um...is this website illegal?
[url]http://www.stephanie-child-model.com/[/url]
You will never be famous.
dude that is just so fucked up dude
im saying it again
dude that is just so fucked up dude
not cool, dude, so not cool
[QUOTE=der Retter]not cool, dude, so not cool[/QUOTE]
say it again
indeed it is fucked
The most fucked up thing is that I think that it is totally legal.
and the question that's troubling me the most is, "Do I want it to be illegal?"
considering how trigger-happy people are going with censorship. This is one of those things that isn't blatently pornographic, but it is troubling. I think that if this stuff was made illegal, why not a movie like American Beauty or The Professional?
But still, you guys are right, it's just so fucked up.
You will never be famous.
[QUOTE=angusbeef123]The most fucked up thing is that I think that it is totally legal.
and the question that's troubling me the most is, "Do I want it to be illegal?"
considering how trigger-happy people are going with censorship. This is one of those things that isn't blatently pornographic, but it is troubling. I think that if this stuff was made illegal, why not a movie like American Beauty or The Professional?
But still, you guys are right, it's just so fucked up.[/QUOTE]
i don't get the american beauty part
the blond chick in American Beauty. She was underage, they just didn't say it. Thats why Kevin Spacey doesn't have sex with her in the end. She says she's a virgin, and Spacey is reminded shes a child.
You will never be famous.
i like that movie
[QUOTE=angusbeef123]the blond chick in American Beauty. She was underage, they just didn't say it. Thats why Kevin Spacey doesn't have sex with her in the end.[/QUOTE]
but in real life she's old enough. so that makes it legal. and i'm not too sure she wasn't 18 man
[QUOTE=der Retter]i like that movie[/QUOTE]
everyone does.
I just wonder what kind of parents would make a website like that about their kid. I would be bothered if my daughter wore a t-shirt with her stomach showing.
You will never be famous.
[QUOTE=tetsuo]but in real life she's old enough. so that makes it legal. and i'm not too sure she wasn't 18 man[/QUOTE]
sorry. I edited my post at the last sec.
but I see what your saying. Shes was of age.
You will never be famous.
the sickest part is you know the parents put the kid up to it. they're putting their pre teen daughters on the net to make money. and they KNOW that child molestors/ other sick fucks are gonna jerk off to this shit.
[QUOTE=angusbeef123][url]http://www.stephanie-child-model.com/[/url][/QUOTE]
You know, I think it's legal, as fucking sick and disturbing as it is.
[IMG]http://sc.groups.msn.com/tn/AC/71/crazyvegan/2/e1.jpg[/IMG] [FONT=Impact][COLOR=MediumTurquoise]The one you love and the one who loves you are never, ever the same person.[/COLOR][/FONT]
did you see the videos with other kids?
On the first page after you open the site theres a link at the bottom.
You will never be famous.
[QUOTE=MinVeg]You know, I think it's legal, as fucking sick and disturbing as it is.[/QUOTE]
Does anybody know the exact law on child abuse? I mean what the actual federal laws say.
y'know the Bat-signal? We should have something like that for Trypdwyre.
You will never be famous.
[QUOTE=codakitty]
it varies from state to state but it is perfectly legal to exploit your own children in this way. welcome to the age of jon-benet and daddy's little prostitutes.[/QUOTE]
Yeah but this would be federal law right? Since he's posting on the internet and it's going around the country. around the world.
You will never be famous.
i once read the people in holland or some shit can have porn sites featuring 16 year olds cuz thats like their 18 equivalent or some shit.
wtf its a pay site? jesus
[url="http://www.sneakerpimps.be"][IMG]http://www.sneakerpimps.be/pictures/banners/spof_banner_01.jpg[/IMG][/url]
[QUOTE=superbug]wtf its a pay site? jesus[/QUOTE]
one of many pay sites.
[url]http://www.wired.com/news/ebiz/0,1272,45346,00.html?tw=wn_story_page_prev2[/url]
"For $25 a month, "Lil' Amber" fans can ogle pictures of the little girl coyly hiking up her miniskirt or posing in a bikini on a faux bearskin rug. For $50, they can purchase a video of Amber "dancing and running around" in outfits that leave little to the imagination."
