Laws on age of consent for porn

[raisinboy]

Well, yes, it is all about labels and clicking "yes" or "no" on the porn sites on the Internet, or did I miss anything? That's what they're doing right now, nothing else, and that's why the question if the age should be lowered came up in the first place - because all the kids are already watching it anyways.
If the age was lowered, why should the control be any stricter than it already is now? It's a proposal to give teenagers more freedom, not to tighten the laws.

 

[LuiM]

And maybe (I can't say for sure but I have a strong feeling that precisely the following would happen): teenagers would lose all the interest in porn if it was allowed for them to watch. We all know: No forbidden fruit -> no temptation.

And it just came to my mind that in this sense lowering the allowed age for watching porn could actually have a better impact on youth (who would then lost the interest in it) as raising the age limit.

It's a thing worth to think about.

 

[ritsuka]

Yes, I really have views other than the ones you do, Integritaso. Is that so shocking? I do "maintain beleifs" despite the fact that you don't agree with them. I only have to say it once; take it or leave it the first time, please. I am not of the opinion that only the most academic, conventional, corporate sponsored research at elite universities, published in expensive peer review journals can touch on the truth. I don't look down on philosophy and genuine scientific research just because it doesn't fall into those categories. It is a complex matter, and I've done a lot of reading on it; I didn't make it up, and it is quite clear. Here is a essay that touches on it:

http://www.nospank.net/s-dugan5.htm


Anyway, I like many of the posts above. I was already masturbating when I was 13, and I would have liked to do it while watching porn; that would be my own business, and no one else's. And I wouldn't have sought out enema porn or etc. because that doesn't interest me and niche fetish porn has the same small audience whether they are 13 or 26. It is his body, his choice; your morality doesn't belong in someone else's body, and teenagers deserve intellectual freedom. When I was 13, going on 14, I cared very little for the condescending morality of adults on such issues; and I haven't changed my mind on that. If someone wanted to "protect" me at that age, they could have done something about the homophobic bullying I was suffering through at school.

 

[ritsuka]

Thankfully 13 year olds will continue to watch their choice of porn if they so please, regardless of some presumptuous "age of consent" law.

 

[Squallmuzza]

Porn is available in far too many forms and states for it to ever to be cut out of any real level of accessibility. Unless EVERY device has a tracking chip in (something people in general wouldn't stand for) and magazines were vaporised from some unknown source and every other form of media was mysteriously wiped overnight, it's inevitable.

Everyone has an older brother, a careless father, a knowledgeable friend or other means to an end. The only surefire methods of protection would be methods people would steadfastly oppose due to their endless need for privacy.

 

[raisinboy]

C. the eighties and nineties, it was legal to have 16+ in many countries, including Germany. Then, c. 1995 they said 18+ only for modelling.

Wait, what? I'm from Germany and that's the first time I've ever heard of that. Source, please.

 

[Squallmuzza]

It's down to PARENTS to police what they view their kid should see. If you're pre-pubescent, porn is neither right to watch or in fact of any real use. After that, well I don't see what the harm is. I think it'd take quite some going before you dug out your particular flavour. One of my friends has only now figured out a particular fetish he's into at 19 going on 20, and he's been watching porn for as long as I've known him (7, going on 8 years).

If you're not interested in X porn, you wouldn't search it out. I wouldn't look for bear porn because I don't like bears. True there are exceptions like 2G1C but that's just one of those vids. It's just a more extreme version of leekspin or stuff like that. Just one of those videos older brothers show their younger brothers to see them squirm. It's not even related to porn really, it's a shock vid. They could be showing them a video of a guy jumping under a train for the same effect.

I had access to porn from an early age (due to having the net in my house since essentially the birth of the net) and I don't think I've EVER seen porn I've not wanted to see until I became a moderator on here and started having to filter through everything on here. I see no reason why you'd seek out someone setting light to their nipples in porn unless you saw that title and went 'phwoar'. It just makes sense.

