Tobin, the NVD, the socalled pedophile "party", is mostly a PR-gag, a phantom. These are little more as a dozen idiots, not more. The party retreated from the last election, as far as I know, they received under 0,1% in the poll forecastings. Ive had a lot of trouble with some knuckleheads from the NVD. I dont like pedophiles at all, but you wrote: "The party seeks to lower the legal age for sexual relations in the Netherlands from 16 years to 12 years, (....), bestiality(...)." It looks like you arent well informed, because bestiality is STILL legal in the NL ( the new law still hasnt passed the 2nd chamber ), we HAD a 12-year old minimum age for sexual relations for decades, until the law was changed on 1st Oct. 02 ( § 240 ). We had a minimum age of 16 for porn, not 18, this was changed too, because Uncle Sam and the EU, and their dutch marionettes, dont liked it too. In fact, porn with 15, originating from Denmark, was tolerated too. Police and justice authorities only confiscated material 14 and younger. I am for a 14 age minimum age in porn, like Germany had until 3 weeks ago. Only pornographic material with minors UNDER 14 was legally defined as "childporn" in Germany. 14 surely is a bit young and debatable, but it shouldnt be higher as 15, because these will move several hundreds of legal danish teen porn movies into illegality. But for Uncle Sam, even two 17 1/2 girlfriends loving each other is "childporn". But you can still have sex with 16 in the USA, or in the Netherlands. Only if you film or photograph it, its "childporn".... Is this making sense ? No ! Police and justice authorities should concentrate on real crime, where small children are molested and raped, not teenagers enjoying sex before a camera. The 14 year minimum was defended by the old conservative-liberal CDU/FDP german government until 1998, these werent "pedophiles", or ? If someone here can understand german, I can send a pdf file with the reply of the old german government, from 1992, defending pornographic material with Teenagers ( 14-17 years ). What has changed in the last 10,15 years ? Nothing, only Uncle Sams and the EUs pressure. Thats all. For a very short time, even the USA had a 16 years minimum in some states, this was before a common federal law was passed. ( From 1976-79 ) And look at the strange case above. On the one hand, US authorities cry "childporn", even if a 17 1/2 year old girl is shooting nude pictures of herself and distributes these pictures ( for free ) on the net - on the other hand, for 10 years, they dont did anything against the distribution of danish "childporn" ( in fact teenporn, all models were 15 years and older ), they did nothing for 10 years, only the video dealers and the customers are in trouble, but not the approximately 50 feds, who slept or even did this on purpose ! Edited by - Caroline-NL on 7/14/2008 10:09:03 AM
The internet, for one. There needs to be a uniform legal age that applies everywhere for porn. I don't personally care what it is but it seems like 18 is the age most people agree on. The problem is that if porn featuring people who are under the legal age of consent in America gets made in Germany or the NL or wherever, it ends up on the internet and people in the US end up downloading it. Possibly not even knowing that what they're downloading is considered CP in the US. Most adult web sites have a 2257 statement. But since a lot of this porn is produced outside the jurisdiction of the US, what consequences do they face if they're lying? You see. 18 is the law here. People sit down at their computers and they look at online porn and half the time, there's really no way to know where that porn was made. And when it comes right down to it, it can be hard to tell the difference between a really mature 17 year old and an 18 or 19 year old. Having different minimum ages for porn in different countries is a minefield for people interested in surfing legal adult porn. I can pretty much tell you nothing's going to change on the US side. In other words, the minimum age for porn is not going to go down. If anything, it will go up. Like I said. The problem is that if it gets made, it ends up on the internet. Some of us don't want to challenge the age of consent laws. We just want our legal adult porn. I don't need to see 15 year olds in porn. 18 is fine. But we need a standard that applies everywhere.
However, if politicians in Europe or the Netherlands decide to change their laws, don't blame it on the US ... it's your problem to take up at election time. Personally, I think the "legal porn age" in the US should be something closer to 21. Also, it's very well known that Amsterdam is a huge haven for pedophiles ... why is it such a good idea to have 14 year olds doing porn in such a climate? Sorta creepy ...