"Gordon said that the child modeling sites were inspired by a birthday party thrown for a friend's 9-year-old daughter. Pictures of the Spice Girls-themed party were posted on the Internet, and within a week they were getting 20,000 page views a day, he said.
"We decided to see if there was a market for this and there was," Gordon said.
The company started charging access to the site, which morphed into Jessithekid.com. Members can browse photos of a little blonde girl practicing yoga in a white leotard or strutting down a homemade runway in swimsuits. The site also sells videos of a coifed Jessi engaged in childish pursuits such as baking cookies or carving a pumpkin.
"
You will never be famous.
trigger-happy with censorship
[url]http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,52379,00.html[/url]
"Five legal scholars contacted by Wired News said that Foley's proposal, cosponsored by Rep. Nick Lampson (D-Texas) and touted at a press conference on Monday, is so broadly written that it would imperil perfectly innocent photography and videography of children and teenagers.
In addition to prohibiting commercial photography of anyone under 17 years old, their bill would make it a federal felony for stock photo houses like Corbis or Getty Images to license images of minors from their catalogs -- a billion-dollar industry -- or for news photographers to sell images of minors.
James Mitchell, associate general counsel for Corbis, said the Child Modeling Exploitation Prevention Act, or CMEPA, would "negatively impact the industry" and likely violates the First Amendment's guarantees of freedom of speech. "
You will never be famous.
Nuff said
[QUOTE=franc tireur]Nuff said[/QUOTE]
Not enough for me. I don't understand the connection between the Holocaust and child pornography.
You will never be famous.
[QUOTE=angusbeef123]this is some fucked up shit.
from that website I found links to other sites with about the same stuff. You can buy videos for fifty bucks.[/QUOTE]
care to share how you happened to stumble across this weirdness?
I'm really just curious... like did you see the news articles first, or did you hear about it somewhere else, or were you searching for something different and happened upon it, or were you searching for just this and found what you wanted and were surprised that you did?
It is legal, but it makes you want to kick her parents in the teeth.
Am I the only one that realizes that Angusbeef was searching for child pornography when he found this?
"Oh no! I umm, I found it by accident! I mean a friend showed me!"
[QUOTE=Tuffy the Dump Truck]It is legal, but it makes you want to kick her parents in the teeth.[/QUOTE]
Word.
...
"It's getting harder for pedophiles to function on the Internet," said Julie Posey, the director of Pedowatch. "These (girl-model) sites may be their way of getting around the law.
"Why else would someone pay to see kids in their underwear?" she asked.
The mother of "Jessi The Kid" insists her daughter's site is geared toward other children, and that her daughter enjoys planning the themes for the photo and video shoots.
"There's so much smut on the Internet, we're completely on the opposite end of that," said the mother, who refused to give her name, referring to herself instead as "Jessi's mommy."
She said she didn't know who was buying pictures and videos of her daughter because she had no face-to-face interaction with customers. She said the site is profitable.
"Let's just say that from her portion of the earnings, she could apply for medical school right now and not have to take out a loan," she said.
...
Jessi's mother said she was "amazed" to learn that her daughter's website was linked on Fresh Petals, a forum dedicated to people attracted to prepubescent girls.
"If they enjoy looking at a kid baking cookies in a video and find that arousing, that's their own sickness, not ours," she said.
the mother, "Jesse's Mommy" is fucking messed up. Child Protective Services should be called on them and the mother should be given a psych evaluation. that is not rational or caring thinking on the mother's part. another thing that bugs me about it is look at the kids faces. only a few of them actually look happy. like they are just little pawns, or slaves, or like they know they're just being pimped out by their parents.
it's just wrong.
_____________________
No. 92-7089
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. STEPHEN A. KNOX, Appellant
________________________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
...
COWEN, Circuit Judge.
The principal question presented by this appeal is whether videotapes that focus on the genitalia and pubic area of minor females constitute a "lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area" under the federal child pornography laws, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(2), (4) and 2256(2)(E) (1988 & Supp. IV 1992), even though these body parts are covered by clothing. When this case first came before us, we held that such visual depictions do qualify as lascivious exhibitions and that this interpretation does not render the statute unconstitutionally overbroad. United States v. Knox, 977 F.2d 815, 820-23 (3d Cir. 1992), vacated and remanded, __ U.S. __, 114 S. Ct. 375 (1993).
