I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Sep 9 2016 : 6:36PM
Great, so if a 19 year old wearing a t-shirt that says "I'm 16" walks into a a New Brunswick bar and shows her ID proving that she is 19, should she be denied alcohol? There is a real legal difference between someone being of legal age and someone not being of legal age. This law glosses over that, as do you. Child pornography without minors isn't child pornography. That isn't hard to understand at all. Child pornography involves minors. Adults are not minors. I do indeed have a serious issue. Adults not being recognized as such and treated as such by the law is a serious issue.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Sep 9 2016 : 6:51PM
The law is not interpreted in the courts that way and are not enforced in any way so your outrage is not neccessary. The people really screwed over by the laws in Canada are the BDSM community but again there's a huge gap between the laws passed in the late 80s/early 90s and the (complete lack) of enforcement in Canada. It will probably will take another case getting in front of the Supreme Court for that to be fixed on paper. As for the OP, as I said I bet it wasn't ageplay that got this snagged more likely it was Max's conviction and JM's near conviction for obscenity. Probably anything from either of them is flagged by US and Canada Customs. Edited by - BlackSix on 9/9/2016 7:09:13 PM
^^The point keeps going over your head and you're changing goalposts, this is not about alcohol or whatever, we're talking pornography here. Adults depicting child pornography is still wrong. The law in some countries sensible enough to see it that way agree. Jailbait fetishist disagreeing with this is their problem, not the law's or 99% of society(including the vast majority of porn consumers themselves). In this case the law doesn't have to change, those fetishists should simply seek help and treatment because they have the problem, not the law and the rest of us. Edited by - 2bollocks on 9/9/2016 6:54:42 PM Edited by - 2bollocks on 9/9/2016 6:58:42 PM
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Sep 9 2016 : 7:02PM
^The point keeps going over your head that to speak of child pornography where there is none makes no sense. I imagine that you'd have police storm movie sets in which the sale or consumption of illegal drugs is depicted. What about the depiction of underage drinking in Canadian film and television? Surely, it's still wrong and should be illegal. More examples can be used, but I think that you get the idea. I'm not surprised that you assume, based on nothing at all, that you represent the majority. What nonsense. Edited by - misspornUSA on 9/9/2016 7:03:04 PM
^Once again, changing goalposts by making straw man comparisons to lessen the severity of this fetish. You can keep comparing alcohol or weed issues to porn directors methodically portraying CP-like movies but you know exactly why there's no comparison. That's why you would never defend jailbait fetishes to anyone in real life outside the internet. If I'm not the majority you should go prove it, get a cam corder and walk down town and interview random people in the street so you can lecture them about why Canada should abolish this law so you can get off on 18 year olds acting like they are 12 year old getting raped, lets see how everybody would totally agree with you and not me. Good luck with that.
lol the outrage is on your sides, not me. Canada already agrees with my line of thinking, there's nothing to be outraged about for me. Unlike you who want them to abolish this law.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Sep 9 2016 : 8:01PM
Whether online or offline I am proud to defend the right of adults to roleplay, and jumping down from 18 to 12 is itself a strawman as you well know.
Edited by - misspornUSA on 9/9/2016 8:02:08 PM
[Link]
doug v Deactivated User
129 Posts 12/11
Posted - Sep 9 2016 : 9:56PM
edit posted 3 times by mistake Edited by - doug v on 9/9/2016 10:03:36 PM
[Link]
doug v Deactivated User
129 Posts 12/11
Posted - Sep 9 2016 : 10:00PM
posted 3 times by mistake, below is original post- Edited by - doug v on 9/9/2016 10:04:39 PM
[Link]
doug v Deactivated User
129 Posts 12/11
Posted - Sep 9 2016 : 10:01PM
Canada may deem this obscene or child porn if shes 18 or 30 acting immature and wearing diapers or mini skirt and in pig tails, but actually allows an adult TO HAVE REAL SEX WITH A REAL 16 year old girl, Now that is fuc'ed up. Oh i know why because law makers know women 18 to 40 will certainly win in that department. Edited by - doug v on 9/9/2016 10:29:54 PM Edited by - doug v on 9/10/2016 11:09:46 AM
Agree completely. The point is, whether they are adults or not, they are promoting the IDEA of having sex with children and using adulthood as a means around the law. That's why our law is the way it is. On the other hand, just to play devil's advocate - this gives an "out" for actual pedophiles to play out their fantasies in a controlled way with another consensual adult. But a true pedophile wouldn't be satisfied. And I don't like the idea of making this acceptable. On the other hand, the miniskirt schoolgirl fetish might just originate from boyhood and be reminiscent of some fond memories and may not have anything to do with pedophilia at all. But my honest opinion is that there's something wrong with the idea that men would want a woman to pretend to be younger than 18. If that's what someone's attracted to, perhaps they should take a step back and do some self-reflection.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Sep 9 2016 : 11:17PM
^The law does not only apply to adults who are portraying prepubescent children, so I don't know why you are emphasizing pedophilia as if it's the primary issue here. Neither is it common for pornstars to play prepubescent children. Most of the "miniskirt schoolgirl" ageplay scenes/movies do not involve pornstars pretending to be prepubescent children. Furthermore, I take issue with your assumption that to depict in porn is to promote.