I favor keeping the age at 18 or changing it to 21. I think that many teenagers below that age aren't fully aware of what they are going to be getting themselves into and haven't thought about the bad parts of going into the adult industry, just the good parts. Don't take this wrong and think that I am against the adult industry, I just know there are bad aspects to it and hope that the actresses and actors that go into it have thought it out first.
Agreed. Of course you can blame me for being prejudice or conservative or whatever, but I have a concern about the girls involved. An age like 21 would (I think) reduce a lot of the "mistakes" that girls make and regret later. You can argue that it reduces their freedom of speech, and I suppose it does to a certain extent, but I am no absolutist. If it reduces enough bad consequences or tragedies, I'm for it. I don't pretend to know where to draw the limit but I think such a limit could be be sensible.
If someone tries to "convince" you with a gun on your head, is this "your problem" too ?Haven or heaven ? It was - until mid 85, when laws against childporn were passed. From your US view, its logical, that you are for a 18 year minimum age. But the legal age was lower - for nearly 3 decades - in almost all european countries. So if these countries adapt the US law, its fine for you, bad for us, because now quite a lot of legal porn is "illegal content". Some of you are for a 21-years minimum age. If this would happen, almost all normal porn consumers would be treated as criminals. Because this site promotes eeeeevil porn movies with 18-20 year old "minors", you should leave this site at once........
No, if the age for porn is raised to 21 then movies made prior to the change in age can be grandfathered since they were made previously under legal circumstances. The difference between that and the movies you are talking about is that they were never legal here. With the global marketplace I can see other countries trying to conform to the stricter legislation as they can sell to more consumers in more countries that way.
I will predict the minimum age will go down before it goes up to 21. The minimum age for porn is federal law. Any change would also have the minimum age for military service attach too it. And government and the military is not going to give up there 18 year olds.
I've met some fairly stupid 49 year olds. Just to be safe, you should probably raise the age to 50. While you're at it, make this the age for driving licenses too. Cars are more dangerous than video cameras. Edited by - licker on 7/15/2008 7:31:59 AM
I'm sure I'll get some flack for this but I don't care - I've always been of the opinion that the legal age of consent in America should be lowered to 14. Teens these days are already having sex so why criminalize their activities? As long as they practice safe sex (condoms, birth control, etc.) what's the harm?
Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son. 1048 Posts 7/04
Posted - Jul 16 2008 : 4:21AM
I remember back in the late '70's when I first became porn-legal there was a European mag in the store I went to called "Fifteen" magazine. All the models were supposedly fifteen years old. I really couldn't tell if they were or not. They weren't dressed up like the fantasy teens in gonzo porn are nowadays.
Don't get me wrong: I'm NOT advocating the sexual abuse or exploitaion of very young children, such as infants, toddlers or preteens. I'm just saying that many teenagers these days are sexually active whether we like it or not so why not just accept it and give them the information they need to avoid the problems their activities are sure to cause living in our so-called "civilized' society. Edited by - Asmodeus on 7/16/2008 4:41:30 AM
If the age was raised to 21 we would miss out on Madison Ivy, Natasha Nice, Carmen McCarthy, Sabrina Starr, and other lovelies. Also while, the age should stay at 18. I always find it odd that if a person can die in Iraq and vote at 18, (or hell be a pornstar) they can't legally buy a drink. The drinking age should be 18, hell if we trust you to pick the leader of the nation, you can at least be trusted with a beer. But then I live in a dry county where occassionaly people are still arrested for "bootlegging" complete with pictures of police posing next to stacks of confiscated beer. Perhaps that last bit was a little off topic, but its almost bed time folks.
Federal law lowered the minimum drinking age to 18, when Congress lower the adult age to 18 from 21. Then the federal government encouraged and strong armed some states to raise the minimum age for Alcohol consumption to 21. Of course it's Unconstitutional but know one wants 18 year olds to buy and consume Alcohol. But if the US goes back to the draft, you will see this come up again. The military and porn needs 18 year olds.
