Fred Bauder wrote:
On Apr 8, 2006, at 8:07 AM, Sydney Poore wrote:
Sam Korn wrote:
On 4/8/06, David Alexander Russell webmaster@davidarussell.co.uk wrote:
Any image, whether a photograph, drawing, or render, which depicts minors engaged in sexual activity or sexually suggestive poses.
Without wishing to be querulous, we then need to define "sexually suggestive poses".
Minors engaged in sexually suggestive poses is too broad Too many movie posters and CD (album) covers would be eliminated. Key to this is age appropriate sexual activity. Depictions of teens or pre-teens acting sexually suggestive towards each other is okay.
You are pointing to an important problem, mildly suggestive images are used by the mainstream media to say nothing of the obvious fact that it is normal for children to engage in innocent sexual behavior.
I think what we are after is those images (and sites) that cross over a poorly defined line into sexual exploitation of children. I would say that if some of our readers find an image or link objectionable, we should not include it. "Some" being a substantial fraction. We should not be mislead by our own reactions to an image. Having viewed goatse, our perspective is a bit warped.
Not just goatse, but autofellatio too...