 

[Irishman25]

The whole point in growing up during teen years is to find the stuff. To bypass the parents filters, find friends with access, in the old days to find the mags under the bed lol
Wheres the fun and learning if its just handed to u??
I had to find it, let the lazy shits of today and tomorrow find it too and to make it more interesting lets make it harder for them muahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!

 

[raisinboy]

Raisinboy it is a relatively straight-forward matter for me to gather information in relation to Irish, UK or US law, being that I speak English. It is for you to research the laws of your own country, being that you presumably speak fluent German.

Uhm, no. You stated that 16+ was the norm in Germany, so all I did was ask to back that up with a source. I didn't claim anything, just that I haven't heard about it, so it's not up to me to research your statements. If I researched every claim that someone wrote on the Internet, I wouldn't have time for anything else.
Seeing that you now indeed named some sources (and even some valid, i.e. non-Wikipedia ones), I will believe it. I even remember the Bleisch-case though I always thought the models were just under 18. Now knowing that they even were under 16 just makes me feel sick.

 

[LuiM]

Well you are missing one point. When you talk about watching porn you're talking actually only about porn classification. It's all just about labeling stuff. Today porn is classified 18+ in most states and it will remain so. I don't believe this border will ever go down. Maybe up - judging by the society's rising porno-phobia.

But I say it's irrelevant if porn is classified 16+ or 21+ or if it's not classified at all, young people will always find a way to it, as I found the way to it when I was a kid. These "laws for accessing/watching porn" won't and can't have any impact on kids at all. Of course they're supposed to be made for parents who Squally mentioned. But every good parent will do everything what is best for his kid anyway - with or without this classification. Good parent doesn't need any classification at all. Good parent doesn't need any state to teach him what is right or wrong.

The only one who needs these labels (an who gains from them) is hypocritical high-class society which is building its own reputation by sending out the message "Yes, we're good Christian nation and we did everything to protect our youth this way!" while in fact it does not give a sh*t about them. ~X(

So I say you're discussing an empty air here.

 

[raisinboy]

Firstly you are presuming quite a lot when you declare that ALL children will find a way to access porn.

I have to agree, though I can see both sides. Children with unmonitored Internet access? Yeah, they definitely can have their porn whenever they want.
But without Internet? Nope. I didn't have Internet as a teenager, and I saw my first porn movie with 17. And it was a straight one, so not really something I even wanted to see.
Hard to believe, but even today, not every kid has an unmonitored Internet access.

 

[LuiM]

Secondly, religion has no bearing on these issues, outsides of some US states and the middle east (Islam). The rest of the world is pretty much secular.

All western society including Russia and Middle East is built on judeo-christian heritage. You don't have to be religious to inherit religious (anti)values - like fear of human body and fear of sexuality.

Firstly you are presuming quite a lot when you declare that ALL children will find a way to access porn.

I didn't say that.

 

[tomcat34]

I voted 18/16.

For me age of consent for modelling in porn is human rights issue. International human right conventions forbids the child pornography and age of consent for modelling in porn is not thing that any country (except USA and Somalia) can legally decide in the national level. It have regulated internationally by United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Every member of the UN, except the USA and Somalia, have ratified the Convention. According Article 1 of the Convention a child means every human being below the age of eighteen. Article 34 forbids quite clearly using children in pornographic performances and materials. And there are also a Second Optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography. This protocol strenghtens the ban of the child pornography.

There are also other issues in the age of consent for modelling in porn. Modelling in porn is more harmful for future of people than watching porn or having real sex. Modelling in porn is very public act, watching porn or having sex are private acts. It can be for example very difficult get job if potential employee knows that applicant have been modelling in porn. And I think that any children (under 18) are not mature enough to make this kind of decisions.

The age of content for watching porn is totally different thing. We need some limits but they can be more flexible. I think that one of those limits can be age of consent having real sex. In the Europe this age varies mostly between 14 and 16. In Finland the age of consent is 16 – but age of criminal responsibility is 15 which means that Finnish legislator thinks that if you are 15 yuo are mature enough to go to jail but not mature enough to have sex. For me this is little bit illogical and I am ready to lower age of consent.