I agree with most of the observations. But the porn age should be 20/21, and you shouldnt be in Iraq before you are that old either. I don't have a problem with voting or drinking at 18, but things that can seriously harm you physically or emotionally should have a higher age limit. It's just my personal opinion, as I think the potential damage from dying or being injured in war, or being abused/misled into doing something you regret in a not-so-clean industry could be serious.
^You can be potentially injured or harmed from alcohol as well. It could be argued that an ill-advised vote could be potentially harmful. So if war service were raised to 20/21 then the other two priviliges (or right in the case of the vote) should be as well. But I can't really see calling a 20 year old a 19/20 year old a "minor" nowadays. But that's just one man's opinion.
As mentioned in my post (and off this topic I guess) my state still has "dry counties". It makes for weird laws. For example: you can buy a beer in certain restaurants but not in a store or club. You have to drive over to another county to get alcohol. A stranger thing is that to circumvent this law is that if a town became newly incorporated it could decide if it would be "wet" or "dry" even in a dry county. So there are "wet spots". There is a town in the NW of the county with 105 people (it has city limits, a mayor, etc) that only exists to sell alcohol. There are seven liquor stores in that town alone. The legal age should remain 18 for porn, not older, and certainly not younger sorry if most of this post was tangential to the larger topic. I just thought it might add some flavor to the stew.
Any country that was willing to let my 18 year old ass tote a machine gun and kill or die on behalf of the rest of you should let same 18 year old drink and make porn. All the rest -- um. I dunno. What was the question again?
That was why the law was changed by congress. Rather than raise the minimum age for military service to 21, they gave 18 yr olds adult status. After Vietnam and we went to all voluntary army. The ruckus died down and drinking was taken away from a group of legal adults. By the way if your 18 you can drink on military bases. Edited by - Shagdog on 7/16/2008 9:29:58 PM
Raising the drinking age has not stopped any teenager from drinking. All it does is stop them from sitting on a bar stool next to you. Teenage sex and drinking are rampaged criminalizing it doesn't stop anyone from drinking or fucking. Parental influence has some effect, but will only go so far. All criminalizing sex and drinking has done is stop mature responsible people from having any contact with teenagers for fear of being accused and convicted. The low life's and scum bags are still having contact and influence and most are getting away with it.
It didn't stop me from drinking when I was 11. And I sure didn't buy it. Oddly, I didn't even really like it and still don't. I just drank because I wasn't supposed to. Soon as I turned 21, it lost all appeal.
I second that opinion. Teenagers may make a lot of stupid decisions, but they can choose what they want to do with their bodies (whether or not they want to have sex, and with whom). For porn, 18 is fine with me in the US, but other countries shouldn't have to change their laws. Americans shouldn't be so paranoid about having minors close to 18 in porn. If an American downloads a European film with a 16 year-old, he should not be guilty of a crime, as long as the material was made in conformance with the laws of the country in which it was produced. But that's too rational for lawmakers and the general American public to handle. In any case, there definitely should be an internationally accepted cut-off to protect children. Wanting to have sex with a 15 or 16 year-old girl does not make someone a pedophile. It means you're a man. Pre-pubescent girls, that's another story altogether.
What? No! Hell, no! Why do you get to impose your views and your values on another culture halfway around the world? What's next? A uniform definition of marriage everywhere? A uniform definition of God? What makes *your* view, *your* culture so superior that you get to force it down the throats of people of a different culture, in a different nation?English is the language most people seem to agree on to. I guess it's a good things that Native American children were forced to cut their hair and attend schoolhouses where they were beaten for speaking their native language. Might doesn't make right. Even in America, the minority view has rights.This is a bullshit argument. I have NEVER, EVER heard of anyone *accidentally* downloading child porn. Where the hell do you go where you "accidentally" find kiddie porn??? In China, it's illegal to download text that criticizes the Chinese government, should we abide by their laws too? After all, something you write in America, Germany or the NL may be illegally downloaded by someone in China.Viewing a woman's shoulder or ankle is considered pornographic in Saudi Arabia. What makes your view superior to theirs? If we are going to have one worldwide standard, shouldn't it be the most conservative view that offends the least amount of people? By that reasoning, shouldn't all women, all over the world be forced to wear burqas? The problem is, your American pornography ends up on the Internet. Saudi Arabian men may be downloading a clip, thinking they're watching the news when suddenly, the news caster starts stripping off her clothes and the next they know some guy is plowing her up the ass screaming "Oh! That's NASTY!" There needs to be one standard that applies everywhere. It's a good thing you don't care what that standard is.
