Quote:
|
Originally Posted by After Shock Media
Will not get into the CP angle because like I said CP is CP no matter how it is done if a minor is used.
There is vagueness in the revised statute as compared to the current statute. With the current statute simulated but not actual sex was exempt. (Before 1995 such companies like penthouse would never show penetration just dick close to it, after 1995 they would show penetration because the law clarified it and thus allowed them to do it.)
If you happen to watch showtime or HBO, you will notice they 2257 the material that is actually sexually explicit such as various episodes of Real Sex, where they do not 2257 any show or movie where the sex is simulated such as sex and the city where you would see pussy then see a guy go down on the pussy but never see mouth to pussy contact.
If using the reasoning that bodily fluids even semen are required by 2257 and always have been, why do we not see a 2257 disclaimer at the end of the movie there is something about mary? We clearly have a case of semen or possibly fake semen being used in production along with a masterbation scene.
I am not saying risk it, I am just talking opinion and how it is used and stated in the laws.
|
my point about CP is that there are definitions that seperate "a picture of a nude child" and "child pornography" and it revolves around the same relevent term "sexually explicit". it can be a sexually explicit photo without penetration. as i said, the definition is similar to 2257 definition sexually explicitl which defines sexually explicit photos of a minor. the point being that "sexually explicit" does not require penetration as far as i recall.
as for the rest of your argument.... i dont know. it doesn't matter why people do or do not do something, particularly when talking about pornographers who generally are largely an irresponsible bunch of assholes that would be flipping burgers if HTML was more difficult than it is. i could also ask a rhetorical question as well to make a point like; "if 2257 is really a law, why doesn't 90% of adult pornographers online comply with it fully?" that however, will not change the court and federal governments view which is all that matters in the end.
