poketeased - inappropriate?

[janmb]

A point was made earlier about someone taking a picture of a naked child at the beach and saying that the action was harmless? I cannot agree with this. This is akin to saying that someone taking a picture of a rape or a murder is not in the wrong because they themselves are no committing the deed, or even as simple as someone taking pictures of a naked woman in a dressing room at a store or though an open windows in the apartment across the street. How can that no be considered inappropriate? The sad truth is that these are not victimless crimes and would be, by almost any court, be considered forms of abuse.

The issue of the under age cartoons. The pure and simple fact is, regardless of opinion or moral objectification , these images used in a sexual way are against the law. So why is this being debated? What if it was content depicting murder? Just because the original murder was not committed for the purposes of the tease, does that make the content any less illegal? The why should a cartoon drawing of a child be treated any different from something equally as illegal?

Why should taking a picture, for example at a beach, be illegal at all? And your comparison to taking pictures of a murder makes no sense since that obviously would be perfectly legal too.

As for the debate, I'm discussing this because difficult topics are interesting and enriching to debate. While I don't agree with it, I'm not discussing seraph0x decisions - that would be meaningless and 99% of the time I agree anyway.

Main challenge with topics such as this one is that far too many think with their hearts rather than the only organ designed for it.

[_bobby_]

Main challenge with topics such as this one is that far too many think with their hearts rather than the only organ designed for it.

The heart is a great organ to think with, combined with the brain, the two together the would make the world a much better place

[Nezhul]

Let's continue without pinky-sweet pathos?

[_bobby_]

WOO HOO! Milo is nothing if not pinky sweet

[janmb]

Main challenge with topics such as this one is that far too many think with their hearts rather than the only organ designed for it.

The heart is a great organ to think with, combined with the brain, the two together the would make the world a much better place

The idea that empathy and rational thought are mutually exclusive is sadly mistaken.

People thinking with their heart (letting emotions speak rather than rational, conscious thought) is a big problem when it so often leads to people making associations that don't exist. I'm sure at this very moment there are a majority of readers in this thread that, based on my posts here, are left with an image that I don't sympathize with children abused in child porn or directly by pedophiles... An association made by heart and blatantly wrong.

[Banquo]

WOW

This place has got a little heated hasn't it.

I have to say I agree with Ph0x's decision to take the tease down, and with the idea that any similar tease will also be removed. From a couple of dealings with the admin of this site, I do know that censorship and interference is not something they want to be doing. But the whole concept and idea paedophilia isn't something you can just skirt around and hope for the best on.

Now I understand Jan and Nes' arguments that they are just cartoons. However, it's very very shaky ground.

There have been a lot of very heated exchanges about what if this, and what if that. But at the end of the day anything depicting children is going to put not just the site at risk, but all of it's users as well. People don't want or need to be tarnished by the grubby hand of "kiddy porn."

On a side note, I find the idea that because paedophilia is a "sexual alignment" then we should cater for it (with cartoons or otherwise) and that it is just like any other fetish on this site entirely morally repugnant.

A child cannot consent, an adult partaking of a fetish can, even when that fetish has elements of rape play.

Like Phox and Wyatt have pointed out, Milo is about exploration, hypothetically if I read a tease that involves a heel fetish and I want to take it further I can do so, if I see a tease that features rape play I can conceivably take that forward with a consenting adult.

You can't say the same about a tease involving children.

The BDSM community takes enough shit from the general public because of their conceptions of seeing it as abuse and domestic violence. We do not need to attract further attention by creating a side line in drawn pornography that depicts children.

Like Les said, there are plenty of pictures with adult models, plenty of Hentai with pictures depicting adult characters. Just use them and no one has any problems, no shaky ground, no moral hand wringing. It's not fucking rocket science.

[janmb]

I completely agree with you on most of those points Banquo.

And that's why it is important to understand that just because some of us takes enjoyment and enrichment from a healthy, critically thinking debate, doesn't mean it's heated or that it is a dispute of seraph's choice of taking down this particular tease at all.

The only thing I regret here is not starting a separate, general discussion thread for this topic a lot sooner, to better keep it apart from the discussion of moderating and site policies here on milo. The concept of child porn/abuse vs. pedophilia as an alignment is much wider than that.

[Nezhul]

Banquo
The main problem I see is not that they are cartoons, but that each and every picture in the tease featured a busty developed female. I could understand if it was some loli pictures with flat breasts and no public hair. Instead, just by looking at pictures you could see a young girl. The only thing that made those girls underage is the connection to the characters of a pokemon series, who, in turn, were underaged by wiki.

The fun thing is that the similarity was in faces, but their bodies were definitely more grown up. In fact all the fuss with several teases deleted is happened... thanks to one single dumbass moralist who thought that using children's cartoons heroes in a webtease might be inappropriate, and wanted some attention by starting this thread. Period.

