egafd.com

Lookie here

Why oh why are we still being associated with child porn (those of us who like our porn) ?????

How popular a thing is child porn? I read an estimate that one in sixty men has tendancies towards children sexually. That's bloody scary. Even so, people like the BBC should know better then to go using the word porn when they really mean child abuse.

I'm going to bed.

That is the thing that annoys me when people talk about child porn on the Internet. The bottom line is that there is no child porn on the Internet. It is private FTP Servers and being sent via email.

You are not exactly going to set up a site www.10yearoldsgettingfucked.com

I like my porn. I would like to think that the producers of adult entertainment are not breaking law by using underage girls in some of their films. If they are, then throw these bast$!?* in jail. But the fact is that a good whopping percentage of UK porn is legit. The girls are mostly over 17 and they know what they're doing and why. It sure must beat working in McDonalds for minimum wage, right girls ?

Yes, but the morons who read The Current Bun, News of The World and Daily Mail need shock horror headlines to get their attention. If perchance a days 'news' is not shocking enough then the papers in question are not averse to taking things out of context, massaging the facts or downright making things up to give the impression that every other site on the net is published by cannibalistic paedophiles.

An example of putting a newsworthy spin on a story might be -

Real story - Man fined ?250 for selling three uncertificated videos at boot sale.

Moronic Tabloid version - VILE PORN RING SMASHED! POLICE SEIZE HUGE LIBRARY OF FILTH! EVIL PORN BARON FACES JUSTICE!

As you can these two versions of the same story could give those who are not fully aware, slightly out of touch with reality or have difficulty with the concept of objectivity a totally false impression of what is happening in society and on the net. The frightening thing is that these deluded knob heads (most of the public) then go and vote on the basis of the 'facts' they have read in the Current Bun and the like - But of course that is what the proprietors intended.

Officer Dibble.

I think there is an (unpopular) distinction to be made between child porn (by which I mean pre-pubescent kids) and (say) 15 - 16 year olds. I think many men (sorry, no idea about percentages) fantasise about being the first with a young teenage girl who is ready and willing. Very, very few will do anything about it of course. I think that is psychologically very different from weird sick people who want to fuck 8 yr olds.

Of course it's all illegal anyway, and I doubt if more than a tiny percentage (maybe the same as that of guys who can't have an orgasm unless they are holding a woman's shoe in their hands?) are in any way interested in children. It's just the law mixes up child porn lovers with the majority(?) who fantasise about (say) schoolgirls around 16.

Respect
Donjon

There's nowt wrong with fantasising about 16 year old schoolgirls if the law says the age of consent is 16. Problem is these child porn sickos are giving the majority of us law-abiding porn lovers a lousy reputation. Cops should keep on busting those losers so the public can make a clear distinction. Besides most of the British public won't admit to watching porn anyway. And I won't take any lectures from the gutter press or politicians about morals. They're the worst hypocrites.

Well said Dibble, I sent a leaflet out many years ago to mail order list of catelouge collectors, it said if I dont sell what you want let me know what you after and I will pass your details on to a supplier.
Most replies were strait forward, big tits, fisting, pissing etc etc. But a few were strange asking for kiddy stuff so I passed their names on to the right people. In case they were plod themselves testing me out..Anyway I am a grass so what, I later found out that they nicked a few people one of which was a school teacher.
So would you say this is the correct approach or not,

Phil McC

As a normal punter, Phil (what's normal, I know....), I believe you took exactly the correct action. I also believe that the reader/writers on this site would fully support this.

Dane

Indeed,
The fancying of teenage girls, be they above the age of consent or just below is not a bad thing in itself. Normally, such "urges" (for want of a better word) are to do with the girl in question having the body of a woman (i.e. breasts, curvy hips n ass). This is not perverted, it is a normal understandable reaction. The attraction to a girl who is still clearly a child (undeveloped) is where the trouble lies. The media and law probably cause more damage than good by blurring these obvious differences. Child abuse is an evil thing, labelling it "porn" just (as Dibble put it quite rightly) just confuses the idiot public further.

Yes, sounds like a cushty plan Phil. So let's trick them into showing their hand (or knob) then get 'em down the station where me and the chaps can administer a well deserved 'truncheoning.'

Officer Dibble.