18 is ridiculous for hardcore To be not able to buy a beer or rent a car but be able to have Max Hardcore put you through the paces for the enjoyment of your hometown, for a few grand, is a mistake that should nnot be made until the full age of adulthood. Not that I won't watch it, of course. :-)
Following that rationale one can purchase anything where it is legal and have it brought in here. If Iran legalizes the sale of dirty bombs do you want them brought in this country legally. If Zimbabwe legalizes 12 year old white slaves do you want them brought in here? I think material coming in should meet the current US laws. And if you want to speak with someone about trouble importing stuff talk to some of our members from the UK.
Common sense would make a clear distinction between an internet porn film, deadly explosives, and the enforced enslavement of another human being, no? You also neglected to quote my next sentence, that there should be an internationally accepted cut-off to protect children. The problem lies in the grey area with sexually mature teenagers. While it may be a crime to produce and distribute a porn film with a 16 year-old in the US, prosecuting an American for (perhaps unknowingly) downloading a European film with a 16 year-old starlet in it seems absurd to me, and allows too much room for an abuse of power. The internet is just much more difficult to police than, say, smuggling in DVDs through the mail or in one's luggage. There should be some legal leeway, IMHO.
In case you haven't noticed, I don't make the laws in the US. Our government makes the laws. But I have to obey them. And if some yahoo puts underage girls on the net halfway around the world and I land on that site, I could get into a lot of trouble (And it doesn't matter how I got there). This goes for anyone living in the US and anywhere else where the AOC for porn is 18.I don't as far as I know. I'm very careful about where I go online. But 17 years old and 8 months is considered child porn here. You wouldn't necessarily know just by looking if a girl is underage. But the penalty is the same. It's against the law. Whether or not it should be is another matter. I have no control over that. And people have accidentally downloaded the worst CP. I don't know how often it happens but it can. Just viewing it is the same as downloading it. If you click a lot of links, it can happen without you having actually searched for it. Many legal adult porn sites redirect you to other sites. Which can then direct you to other sites. Pretty soon, you have no idea where the hell you are. Anyone who surfs adult sites should know this. If people are making porn with what would be underaged girls here in various other countries, our government will hold us accountable for it if we download it whether we deliberately went looking for it or not. Even if it was completely unintentional. I don't think that's fair but that's the law. I can't argue with you about China and Muslim women and all that. I could but I just don't have the energy. I was simply trying to point out that this stuff can have unintended consequences.
They were at least 16 year old - this was the former legal age in Sweden, where the material was produced. But your last sentence is very important for all US people criticizing this. Almost all porn movies/mags with teens from 15-17 produced in northern Europe, werent as artificial or pictured such an estranged form of sexuality, as seen in many US porn productions. Most productions - of course not all - reflected real teen sexuality, instead of fantasy and gonzo porn. A 15-17 year old girl having sex with her real boyfriend, or having sex with girlfriends, was more typical as extreme porn. Surely, some were extreme using the "US obscene standard", e.g. golden showers. But I cant remember one single movie, where a teen girl participated in a form of gonzo. You should keep in mind too, that the northern european societies prepared their teenagers much, much better for sex life. You cant transfer this 1:1 to the USA or vice versa. And thats my critique.