Funny thing is, that If I wanted, I could take 95% of the teases on this site for different legal reasons, starting from the abuse on human rights, racism, harm for my religious and other feelings, antisemitism, and ending in simple things like copyright violation (which covers 80% teases all by itself). But hey, noone gives a damn! But some pokemon watching brat pops up and starts a nonsence that already resulted in taking down of several teases, and suddenly everyone care, because the word PEDOPHILIA was mentioned, and even if most supporters don't read laws they will support taking those teases down, just because of the word that makes them bark in unison like trained dogs. I find it just plain stupid. And the wors thing is, that those moralists think that they are doing good thing, and that they are on the right side, and they are protecting children, obviously... Because in the minds of most of them the thought process looks broadly like this: "I didn't see the tease, and I didn't watch the anime, I don't know those characters and how they looked like originally, but HEY!... Some bloke here says they are all underaged so obviously I should support the guy just in case. I also don't have any idea how fan-drawn doujishi can harm children, but HEY!... This bloke says it can, so I definitely support him and look all white and fluffy! Weeeeeee.....!"

or that it is a dispute of seraph's choice of taking down this particular tease at all.

Well, I would dispute that, but it's no use anyway.

[breathplayslut]

... thanks to one single dumbass moralist who thought that using children's cartoons heroes in a webtease might be inappropriate, and wanted some attention by starting this thread. Period.

Funny thing is, that If I wanted, I could take 95% of the teases on this site for different legal reasons, starting from the abuse on human rights, racism, harm for my religious and other feelings, antisemitism, and ending in simple things like copyright violation (which covers 80% teases all by itself). But hey, noone gives a damn! But some pokemon watching brat pops up and starts a nonsence that already resulted in taking down of several teases, and suddenly everyone care, because the word PEDOPHILIA was mentioned, and even if most supporters don't read laws they will support taking those teases down, just because of the word that makes them bark in unison like trained dogs. I find it just plain stupid. And the wors thing is, that those moralists think that they are doing good thing, and that they are on the right side, and they are protecting children, obviously... Because in the minds of most of them the thought process looks broadly like this: "I didn't see the tease, and I didn't watch the anime, I don't know those characters and how they looked like originally, but HEY!... Some bloke here says they are all underaged so obviously I should support the guy just in case. I also don't have any idea how fan-drawn doujishi can harm children, but HEY!... This bloke says it can, so I definitely support him and look all white and fluffy! Weeeeeee.....!"

So now rather than a debate with relavent points, you're butt-hurt, and resorting to namecalling. How immature. I refuse to do a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. There were a lot of relavent posts on the subject, if you can't pull your head out of your ass long enough to at least recognize that people are concerned about the welfare of kids, then you're as morally bankrupt as they come.

[LittleElfBoy]

Yo, I think I'll look into this thread once again. The lulz in here is amazing.

First we have breathplayslut who is trying to sell his moralic views as a matter of fact and won't accept they're a result of his upbringing and social climate and entirely subjective.

And Anna seems to have reasonable arguments albeit she mixes my arguments up with some statements a few others have made. I don't thin Pedos should be able to screw with childs at their leisure, but given the article I found I began to wonder if a Pedo relationship under parental supervision is harmful or not. I believe taking naked pictures from the beach is wrong for same reason as taking them from other people, I simply believe porngraphy that was produced without harming a child is fine, so I don't oppose underage hentai.

And Sexytimes 5, you threw a hateful rant at me just when I told you, thank you. Subjective morals simply means what you regard as morally right does not necessarily mean it is. Because morals are a subjective matter. If you disagree, we have a lot of discussions that are currently ongoing that are subject to subjective moral (Abortion, homosexuality to some degree, Gun Control, Religion etc.)

Banquo, you have an interesting view on that. Even though you seem to understand the subjective morals issue on BDSM, but dismiss it on Pedophilia because you're not into it. You should be aware that similar to pedophile rapists, there are sexual sadists who cannot control their urges and simply goes out to rape a woman like he fantasizes.

And Nezhul, you seem to have a similar opinion to me. But you can't take them down, you can only (maybe) rightfully blame them.



I throw something in the room: One of the teases taken down in the recent ban on hentai images was long before nominated as Tease of the month and only lost by two votes: http://www.milovana.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=9600

-That tease easily had more than 10000 views and Wyatt even publicly posted it. So I actually do believe Nezhul is right about blaming the bans on a single person that called it pedophilia.

[AngelAnna837]

I was not only addressing you LittleElfBoy, I just chose to quote one of your statements because I found it to be the most disturbing.

If you were paying attention BreathPlaySlut did mention she was a girl.

My only concern with what you are saying at this point is that your argument suggests that this, so called, "pedo relationship with prenatal supervision" is even a rational thing. What parent in there right mind would agree for their child to have any sort of consensual relationship with a sexual deviant even if the relationship was not sexual in nature. I can't think of anyone that would put there child in harms way like that.

I know *for a fact* the damage that is done by sexual abuse towards minors. As I said, I work with vulnerable children and there is no one I know, who in there right mind, would support or encourage this kind of damaging behavior against children and no matter how you try to justify it, it is not a victimless endeavor.

Food for though.... You take your child to the park or the beach, your notice someone taking pictures of your child while you are helping them change for what you can only assume is for some sinister purpose. Do you consider this to be blameless behaviour?

