SomethingAwful starts campaign to label Reddit as a child pornography hub. Urging users to contact c

[JesterUK]

[QUOTE=Drsalvador;34672278]holy fucking shit you are [I]despicable.[/I][/QUOTE]

come on Drsalvador calm yourself

[Bawbag]

[QUOTE=The Mighty Boat;34672287]btw guys please take ur little slapfight to somewhere more private thanks[/QUOTE]

Blame thisispain, I just felt obliged to respond to his comments.

[QUOTE=thisispain;34672310]this has nothing to do with taking pictures of fucking 7 year old kids. this is about people who abduct and abuse children sexually.[/QUOTE]

How the flying fuck is that nothing to do with the sexual abuse of children?

[recl]

[url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1163134]Legal Child Porn Linked to Lower Child Sex Abuses[/url]

What have they done! Hide your kids!

[The Mighty Boat]

[QUOTE=Bawbag;34672314]Blame thisispain, I just felt obliged to respond to his comments.[/QUOTE]

lol you have no idea how little i care just stop

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=Bawbag;34672266]If she had really been raped; I would think she wouldn't have been so public about it.[/QUOTE]

how do you even qualify this. should someone not go public with their rape?
you're just dragging yourself into a hole.

[Bawbag]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34672330]you're just dragging yourself into a hole.[/QUOTE]

Like those child molesters who took those pictures you're defending.

seriously, how can you defend the sexualisation of children? It's disgusting.

[The Baconator]

[QUOTE=Zeke129;34671898]Enemy casualties:

[img]http://i.imgur.com/j0ii7.png[/img][/QUOTE]

How is a site that can arguably be worse than 4chan be so mainstream? I mean you see "share to reddit" buttons on tons of sites. For example on Steam

[Sickle]

It's dangerous to accidentally rate posts in this thread, holy fucking balls.

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=Bawbag;34672314]
How the flying fuck is that nothing to do with the sexual abuse of children?[/QUOTE]

because pictures of small children aren't child pornography until there's explicit sexual content within the pictures.

[The Baconator]

For example on Steam

[Alice]

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;34672008]No but /b/ especially is so tremendous and fast-moving that threads can last for quite a while "b4 404".[/QUOTE]
Wouldn't a faster moving thread on 4chan lock more quickly? I thought they got automatically deeletd after a certain amount of time or a certain amount of posts.

[Elecbullet]

[QUOTE=Bawbag;34672343]Like those child molesters who took those pictures you're defending.

seriously, how can you defend the sexualisation of children? It's disgusting.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34672310]this isn't even relevant.
what is relevant is the huge amount of child pornography made from sexually abusing a child and distributing it.

the idea of "So if I were to take a photo of you and your 7 year old sister, and then upload it for millions to splooge over" is fucking retarded and completely out of what the issue is.

there's a seedy subculture in the internet where people will sexually abuse children for the purposes of financial gain or simply a sick thrill. these kids are irrevocably harmed mentally and depending on the severity of the abuse they can also harmed physically.

this has nothing to do with taking pictures of fucking 7 year old kids. this is about people who abduct and abuse children sexually.[/QUOTE]

[quote]defending[/quote]

[Sickle]

snip

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=Bawbag;34672343]
seriously, how can you defend the sexualisation of children? [/QUOTE]

i'm not even defending anything, i'm correcting your ridiculous arguments that don't make any sense.

[Bawbag]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34672359]because pictures of small children aren't child pornography until there's explicit sexual content within the pictures.[/QUOTE]

[img]http://www.hightechidea.com/wp-content/uploads/beer_boobs_378580a.jpg[/img]

This isn't explicit sexual content. Now are you going to say that a picture of a child in a similar state isn't abuse?

[AngryChairR]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34672359]because pictures of small children aren't child pornography until there's explicit sexual content within the pictures.[/QUOTE]

That's not how it's defined.

[Elecbullet]

[QUOTE=Onyx3173;34672362]Wouldn't a faster moving thread on 4chan lock more quickly? I thought they got automatically deeletd after a certain amount of time or a certain amount of posts.[/QUOTE]

uhhhh there is an image cap, you can post with or without an image and once 150 or so images are in a thread, you can only post text, so porn threads die pretty quick when that happens. However most threads don't get anywhere near the "image cap".

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=Bawbag;34672383][img]http://www.hightechidea.com/wp-content/uploads/beer_boobs_378580a.jpg[/img]

This isn't explicit sexual content.[/QUOTE]

yes it is because it's nudity intended to entice.