At the Supreme Court's instruction, we have further considered this case "in light of the position asserted by the Solicitor General in his brief for the United States," Knox v. United States, __ U.S. __, 114 S. Ct. 375 (1993). In that brief and in its subsequent brief filed in this court after the Supreme Court remand, the government argues that the plain language of the statute requires the genitals or pubic area exhibited to be at least somewhat visible or discernible through the child's clothing. We hold that the federal child pornography statute, on its face, contains no nudity or discernibility requirement, that non-nude visual depictions, such as the ones contained in this record, can qualify as lascivious exhibitions, and that this construction does not render the statute unconstitutionally overbroad. Finally, we again conclude that the government presented sufficient evidence at the bench trial to establish both the necessary mens rea and the delivery of the films through interstate mail. We thus will reaffirm Knox's conviction.
this is just one case decided in pennsylvania. it's posible this decision could set a precedence, if anyone attempts to argue it.
so i looked up the actual text of the law (18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(2), (4) and 2256(2)(E) (1988 & Supp. IV 1992)) and what i found was [url=http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2252.html]this link[/url] which wasn't too terribly much help, unless i wanted to know the consequences, and [url=http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2256.html]this link[/url] which gives the definitions, one of them being (the only one addressing such a problem) "2256 (2) (e) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;"
so as much as it could or couldn't be applied to these child models, there's a whole lot of room for argument on both sides. Alene would be a good one to talk to on this, i think she's in law school.
i personally think it's wrong to pimp out your kid to generate income, even if it is going to pay for their college. i don't see how any parent could begin to think that this sort of blatent use of their kid to make money is ok.
we should rename this thread 'everything wrong with america/the world"
nice researching trypd
i thought the holocaust comparison was great
[QUOTE=Nightrious]Am I the only one that realizes that Angusbeef was searching for child pornography when he found this?
"Oh no! I umm, I found it by accident! I mean a friend showed me!"
[/QUOTE]
Cute.
I typed "models" into google image search for a new avatar. Didn't find much. Then I typed in "girl models", and I found it.
And I still don't understand the Holocaust connection.
You will never be famous.
[QUOTE=angusbeef123]Cute.
I typed "models" into google image search for a new avatar. Didn't find much. Then I typed in "girl models", and I found it.
And I still don't understand the Holocaust connection.[/QUOTE]
just think of the little girls parents as the nazi's and the little boy as the little girl
[QUOTE=tetsuo]just think of the little girls parents as the nazi's and the little boy as the little girl[/QUOTE]
Yeah, the pictures look similar. I get that. But the subject matter isn't similar at all.
You will never be famous.
.jpg "Fino35's picture"){kind=avatar}
I think 20/20 did a story on this a while ago, I was disturbed.
Someone needs to take these parents behind the woodshed and give them two bullets to the back of the skull.
Fucking disgusting.
I saw a lone pube sticking out of her bikini. Bitch is too old for me.
It's not easy having a good time.
Even smiling makes my face ache.
[QUOTE=angusbeef123]Cute.
I typed "models" into google image search for a new avatar. Didn't find much. Then I typed in "girl models", and I found it.
And I still don't understand the Holocaust connection.[/QUOTE]
Ohhh, so you saw a picture of a little girl in a bikini, you clicked on it, and then you clicked on the website.
I'm glad we cleared that up.
That poor girl, you know her father has to have sexual feelings for her in the way he's having her pose or allowing a photographer to pose her like that. She's going to grow up to become a whore not realizing that anything's wrong with it. Then by the time she's in her thirties she'll figure it all out, have a breakdown and develop a phobia of sex and father figures. After years of psychological tests and sessions she'll finally feel better about herself and realize she was the victim. But by that time it'll be to late and the whole world will just implode.
Moving this to the PCA forum.
[img]http://img93.exs.cx/img93/3678/hoos13as.jpg[/img]
You don't know that the girl is not 18, this girl was living at the hotel I worked at, she had a illness that affected her growth...she looked 11 but was 17.
this is some fucked up shit.
from that website I found links to other sites with about the same stuff. You can buy videos for fifty bucks.
You will never be famous.