• Drawing nude/semi-nude underage girls - is that also pedophilia?
    339 replies, posted
[QUOTE=HookJ;18652615]Nice working with you. [img]http://www.esquire.com/media/cm/esquire/images/high-five-0808-lg-76258126.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] :respek:
[QUOTE=Strider_07;18643149]They took down the CPPA but the PROTECT act was instated. # Prohibits computer-generated child pornography when "(B) such visual depiction is a computer image or computer-generated image that is, or appears virtually indistinguishable from that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (as amended by 1466A for Section 2256(8)(B) of title 18, United States Code). # Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the __MILLER TEST__of being obscene, OR are engaged in sex acts that are deemed to meet the same obscene condition. The law does not explicitly state that images of fictional beings who appear to be under 18 engaged in sexual acts that are not deemed to be obscene are rendered illegal in and of their own condition (illustration of sex of fictional minors). So it's sort of a toss-up, if you can argue that the characters depicted are fictional beings who only [I]appear[/I] underage.[/QUOTE] Ho boy... [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test[/url] This law has almost literally no power... The miller test is effectively asking the next three people to view it, "Is it obscene?". People will be hard pressed to find an unbiased jury that wouldn't go "Meh". The example on the wiki went after a porno joint, and lost amazingly simply because the store was delivering less porn than the pay-per-view at a nearby hotel... Honestly, Your "artist" is protected by the fact that on one hand, He can make it a 1st amendment "It's Art!" issue, or, on the other, he can dismiss the miller test as unreliable, or just take it and have the entire prosecution face-palm as it passes because they couldn't get enough priests on the panel. Or he could simply point out that anyone with more than a half-eye can see they are drawings, ergo they cannot be called "indistiguishable".
[QUOTE=Uberman77883;18652143]How do you know thats not his umbilical cord that hasn't been snipped yet.[/QUOTE] Because you can see his belly button also.
Art is always accepted. Ancient Greek paintings have nude men, women and children. Same with literature.
[QUOTE=saberwulf;18651885]people who like bestiality should still stay the fuck away from my state.[/QUOTE] holy shit aren't you quite the badass
I'm pretty sure Australia has the strictest laws with things like these. Wasn't there some guy who got arrested over some simpsons porn?
[QUOTE=jalit;18659421]I'm pretty sure Australia has the strictest laws with things like these. Wasn't there some guy who got arrested over some simpsons porn?[/QUOTE] Yeah but that's Australia, you're a fucking joke of a country.
though i don't think drawing loli's is right it's safer than stealing children of the street so whatever
Drawing naked children artisticly doesn't make you a pedo. However, drawing naked children sexually does. If it's drawn for your arousal, then yeah, you're a pedo.
[QUOTE=Cheesemonkey;18652329]yeah pedophiles don't do that. those are child rapists/exploiters not all pedos diddle little kids.[/QUOTE] You lived up to your title, son. I'm proud.
[QUOTE=plokoon9619;18652125]I don't wanna see a child's penis.[/QUOTE] Whose penis then?
this is bad
Lolicon is perfectly legal as of now in the united states. Also, just because someone like to fap to loli doesn't means he/she shows any interest in young children.
Link. This is getting quite dumb as we have NO clue what he's talking about.
[QUOTE=DDex;18670728]just because someone like to fap to loli doesn't means he/she shows any interest in young children.[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nile[/url] Not just a river in Egypt.
[QUOTE=garry;18646363]I'm not a pedo, I just don't think that drawing naked kids makes you one. In the same way that drawing dead jews doesn't automatically make you a nazi.[/QUOTE] This is a very good point.
I logged back on today and noticed: 277 new posts on my thread.
CP in my mass marketed product? [img]http://slog.thestranger.com/files/2007/05/Coppertone_girl.jpg[/img] It all depends on the context used to be honest.
The Greeks sculpted naked statues all the time. And those were statues...
[QUOTE=cakeonastick;18684319]The Greeks sculpted naked statues all the time. And those were statues...[/QUOTE] The Greeks also diddled little boys.
[QUOTE=lmaoboat;18684471]The Greeks also diddled little boys.[/QUOTE] Yeah ancient Greek politicians and respected members of society were known to have boy servants that they had sex with. The public knew of it, and it wasn't looked down upon. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Greece[/url]
That's because life expectancy in Ancient Greece was pretty low. Live free and die horny.
Not directly, but it's still pretty fucking sick.
[QUOTE=jcallan;18684751]That's because life expectancy in Ancient Greece was pretty low. Live free and die horny.[/QUOTE] Pretty much. After what I've heard the girls body is best at giving birth when they are around 16 years old. Pretty logical when their life expecatancy was what? 20-30?
[QUOTE=dgg;18685701]Pretty much. After what I've heard the girls body is best at giving birth when they are around 16 years old. Pretty logical when their life expecatancy was what? 20-30?[/QUOTE] Plus I heard older ancient Greek males appreciated a well proportioned body, whether it be male or female. Thin waste, big chest, etc., so it doesn't seem far fetched that it was normal back in the day.
ew lol
[QUOTE=dgg;18685701]Pretty much. After what [b]I've heard the girls body is best at giving birth when they are around 16 years old.[/b] Pretty logical when their life expecatancy was what? 20-30?[/QUOTE] Well, that kicks the current society's laws directly in the balls.
I can't be arsed into reading all nine pages of this thread, but it sounds to me like OP is referring to Teruchan. I say this because Teruchan has 6,800,000+ pageviews, is older than 18, and gets a lot of shit for being a pedophile. Even if it isn't Teru, it still represents a similar argument. Teruchan is extremely Japanese, and some of his characters look underaged (such as the small breasted girl who wears underwear on her head) and so he gets a FUCKTON of comments about how fucked up he is. Tons of heat about it. I think he's had drawings removed. He makes an extra point to have his translator point out that the characters in his works are 18+ just to calm it a bit. Now that I think about it, he actually made a new account for his erotic works of some of those characters just to draw some of the fire away. But if you check out his gallery, a whole ton of his drawings are clearly of adult women. And it is, in a combination of anatomy and drawing style, possible that an 18 year old girl could have small boobs. To think that someone is a pedophile because they draw girls who aren't built like hourglasses with FF cups is a little closeminded, but you see a ton of it on deviantART anyway. Do take note that I'm not sure it's who OP referred to, but it's definitely relevant. On the discussion that's been going on, I don't think it's wrong to draw kids erotically, and it shouldn't be illegal. Child pornography is justifiably illegal because of the damage it can cause to children, but just because someone is sexually attracted to children, they might still be decent enough not to bone them. We don't arrest people who draw graphic depictions of mass murders, unless they're of real people, perhaps. You can't (or shouldn't be able to) police thoughts and desires if the person isn't actually acting on them. Not that this argument is new or anything.
yah i masturbate to 11 year old girls b/c i like flat chests ur a freak op
It's a drawing. It isn't pedophilia.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.