abuse aspect. I don't think any prosecuter would prosecute the "star" of the video.

    However such video could still be banned because of the high risk for abuse. If something like this scenario were allowed, it would create a risk of people manipulating children to masterbate on film and then paying them for it once they're 18. There would be an evidentiary burden on the state to prove that the child didn't film the video himself or wasn't manipulated into filming the video himself which might allow too many cases of abuse to slip through.

    Animated kiddie porn, on the other hand, doesn't pose the same risk of abuse.

    How would you even enforce a ban on animated kiddie porn? Couldn't producers just include a disclaimer that states all animations that may seem to represent children actually represent adults who suffer from congenital growth hormone conditions? Even better, they're not human, they're a race of creatures that look like our children. The whole thing really seems kinda dumb.

  • lazegamerlazegamer Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    oldsak wrote: »
    So VC's hypothetical: Someone films himself masterbating when he's 12, no one see's the video, and he sells it once it's 18.

    For fun, here is a story that almost matches up with the hypothetical.

    http://www.usatoday.com/tech/webguide/internetlife/2004-03-29-child-self-porn_x.htm
    Spoiler:

    The difference being that the person who posted the image was not yet over 18. If she could be arrested at 15 for it though, I don't see why she couldn't be arrested at 18.

    Surprise.
    - Spy
  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    oldsak wrote: »

    Animated kiddie porn, on the other hand, doesn't pose the same risk of abuse.

    Most artists use models to draw.

    I don't know whether these artists use kids as models, but I think it's a risk not worth taking.

    Buy Pokemon Alpha Sapphire>
    Buy Pokemon Omega Ruby>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • AdrienAdrien Registered User
    edited May 2008
    RockinX wrote: »
    oldsak wrote: »

    Animated kiddie porn, on the other hand, doesn't pose the same risk of abuse.

    Most artists use models to draw.

    I don't know whether these artists use kids as models, but I think it's a risk not worth taking.

    Unless you can demonstrate somehow that that is the case for a particular image, however, it's not evidence of sexual abuse. Unlike real child porn.

    tmkm.jpg
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    RockinX wrote: »
    Most artists use models to draw.

    I don't know whether these artists use kids as models, but I think it's a risk not worth taking.
    There's a distinct lack of models in animation studios.

    Edit: Unless you think there's some guy modeling poses for spiderman or something.

    PSN: allenquid
  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    Chuck Jones used himself as a model for many cartoons, and people who knew him said the Grinch looked like Chuck Jones.

    That was back then, and I really don't know if the same techniques are used nowadays, but just picturing that happening is creepy enough for me to not agree with these practices.

    Buy Pokemon Alpha Sapphire>
    Buy Pokemon Omega Ruby>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited May 2008
    You don't have to like child porn. There's a difference between not liking and actively suppressing others.

    PSN: allenquid
  • AdrienAdrien Registered User
    edited June 2008
    RockinX wrote: »
    Chuck Jones used himself as a model for many cartoons, and people who knew him said the Grinch looked like Chuck Jones.

    That was back then, and I really don't know if the same techniques are used nowadays, but just picturing that happening is creepy enough for me to not agree with these practices.

    I don't look at a lot of fake child porn, but going on the manga I have seen... You think there's a risk these drawings are based on real people? Seriously?

    tmkm.jpg
  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    I've seen animated hentai, and I believe some women do look like they were drawn using models. Obviously not for their faces, but their bodies sometimes do have some realism in them.

    Ask me about animated child porn, though, and I won't be able to answer about this because I have never watched that, and I never will.
    Quid wrote: »
    You don't have to like child porn. There's a difference between not liking and actively suppressing others.
    I'm not really suppressing anyone here. But if I were, I'd have a good reason if they really used children as models.

    Buy Pokemon Alpha Sapphire>
    Buy Pokemon Omega Ruby>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    You don't need a model to draw realistic people.

    PSN: allenquid
  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    If you're experienced enough, then that's true.

    But you do need experience with angles and perspective and how to draw them. I think some comic book artists still use models, whether they're statues or real people.

    Buy Pokemon Alpha Sapphire>
    Buy Pokemon Omega Ruby>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    RockinX wrote: »
    oldsak wrote: »
    Animated kiddie porn, on the other hand, doesn't pose the same risk of abuse.
    Most artists use models to draw.

    I don't know whether these artists use kids as models, but I think it's a risk not worth taking.
    Except that posing children in sexually explicit positions in order to draw them is already illegal, we don't need a law saying "it's illegal to draw child porn" to stop people from doing that.

    And again, how exactly do you determine how old the people in the drawing/animation are?