[Trogdon]

[img]http://i.imgur.com/ufTHk.jpg[/img]
0.o

[AngryChairR]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34672407]yes it is because it's nudity intended to entice.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Paedophile;34672407]until there's explicit sexual content within the pictures.[/QUOTE]

???

You just contradicted yourself.

[Mattk50]

Uh, this isnt illegal and its not harming anyone. Its not even actually "cp" and is legal outside the UK.

Take your "moral censorship" elsewhere.

[Bawbag]

don't worry thisispain your condition is normal you just need to seek help so as you can be prevented from being harm to children.

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=AngryChairR;34672386]That's not how it's defined.[/QUOTE]

[quote]Child pornography refers to images or films (also known as child abuse images[1][2][3]) and, in some cases, writings[3][4][5] depicting sexually explicit activities involving a child.[6][7][8][9][10][11][/quote]

all those numbers are citations from wikipedia.
a picture of a boy with his sister isn't child pornography just because people jerk off over it. there has to be inherent sexually explicit activity.

now that i corrected you.

this goes to Rubs10.
child pornography almost always hurts the child because it almost always involves rape and coercion.

[The Baconator]

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/zVFQ8.jpg[/IMG]

Reddit's shirt makes sense to me now.

Wait they should be opposite.

[Laferio]

oh hey whats going on in this thre-..

oh.

>walks back out

[Zeke129]

[QUOTE=Bawbag;34672061]is he another complete left-winger like zeke who won't listen to sense when it smacks them in the face?[/QUOTE]

Yeah fuck that "zeke" guy and his acceptance of child pornography

why he hasn't even come into this thread to cheer on SA's efforts yet

what a fucker!

[LiquidNazgul]

[QUOTE=The Baconator;34672446][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/zVFQ8.jpg[/IMG]

Reddit's shirt makes sense to me now.

Wait they should be opposite.[/QUOTE]

They should have had Something Awful and Facepu---

...nevermind.

But in all seriousness, what's the source on this image?

[QUOTE=Zeke129;34672463]Yeah fuck that "zeke" guy and his acceptance of child pornography

why he hasn't even come into this thread to cheer on SA's efforts yet

what a fucker![/QUOTE]

I think he was referring to Zeke128

[Boozy&Bitter]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34672310]this isn't even relevant.
what is relevant is the huge amount of child pornography made from sexually abusing a child and distributing it.

the idea of "So if I were to take a photo of you and your 7 year old sister, and then upload it for millions to splooge over" is fucking retarded and completely out of what the issue is.

there's a seedy subculture in the internet where people will sexually abuse children for the purposes of financial gain or simply a sick thrill. these kids are irrevocably harmed mentally and depending on the severity of the abuse they can also harmed physically.

this has nothing to do with taking pictures of fucking 7 year old kids. this is about people who abduct and abuse children sexually.[/QUOTE]

My problem is whether or not it's unethical to take pictures of little kids at nude beaches/cultures that don't bother with clothes/nudist colonies and jerk off to them, something exempt from abuse and coercion.

[AngryChairR]

[QUOTE=thisispain;34672445]all those numbers are citations from wikipedia.
a picture of a boy with his sister isn't child pornography just because people jerk off over it. there has to be inherent sexually explicit activity.

now that i corrected you.

this goes to Rubs10.
child pornography almost always hurts the child because it almost always involves rape and coercion.[/QUOTE]

The Bill defines child exploitation material as material that, in a way likely
to cause offence to a reasonable adult, describes or depicts someone who is,
or apparently is, a child under 16 years—
(i) in a sexual context, including for example, engaging in a sexual
activity; or
[B](ii) in an offensive or demeaning context; or[/B]
(iii) being subjected to abuse, cruelty or tortur

1. That the image is pornographic;
2. That the image is grossly offensive, disgusting, or otherwise of an obscene character; and
3. That the image focuses solely or principally on a child's genitals or anal region, or portrays any of the following acts:

the performance by a person of an act of intercourse or oral sex with or in the presence of a child
an act of masturbation by, of, involving or in the presence of a child
an act which involves penetration of the vagina or anus of a child with a part of a person's body or with anything else;
an act of penetration , in the presence of a child, of the vagina or anus of a person with a part of a person's body or with anything else;
the performance by a child of an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive or imaginary);
the performance by a person of an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive or imaginary) in the presence of a child.

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=Zeke129;34672463]Yeah fuck that "zeke" guy and his acceptance of child pornography

why he hasn't even come into this thread to cheer on SA's efforts yet

what a fucker![/QUOTE]

[quote]at least zeke isn't functionally dead in the cerebral cortex [/quote]

seriously.