Is this really true ? I doubt this. Before there was a federal law against childporn, some US States had a 16-year-minimum age for porn too. ( From 1977-79 ) Movies produced in this time span, would be illegal after 1980. Just look at the ballyhoo around Traci Lords. European countries have different strategies executing these laws. But if I look at Germany, the country that had the lowest minimum age for pornographic materials in Europe - for 35 years ! - 14 years of age - now criminalizing legally produced material with 15-17 year old teens makes no sense, or ? ( Excluding very few 8mm movies in the 70s, there is no commercial porn material with 14-year olds ) So why havent they postponed a "15 years minimum age" at least ? Only because Uncle Sam dislikes it ? And if this is so important for the FBI - can you explain this strange conduct of the feds in this case ? They were responsible for the distribution of danish teen porn - or as US law calls it "childporn". ?????????????????????????????????????????
Can you elaborate a bit? --------Sure it is. But all I am saying is if Europe decides to copy the US, then its an issue to bring up w/European government. They had no problems telling the US to fuck off over Iraq, but they're backing down over fuck movies? ----------No .... you misunderstand. What I'm saying is that 18 should always be the age of consent ... even 16 would be fine. BUt a 21 and up limit for porn would certainly weed out a lot of issues. It wouldn't affect existing porn ... just be a rule for future productions. But it's theoretical anyway.
I don't believe that 16 years old was ever acceptable for porn in the US. And laws can be written here to grandfather material that doesn't adhere to a current law because it was produced prior to that law. If you don't believe that look at the 2257 legislation which just requires material made prior to the law to state that instead of making it illegal.
There is no common sense in the law and I've lived places where what appeared to be simple changes to allow one thing to become acceptable ends up becoming a loophole that allows tons of shit eventually to get through. If you allow downloading of younger people, then someone is going to successfully win a case to produce it here. I think children should be protected. I think teenagers do stupid things without thinking about it. I want the people who are in the industry do have entered at a year where hopefully they have been able to think of the pros and the cons and be okay with the results. The same can happen here. And who makes up the internationally accepted cut-off.
This is completely separate from the debate you are having but I think we'd have to think about how we're "educating" our young people a long time before we start wondering how to protect them. They can do a whole lot of protecting themselves if they know how. An ignoramus left to their own devices will find a way to fuck up. No matter how hard you try to protect them. Yes. Protect them. By all means. But don't protect them from the knowledge they need to protect themselves. Because at some point down the line, they'll be on their own and they'll need it. I don't care how high the minimum age of porn goes. If we shelter our young people to such an extent that they can't make a rational decision and think about the future, they will make mistakes when they hit that age no matter what it is. The whole problem of girls coming into porn at 18 and being completely clueless is caused by such overbearing overprotection that they don't know anything because their parents expected them to be little girls forever. They typically didn't have to face any consequences for their actions for 17 years and 364 days and then one fine day, the clock strikes midnight and they can suddenly start doing things that they might regret in 5 or 10 years. What do we expect? Responsibility. I don't know what they're teaching kids in school these days but this is something I was never taught.
I agree with what you are saying, girls nor boys should be sheltered their whole adolescent life or they are screwed as an adult. I think with the education though they should have a period of life where they are protected as well. If that makes sense.
I have heard that in Texas girls can dance totally nude at 17. However, if you own or download a picture of a nude 17 year old then thats child pornography.
I live in Texas...and I don't know where you heard about the dancing business, but that is a lie. Even in Austin. This is still territory where strip clubs are bearly tolerated, and that would certainly not be. Edited by - algaliarept on 7/18/2008 8:51:03 PM
I live in Texas too. I'm not positive and I'm not saying this as fact. But I think there was time not to long ago. There was a loop hole in Texas law. If I remember right. 17 yr olds could work in a bar but not serve alcohol. Work in a bar was not defined. So stripping was working in a bar and wasn't serving alcohol. But when it came to light it was quickly close. I don't think anybody was ever found to be stripping at 17. I think it was one of those they could if they wanted too, so we close the loop hole laws. No one ever advertised 17 year strippers. The law was intended to let 17 yr olds work in restaurants/bars to serve food only, but wasn't written that way.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jul 19 2008 : 6:13AM
I think you may be confusing age of consent (when you can have sex with someone approximately your age) and when you can perform in pornography. They are two different laws.