  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Dude, I have no idea. I am just giving my opinion here and everyone jumps all over me.

    Buy Pokemon Alpha Sapphire>
    Buy Pokemon Omega Ruby>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • zerg rushzerg rush Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Adrien wrote: »
    RockinX wrote: »
    Chuck Jones used himself as a model for many cartoons, and people who knew him said the Grinch looked like Chuck Jones.

    That was back then, and I really don't know if the same techniques are used nowadays, but just picturing that happening is creepy enough for me to not agree with these practices.

    I don't look at a lot of fake child porn, but going on the manga I have seen... You think there's a risk these drawings are based on real people? Seriously?

    Based on real children? Bah! I'm more concerned about how they got the tentacle monsters to model for them.

  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    The problem is that your opinion was:
    RockinX wrote: »
    I don't know whether these artists use kids as models, but I think it's a risk not worth taking.
    Which presumably meant banning animated child porn.

    PSN: allenquid
  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    The problem is that your opinion was:
    RockinX wrote: »
    I don't know whether these artists use kids as models, but I think it's a risk not worth taking.
    Which presumably meant banning animated child porn.

    Which is still an opinion. One that has no say on whether a ban is enforced or not, for that matter.

    Buy Pokemon Alpha Sapphire>
    Buy Pokemon Omega Ruby>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Well for one, an opinion can still be dumb. More so, I don't think it's going far for people to think that if you'd want a ban you'd want it enforced.

    PSN: allenquid
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    RockinX wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    The problem is that your opinion was:
    RockinX wrote: »
    I don't know whether these artists use kids as models, but I think it's a risk not worth taking.
    Which presumably meant banning animated child porn.

    Which is still an opinion. One that has no say on whether a ban is enforced or not, for that matter.

    Um, as Quid says, it is only reasonable to assume that arguing in favor of a ban is also arguing in favor of enforcing the ban. It is not very reasonable to argue in favor of laws that you don't expect to be enforced.

    steam_sig.png
  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    My opinion is not dumb. It's different from yours, which isn't the same. I don't have a problem because I haven't seen that kind of stuff in my country, but if it's proven that the artists do use children as models, then I'm going to be pissed off.

    Just to make this clear:

    I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PROVE AN ARTIST USES CHILDREN AS MODELS, NOR DO I WANT TO BE THE ONE TO JUDGE THAT. But if it were to be proven, then I want that law to be enforced in every country that can enforce it.

    Buy Pokemon Alpha Sapphire>
    Buy Pokemon Omega Ruby>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    No more than they do now because that's already illegal.

    Edit: That's nice. If it were proven that cat hair caused brain tumors I'd want them made illegal to.

    PSN: allenquid
  • DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    RockinX don't get overly defensive in a D&D thread. That said most of us are still waiting for a reason to make it unlawful. Also if I remember the OP, this was being discussed in Britain, wasn't it? Does anyone have knowledge/experience with Britain's freedom of speech/expression laws?

  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    ... Ok, I think I should have just stayed in G&T....

    Buy Pokemon Alpha Sapphire>
    Buy Pokemon Omega Ruby>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    RockinX wrote: »
    ... Ok, I think I should have just stayed in G&T....
    That's not necessary at all. But you should know that if you post here your views will be challenged and you're expected to justify them.

    PSN: allenquid
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    RockinX wrote: »
    ... Ok, I think I should have just stayed in G&T....

    The thing is, there should be a clear reason for banning something. That it is "indecent," for instance, is not a valid reason, and is one that was dragged through multiple pages of this thread. I mean, banning something, anything, is a big fucking deal. Having access to as many things as possible - especially media - is one aspect in which this country has historically defined our concept of "freedom." So I think banning something should be taken very seriously and should only be done when the reason is sufficient. Some people in this thread have just been waving their hands at the issue like banning something isn't really a decision of consequence, and it is; it is of grave consequence.

    So you may have just wandered in at a bad time. Nobody's trying to ostracize you in this thread, but you really need to present a logical and reasonable argument to ban something and I know I'm only going to be convinced if it can be proven that the production of animated child pornography harms society or specific children. So, yes, if a child is used to model for animated porn, that should be unlawful. People are pointing out, though, that that already IS unlawful. So it is not a good argument in favor of banning all animated child pornography.

    steam_sig.png
  • DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    I'm sticking with my original question of which countries laws are we going by. The OP is talking about it being discussed in the UK which wouldn't have the same laws as the USA.

  • RockinXRockinX Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Drez wrote: »
    So you may have just wandered in at a bad time. Nobody's trying to ostracize you in this thread, but you really need to present a logical and reasonable argument to ban something and I know I'm only going to be convinced if it can be proven that the production of animated child pornography harms society or specific children.

