Talk:Child pornography

More research

Tangentially related: http://www.libertarianview.co.uk/current-affairs/in-defence-of-rape-porn Leucosticte (talk) 19:21, 12 May 2014 (CEST)

Debunking the "tools for further molestation" argument

"Second, there is substantial evidence that photographs of children engaged in sexual activity are used as tools for further molestation of other children. Children are shown pictures of other children engaged in sexual activity, with the aim of persuading especially a quite young child that if it is in a picture, and if other children are doing it, then it must be all right for this child to do it."

Isn't there a debunking of this argument somewhere? @User4 Leucosticte (talk) 00:44, 13 May 2014 (CEST)

Debunking the "banning distribution decreases incentives to produce the pictures" argument

"If the sale or distribution of such pictures is stringently sanctioned, and if those sanctions are equally stringently enforced, the market may decrease, and this may in turn decrease the incentive to produce those pictures."

Is there a refutation of this? Leucosticte (talk) 15:50, 13 May 2014 (CEST)

The first sentence

really there is no common denominator for either "child" or "pornography"? They're 100% culturally determined, all we can do is look at what laws say in different countries? Wanker (talk) 03:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

"Child pornography" vs. "child abuse imagery"

I wonder whether the term "child abuse imagery" will gain currency? It seems to me that the government might prefer to continue calling it "child pornography" since "pornography" carries a stigma. It emphasizes the fact that people are using to get off on. "Child abuse imagery" emphasizes that it's just images that can be used for any number of purposes. Lysander (talk) 00:53, 14 April 2015 (UTC)