I was playing both sides of the coin in a conversational way. Why do you get so defensive with everything posted? Do I really have to get that technical? The correct term is hebephilia in this case. But most people don't know what that means, so I thought I'd over-simplify and use the term pedophilia. How is depicting in porn not promoting?
I find legalize like this a bit funny: "For example, a 14 or 15 year old can consent to sexual activity with a partner as long as the partner is less than five years older and there is no relationship of trust, authority or dependency or any other exploitation of the young person." I know that the point of the "trust" clause is to make sure that people in authority don't abuse those under their authority, and the word probably has a legal usage in the contexts of financial Trusts that carry significant meaning in the law. Still, the plain reading of the text would make it seem that sex between two minors isn't rape. But if they are in a "relationship of trust", then it's rape. As bizarre as the "trust" language seems to a lay-person, I have more trouble with the clause under discussion that forbids performances by someone "who is, or seems to be, under the age of 18 years". I completely support laws that protect minors from a range of potentially abusive sexual relationships. Still, the "seems to be" language seems aimed at legislating the content of people's fantasy life. This seems like thought-crime to me. Sexual fantasy seems to me an especially personal and private form of thought, and I object to legislation restricting the right to fantasize. I recognize the distinction between media depictions and a fantasy that stays inside a person's head, but I consider free-speech doctrine as existing in part to protect the freedom to think. I object to laws that seem clearly designed to suppress particular kinds of thought that many people find offensive. I started watching porn decades ago, and one of my fondest memories from the Golden Age was watching Kay Parker's shower scene in Taboo. I get why the industry plays it safe with all the "Step-brother" "step-mother" stuff, but I also think it's ridiculous. Part of why "Taboo" worked was that they played up the conflict that Kay's character felt, and even the son's teenage "My cock will get hard for anyone who shows me her bare tits" thing worked as an element of character. They were able to tell a story with real conflict. The "step-" genre avoids the issue, and thereby avoids the conflict. I was so young at the time, that stories set in High School wouldn't have seemed unusual to me. Moreover, movies like "Fast Time at Ridgemont High" were mainstream, so light entertainment that explored themes of teenage sexuality was pretty common. Does anyone remembers if movies like "Debbie Does Dallas" were typically set in High School or College?
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Sep 10 2016 : 1:11AM
^^I explicitly agreed with something you wrote on your thread. I don't know that most of the "miniskirt schoolgirl" ageplay scenes/movies cater to those who have a sexual preference for minors in early adolescence. Why do you view depiction in porn as promotion? If I see a scene in which a woman cheats on her significant other, and I've seen hundreds by now, it's never crossed my mind that the director is promoting cheating. You have scenes in which a character is cheating with her boyfriend or husband's best friend, his sister, his brother, his dad, his mother, his daughter, his son, etc. Directors are promoting all of that? They're saying to consumers: "Go ahead and fuck your husband's mom"? Are directors promoting the idea that women in management should seduce their employees or that doctors should seduce their patients? Are directors telling prison guards to have sex with inmates and cops to have sex with perps? Are they endorsing sex between family members? Porn directors are promoting all of this?
Porn often deals in scenarios that most of us would find reprehensible in real life. Husbands cheat on their wives, wives cheats on husbands, bosses exploit their power to get sex, employees blackmail their bosses into sex, students trade sex for good grades, etc. I'm sure most of the members here who have masturbated to these scenarios don't actually support adultery, workplace sexual harassment, and sexual relationships between teachers and students. And it's not the intent of porn producers to promote those things as values that people should emulate. Rather, they're providing a fantasy. That's all it ever is for most people. EDIT: misspornUSA beat me to the punch. Edited by - Mister Fahrenheit on 9/10/2016 1:17:07 AM
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Sep 10 2016 : 1:26AM
^^^^Consider some recent content: The description of "Sex with My Younger Sister #2" reads "When it comes to sex for these young sluts, even their step-siblings are fair game!" Therefore director Paul Woodcrest is promoting sex between step-siblings? In "Licking Locked Up" two people in jail have sex and "moan extra loud and wake up the mean prison guard! But he's going to take pity on his naughty prisoners and give them the fucking they need so bad." So Brazzers is telling prison guards to have sex with inmates? Is that really the purpose of the scene? I see that there's a new lesbian scene on Twistys titled "Licking The In-Law", in which a young woman has sex with her mother-in-law. You're saying that the director is promoting that? Are you sure that's really what the director had in mind in shooting that scene? Edited by - misspornUSA on 9/10/2016 1:27:06 AM
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Sep 10 2016 : 4:13AM
I'm Canadian as well. Posting the link for all the forum members not just us.
