Quote:
Originally posted by Rip
I think this is an important discussion, but a much bigger issue
I ask, how is this different than the teen underwear section in say your sears catalogue?
Well, I suppose that they don't charge money for membership...
But then what is different from teen fashion magazines?
They cost money and blatently display rather provocative under eighteen girls?
So then one might pose the argument is it better for a member of one of these sites to jack off to the non nude pictures, rather than go on a date with a 14 year old hooker?
|
The difference is that you can't stroll to your neighborhood porn store and get a copy of the SEARS catalog.
If these non-nude sites advertised and marketed their product in a different manner and stayed the hell away from the adult sections of the net, then perhaps they would be perceived differently. Sure, its perfectly legal, but they are taking advantage of some legalities that are yet to be strictly defined and getting away with peddling their "non-nude teenie fashion" sites to adult men who make up the majority of porn net surfers.
THAT is the difference. You can't prevent people from looking at little girls, its the context in which it is done. I really don't care because what is going to happen is the LAW is going to make this decision for us all..... hence the arrests that have occured.
I'll say it again..... if non nude sites as such are legal, then can somebody give me a clear definition of why that guy was arrested.....?? Pretty disturbing.