Flash wrote:It was for a very short time, around 18 months, only in some states, before a common federal law was passed. Ive also read about it in some US books about childporn, these were released between the early 80s and mid-80s. The new literature isnt mentioning this anymore, maybe because no commercial porn with 16/17 year old was ever produced officially. ( All other porn with "minors" was a result of fake IDs or sloopiness ). But private material was shot on 8mm. Flash wrote:Ive stopped to read the flood of revised versions of the 2257 two years ago, but material with 16/17 year old girls is, even if it was produced in this short time span and in a state where it was legal, illegal now. The European Union isnt permitting the "grandfather" clause. But some north-european countries are trying to ignore the old stuff in the 15-17 years age range. By law, its illegal, but there wasnt a single case in northern Europe yet, as far as I know, where OLD material was confiscated. New material, produced after 2002/3, is illegal and there were some seizures. So we have a sort of "grandfather" law, even if this isnt de jure possible here. And Ive heard from several raids in austrian video stores and sexshops. Edited by - Caroline-NL on 7/19/2008 5:21:35 PM
Random Precision brings it to the point. I can understand the shock many US members have, if they hear, that the minimum age for porn was as low as 15 or 16 in northern Europe. But the average girl of this age here, was much, much, much better prepared to handle this mentally and emotionally. I say was, because conservative politicans pressed the "rewind" button of our society. But until the late 90s, we hadnt such a hysteria about nude teens. The sex education was very good, it started in the 5th grade and was continued in the 8th grade. Some porn mags were still sold openly ( on higher shelves or shrinkwrapped ). If I look at the US, the (sex) policy is idiotic. If you are 17 years and 364 days old, you are a "child". You cant watch porn - but you can have sex with 16 in most US states(?!). So if two 16 year old girls are having sex, they can film it, but they arent allowed to view it. Stop - they even cant film it, because this is "production of cp". ??!!? Teenagers are saved from "evil" sex and from explicit nudeness on TV. Talking about sex at school is very dangerous, because the teacher could be arrested as a "child molester". Just look at the high rate of teenager pregnancies in the USA and the very low rates in NL/DK. We dont need these US laws at all.... And in this evangelical social climate, a girl, just after the day of her 18th birthday, can do everything - at once. Without preparation. Can even join a "50 men gangbang porn". But she isnt - if she hadnt brave parents and revolting friends - emotionally and mentally prepared for this. Thats the reason, that a lot of newcomers are sinking into despair and are entering a road to self-destruction. The NL had a very differentiated sexual law, before all of the european laws systems were "harmonized". "Harmful to minors" is an excellent book, its ironic, that Judith Levine praises the dutch/danish system exactly in the year, when these systems were exchanged with US laws. Back to this strange case Ive linked in my 1st posting. Why isnt this getting the media attention it deserves ? Edited by - Caroline-NL on 7/19/2008 5:16:19 PM
I still don't believe it was legal but if it was and none was officially produced there would be no reason to consider grandfathering. More than that, it's hard to grandfather something that was illegal in most states as they would have to redact their earlier laws.The part which grandfather's earlier work was done in 1995 or 1996. Regarding 16/17 year old girls please see the above statement I made.
Flash wrote:Flash, I just found this in an actual book. Its Philip Jenkins: "Beyond Tolerance - CP on the Internet ", NY University Press 2001. ( In 2001, we still had the low 15/16 minimum age in DK/NL ) Page 219/220 " Judging by the consensus of American state laws and the codes of most advanced nations, for instance, 18 is too high a minimum age at which inidviduals can be depicted in sexual contexts, and 16 would be more sensible. This was the age established by US law under the first restrictive 1978 anti-child porn law, and it is closely in tune with the ideas in most advanced European states. 17 year olds arent children, and it is ludicrous to try to impose upon them them the same limitations that apply to 7 year olds. " This law was active between 1978 and 1980. I only heard something about privately produced 8mm movies ( with 16/17 models in the USA ), these are mentioned in several scientific books about this subject. But I dont know a single commercial title.
and that would certainly not be.