After age of consent it should be free access to all legal porn. Before that age there have to be limitations. There should be some very strict limits like situations when clearly adult person want to show porn for minors. I dont also want selling of porn is for children below age of consent. But in real world it is impossible to prevent children totally access for porn.

 

[LuiM]

However, the legislation is created by democratically elected representatives of ALL people. If people vote for a politician or one way or the other in a referendum because of their personal religious convictions --then that is their right. In any event the laws we are discussing are arrived at via a democratic process and therefore they should not be dismissed.

Of course. But no need to put views in my mouth which I didn't express. We all have to follow the laws no matter how wrong they seem to us.

I just said that these labels are needed for hypocritical society to justify its conscience on how much it has done for youth while the truth is quite the opposite. Any parent who is concerned about his kid already does everything to provide his kid what's best for him - regardless the labels - even if they would be reduced to zero or enlarged to 100+. These labels are just for someone to feel good about himself. No kid is going to care for them and every good parent will bring up his child properly. It's a salon discussion (just for the sake of discussion).

My view is that kids should be left alone, within their own age groups, and that we should not encourage children and young-teens to look at adults having sex in porn --because they simply aren't all that interested in the bodies of adult people.

Well this is something completely new in this discussion. I don't believe anyone said anything like that or talked about that. And I believe we all agree that kids should not be encouraged to search for porn. But that they're not interested in porn - well again - if I remember me any my mates - is just not true.

 

[Squallmuzza]

Well I'm pretty sure that I wasn't watching porn of people the same age as me when I was 13, since it was all mainstream previews (as I didn't know where to find proper length stuff). I certainly remember enjoying myself enough with that and they were definitely 18+. And somehow that hasn't altered my level of enjoyment of people my own age, or in fact a couple of years younger.

I think you place too much value on a lust-filled teenager's brain. They'll rub up against the side of a wall just to get a thrill at that age. I doubt they're entirely that fussed about who they're aimed at when they get their jollys. I don't think I really cared further than that it wasn't a dick that made me vomit to look at.

As for the 'assuming everyone is like yourself' as a kid, ummm well these are the same sorts of experiences I've talked about with a lot of friends down the pub. It's a pretty wide-spread thing. A LOT of people my age had the exact same experiences with just the title of the video being different really.

 

[Snome]

It strikes me that no one in this discussion is willing to give an inch and so it is becoming more like an argument than a discussion. Integritas0, if you wish to deny all children from viewing porn, in order to prevent the few being 'dragged' into the porn industry, then 18+ is too young to either watch or participate. Surely 25+ for both would ensure children are fully protected, if that's your wish as it seems to be.
Personally, I managed to persuade an adult to let me watch porn when I was 14 and the laws in my country were quite Dickensian at that time. I have to say I enjoyed it, and yes, I masturbated while watching it. I never felt the desire to participate in it or even to 'have sex' at that time. (I think I was, mentally, a slow developer as I wasn't sexually active until my late 20s)
So, I can see the other side of the argument. In the UK it is now legal for gay and straight couples to enjoy a full and meaningful sexual relationship at 16 and I have to admit, it does seem odd that they can shag themselves blind at 16 but mustn't watch anyone else doing it until they are 18. To me that seems ridiculous, but that's the law. I would vote for a single age of consent for all sexual activities. If people are considered adult enough to have sex, get married and procreate all at 16, then I guess (reluctantly) that they ought to be adult enough to watch legal porn.

 

[Squallmuzza]

Considering you blackball every point that I make, valid or not, and don't actually concede any points whatsoever, I'm just going to step out of this circular argument as I'm being told that personal experiences and the experiences of many people I know didn't exist, aren't valid and hold no sway whatsoever.

 

[BugsyB]

sorry i cant...im not allowed to answer because my government said so

 

[BugsyB]

oh FUCK THEM i voted anyway lol

 

[BugsyB]

kiss and make up...sheesh