As for the tease being banned, regardless of the reason, it was taken down because the images were illegal. I don't think it's wrong to be offended by illegal material, nor is it wrong to being it to the attention of the people who make sure this site stays online. We all know the ramifications of illegal content and surly it is best to protect the site as best as possible?

Anna

[LittleElfBoy]

I haven't demanded to reup any of the teases.

And sorry, I have missed that she's a girl.

My only concern with what you are saying at this point is that your argument suggests that this, so called, "pedo relationship with prenatal supervision" is even a rational thing. What parent in there right mind would agree for their child to have any sort of consensual relationship with a sexual deviant even if the relationship was not sexual in nature. I can't think of anyone that would put there child in harms way like that.

I posted a link earlier in which that was described and apparently, it worked out in that specific case.

I know *for a fact* the damage that is done by sexual abuse towards minors. As I said, I work with vulnerable children and there is no one I know, who in there right mind, would support or encourage this kind of damaging behaviour against children and no matter how you try to justify it, it is it a victimless endeavour.

I never suggested abuse. I know the violent abuse is damaging. Not that I haven't suggested sexual intercourse, I stated relationship because I'm not sure how far would be healthy and where the borders should be.

Food for though.... You take your child to the park or the beach, your notice someone taking pictures of your child while you are helping them change for what you can only assume is for some sinister purpose. Do you consider this to be blameless behaviour?

I quote myself: "I believe taking naked pictures from the beach is wrong for same reason as taking them from other people" - However, I would give out mild punishments for such behavior, not a few years of prison like the current jurisdiction in Germany states (I'm not very knowledgeable about US laws, due to not living there.)

As for the tease being banned, regardless of the reason, it was taken down because the images were illegal. I don't think it's wrong to be offended by illegal material, nor is it wrong to being it to the attention of the people who make sure this site stays online. We all know the ramifications of illegal content and surly it is best to protect the site as best as possible?

The pictures weren't illegal in all cases. Some where non-sexual pictures of minors in a tease. I am no lawyer and won't force the page to change their policies. Sure, I liked some of the teases taken down, but all I was talking about in here initially was that I don't think any of these were morally wrong and those hentai images aren't morally wrong either. Over the course of discussion I read up a few things on pedophilia and realized how horrible it is to be born as one and how much unjust bias is towards them. I repeat, that I don't think they should be able to have sex with children at their leisure, but I want to maybe change a few people's opinion to make them stop to think all of them are sick perverted monsters, because that isn't true.

[breathplayslut]

Huh - actually, I can kind of agree with this. Persecution for a condition you can't control really is an awful thing. And I don't necessarily agree with thought control, but with action control. But abuse comes in all forms, not necessarily violent abuse. Mental abuse, emotional abuse, etc, all leave scars, some far more severe than if they were just beaten.

For what it's worth, I didn't have a problem with the pics, or the tease. I was just asking what the opinion of the site admin was with regards to potentially damaging materials. Now if the law states that these specific pictures/forms are acceptable, then I certainly have no issues with them. I would definitely agree that the tease that was originally mentioned didn't have any mention of underage content, and the pictures weren't in poor taste, so again, if the law says "Okay", then who am I to argue?

"Mild" punishment - that's subjective. The idea is to publicly state that this is *not* acceptable behavior. But I don't believe we should publicly execute every person who breaks a law either. Let the punishment fit the crime, as it were.

I think the problem here is sexual. Nobody has any problems with kids and adults being friends. I used to go fishing with my Dad's best friend - that was a perfectly acceptable relationship. But a pedophile by definition is someone that finds children sexually appealing - and in my mind, that's wrong. Call it morally questionable if you want, but I challenge you to come up with a scenario between a 30 year old man and a 16 year old girl that would be both socially acceptable, and sexual in nature in which on some level, the 16 year old is *not* being abused. Yes, there will usually be some specific scenario that allows for the unlikely chance of an exception to a rule and having it work out, but for the most part, in this instance, it just isn't so.

[LittleElfBoy]

Well, 16 is legal age in some countries, that was a no brainer. And if the teen is in puberty already, the pedophile could help them with sex education. This is something I saw suggested somewhere else too. This doesn't neccessarily involve intercourse. Of course, with all the neccessary safeguards. I don't even think there is a need for the pedos to have intercourse with kids.

I do agree that some kids ARE too young, but I wouldn't say a minor isn't supposed to know anything about sex.

[breathplayslut]

So, what you're really saying is that you have no issues with pedophiles thinking sexually about children, just that you feel that its wrong for adults to actually engage in sex with minors under most circumstances?

You're always going to run into the opposition that says that even thinking about it is wrong, and maybe it is - but I don't think that people are always going to be able to control their thoughts, just how they act upon them. Some fantasies should never see the light of day, but its not necessarily wrong to fantasize about them. I don't personally agree with it, I do believe that fantasies about kids is wrong, but I can accept that all things being equal, as long as it stays purely fantasy, it probably doesn't hurt anyone, so long as no kids were used/abused in the creation of any fap material to aid the fantasy.