[Link]
doug v Deactivated User
129 Posts 12/11
Posted - Sep 10 2016 : 6:57AM
I thought trust is suppose to be a good thing between people,OH,only when the other person is a woman. And at 14 the boy or girl are still in pubescent form, smaller bodiliy frame not fully grown as in 18 who reached post puberty adulthood. So this means the canadian law is actually allowing an 18 year old post puberty adult to engage in sex with a teen child but will send a 20 or 25 year old to prison. Canadian law is saying,"yes 18 year old you're deemed an adult and YES YOU CAN with a minor but ya can't buy porn of a 20 year old depicted as a minor." Edited by - d Edited by - doug v on 10/13/2016 10:49:20 AM
This quote pretty much wins the internet. The way that I see this thread is that some people (here and elsewhere) have difficulty distinguishing between what is thought and what is reality. In any society that touts itself as cherishing "freedom", only the latter should be punishable by law. The former never should be, regardless of how conventionally deplorable it may be considered.
^ Anti-porn crusaders regularly claim that we consumers are encouraged to have sex with minors by viewing porn where grown women dress in 'school girl' type attire. It may be the case that some few individuals are, but I doubt it. I think it more likely that pedophiles, like others who prey on their fellow man, just want to manipulate the so-called academics who come to them looking for confirmation of their theories. It amuses me that these fools believe they're too smart for the likes of Ted Bundy, when they're clearly being played.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Sep 10 2016 : 10:02PM
^
[Link]
doug v Deactivated User
129 Posts 12/11
Posted - Sep 10 2016 : 10:31PM
About this obscene thing, whats next canada is going to deem a woman's wet cun and wet butt-spread obscene if she didn't take a crap yet but really needs to(but doesn't but its bulgie and wet looking) or deem it obscene if she took a crap and wiped her butt a half hour ago before filming? So porn can't be based on legal every day life? Dudes if you think thats obscene, DON'T WATCH IT. You see if i was in control, i would not pass a law stating YOU MUST watch that. Edited by - doug v on 9/10/2016 11:36:45 PM Edited by - doug v on 9/20/2016 8:17:33 PM Edited by - doug v on 10/13/2016 11:00:19 AM
^Notice none of them are under 30 due to fear by the porn company, BUT this confirms that dvd cover has depicted them to be 32 to 54 looking and acting immature. What is the cause of a law maker to hate the fellow man for finding an 18 or 20 year old to be what they are, pretty and sensuous that CAN ONLY BE depicted as an 18 or 20 year old(because thats there age) looking and acting immature, the men law makers are the guilty cause due to developing hatred of men(misandry), although theres an INNOCENT root cause-(??). To prove misandry is very simple, they dont hate the woman whos acting and dressing sweet and innocent(when she is the one doing this), they hate the men who watch it. In nature's law,there is no sin and no wrong to find them to be what they are,although if you're too old for them, where they find you to be what you are, then you shouldn't touch, but you certainly have the right to look and watch a porno. Edited by - doug v on 9/11/2016 4:30:28 PM Edited by - doug v on 9/11/2016 11:26:10 PM Edited by - doug v on 11/12/2016 8:52:38 AM
"You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10
Posted - Sep 11 2016 : 4:31PM
[Link]
Mermaidprince Deactivated User
129 Posts 8/16
Posted - Sep 11 2016 : 6:20PM
If she look minor or show something pretending she less then 18 should be a law punishement. Dvd wih title of teen should be illegal. Productor should go in jail. We need to stop this stupid tittle.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Sep 11 2016 : 6:47PM
^No there shouldn't be. No it shouldn't be. No s/he shouldn't. No we don't.
[Link]
doug v Deactivated User
129 Posts 12/11
Posted - Sep 11 2016 : 8:18PM
Mermaidprince did not yet read all the comments i have posted. And whats this about the word teen in a dvd title? Teen can also stand for 18 or 19. Google, teen forming the names of numerals from 13 to 19. It really takes a misandrist to deem an adult dvd with the word teen in the title to be obscene or child porn because shes acting and looking sweet and innocent AS an 18 year old, she can't as a 17 year old or younger no matter what she wears. Misandrist, a person who dislikes, despises, or is strongly prejudiced against men because they, like nature sees males as secondary to females. There is no room for hate in canadian law based on misandry. Edited by - doug v on 9/12/2016 10:16:14 AM Edited by - doug v on 9/12/2016 10:18:23 AM Edited by - doug v on 9/12/ Edited by - doug v on 9/12/2016 12:51:52 PM
Many of these types likely don't care. It's all about "publish or perish" and/or getting some "recognition".
[Link]
doug v Deactivated User
129 Posts 12/11
Posted - Sep 12 2016 : 5:49PM
Men, especially older men 40-50 and over, are not pretty and sensuous, therefore they hate men who become sexually aroused while viewing legal porn of the pretty and sensuous, when men have that every right to find them to be what they are. Why? Because thats what they are, aren't they? Throw in the fact that men have intercourse with a woman strictly for sex, and women have it strictly for pregnancy or payment, then the misandrist mind of society and law makers come full circle. JUST ASK bruce willis in the movie armaggeddon as he chased down his daughter's boyfriend with a shot gun. I have sex with a woman strictly to give her oral then its 69 with female on top, or its outercourse, no anal no intercourse. Edited by - doug v on 11/12/2016 8:42:54 AM
Hazel Heart Interview
Posted - Sep 9 2016 : 6:36PM