    Well, you're used to it, I'm not.

    I guess I'll just have to lurk these regions more often.

    Buy Pokemon Alpha Sapphire>
    Buy Pokemon Omega Ruby>
    NNID: RockinX. 3DS FC: 2148-9166-6811. In-game name: アルヘニス. SV: 2746
    Free flawless Dittos
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited June 2008
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    RockinX don't get overly defensive in a D&D thread. That said most of us are still waiting for a reason to make it unlawful. Also if I remember the OP, this was being discussed in Britain, wasn't it? Does anyone have knowledge/experience with Britain's freedom of speech/expression laws?

    By my understanding from trying to do research earlier, Britain doesn't allow half the shit we allow in porn. Example, bondage and penetration in the same scene = rape on film in British courts regardless of consent. From what I read earlier.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • mantidormantidor Registered User
    edited June 2008
    Glyph wrote: »
    1) Child pornography, either actual, animated or using "young-looking" actors, could still help to reinforce the pedophilia. The consequences of making such material accepted in society are simply impossible to predict, blurring the line between fantasy and reality as the technology improves.

    This is something that I think hasn't been adressed enough. Child porn producers could apply some effects and tell the thing is animated when it's not. How do you fight against that? how can you tell what is real and whats not as has been said when technology makes it harder and harder to make a difference? we all know that Tom Hanks really didn't shake hands with John F. Kennedy in Forrest Gump but thats only because of external evidence, if we only had the video we would had to invest considerable effort to tell if its real or not, and even then it might be impossible.

  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    That's a lot of money to sink in to special effects for a remarkably small market. Especially when one could avoid it all and just get it animated.

    PSN: allenquid
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Is there any reason to believe that any 3d porn made for an extremely niche market will ever look like anything more than crappy poser models?

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    mantidor wrote: »
    Glyph wrote: »
    1) Child pornography, either actual, animated or using "young-looking" actors, could still help to reinforce the pedophilia. The consequences of making such material accepted in society are simply impossible to predict, blurring the line between fantasy and reality as the technology improves.

    This is something that I think hasn't been adressed enough. Child porn producers could apply some effects and tell the thing is animated when it's not. How do you fight against that? how can you tell what is real and whats not as has been said when technology makes it harder and harder to make a difference? we all know that Tom Hanks really didn't shake hands with John F. Kennedy in Forrest Gump but thats only because of external evidence, if we only had the video we would had to invest considerable effort to tell if its real or not, and even then it might be impossible.
    Every part of this applies equally to any depiction of violence.

    Also you've pretty much failed at the psychology of pornography - why the fuck would any of the presumed target audience for real child-porn want to watch something that looks animated.

    And more importantly, why go to all that effort in the first place to still do something which will get you put in prison forever.

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Titmouse wrote: »
    Is there any reason to believe that any 3d porn made for an extremely niche market will ever look like anything more than crappy poser models?
    Well eventually we'll have the fantasy world where we have VR that looks like The Matrix and be able to manage most harmful deviants with computer simulations.

  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Titmouse wrote: »
    Is there any reason to believe that any 3d porn made for an extremely niche market will ever look like anything more than crappy poser models?

    Yes. Technology will continue to improve. It is feasible to think that, given a long enough timeline, technology will improve to the point where it will be possible to create a video forgery with virtually-created beings that is completely undetectable from a real video with real beings, and is also cheap and easy enough for porn companies to use. It is unreasonable to think that this will happen in the next 5, 10, 20, or even 100 years. But you said "ever" and yes, I think that at some point in the next 5,000 years or so, this kind of technology will exist.

    But I don't think it is responsible to legislate against future possibilities. Right now, such technology does not exist. As such, the production, dissemination, and possession of animated child porn causes no identifiable harm or abuse. If technology gets to that point and one could reasonably assert that the inability to detect real child porn from fake child porn causes harm or provides a climate where harm is protected and thus propagated, then it should be banned. But talking about it now is nothing but academic.

    steam_sig.png
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Titmouse wrote: »
    Is there any reason to believe that any 3d porn made for an extremely niche market will ever look like anything more than crappy poser models?
    Well eventually we'll have the fantasy world where we have VR that looks like The Matrix and be able to manage most harmful deviants with computer simulations.
    Tangential question: Should it be illegal to rape virtual beings that aren't based on a real life model?

    And also: Should it be illegal to rape virtual ADULT beings that ARE based on a real life model?

    This is assuming future virtual beings could be interacted with.

    steam_sig.png
Sign In or Register to comment.