I agree, Insolectual.  

There's a big difference between sexual expression of children and sexual exploitation of children by adults.  How is the law on porn being for over 18's related to children being exploited in porn?  I guess the law doesn't make much difference, because all boys look at porn anyway.  The law is just a sort of sad, ironic anachronism, really.

Agreed!  You can look at porn and not be subject to pedophiles, and again, you're right, most young guys are looking at porn. What about adults who look at porn? Does that automatically make them want to be porn stars? I admit to having looked at sexually charged material since I was around 10, and I had no desire to be sexually exploited by anyone. If someone tried to get me to do something like that, I'd tell my mom. Kids are more savvy than you think, and they're in touch with their bodies.

"If someone tried to get me to do something like that, I'd tell my mom. Kids are more savvy than you think, and they're in touch with their bodies."

That is good for you, but some kids don't get any choice, in Thailand there are brothels that only contain children, those kids don't have any choice.

Minimum age requirements are needed for children as they are easily exploited by adults, all around the world.

What has that got to do with censorship?

In lieu of not writing an essay on the whole issue, you could study censorship laws around the world, study the reasons behind their creation, study some cases that were prosecuted and some that failed to be prosecuted, look at the effects in countries that have no such laws, then look at child abuse laws, child pornography laws, child prostitution laws, legal age of consent laws, again with examples of cases that have been prosecuted and those that have failed to be prosecuted.

Did I SAY that pedophilia should be legal? No, I don't think so. I just think that young people (especially teenagers) should be able to look at porn. I don't advocate child pornography. Young people's civil rights are being violated in countries like Thailand, and they're not exactly up to date on youth empowerment in the first place. It is wrong to force anyone into prostitution, regardless of age. It's just wrong in the first place. What about teenagers and adolescents being able to have sex among themselves? And come on, a 15-year-old having sex with a 16-year-old really is no big deal. The age of consent draws an artificial line between them. It is unreasonable to deprive teenagers (I mainly speak about teenagers when I talk about sexuality, not five-year-olds who are usually uninterested in sex anyway) of their natural sexual drives. I know that some parents might be worried that their kids are having sex, but once puberty arises, it's unreasonable to think of your child as being perfectly innocent. Your baby will grow up, like it or not.

In short, if you can physically reproduce, then you should be able to have sex and look at porn.

Amy, I'm still not sure what point you're trying to make.  

Speaking personally, my sex drive was highest at about age 13, and I had sexual interest many years before that.  Are kids really supposed to somehow supress their sexual feelings for over half a decade, whether it's through pornography or actual sex with other kids?  

No kid is going to try, and if they're forced to supress it, they'd end up as pretty mentally distorted adults.

Agreed, Dreamer.

I think she's trying to say that letting kids look at porn invites pedophilia, and so does lowering the age of consent. But when I talk about young people, I'm mainly talking about teenagers and adolescents, not five-year-olds. I think she has a kid, so she might be worried that a pedophile might get her child. But allowing teens to look at porn doesn't exactly invite pedophilia.

As I said you need to look at all the information before entering into a debate as the laws in each country are different and you are making suppositions about those.
In the UK a couple of teens one 14 and one 15, for example, would not be arrested and charged for having a sexual relationship.

They would not be arrested if they found some pornography and looked at it.

If an adult showed them ponography that would be illegal, and I believe rightly so. That situation would not be generated and controlled by them, it would be controlled by the adult in the situation.
That law stands as so many thousands of children have been abused with that as a start, it is well documented.

I would not allow a link on this site to pornography as people under 18 view the site.

The whole issue of censorship is massive and I have studied it in great depth for many years, and been part of the campaign to make child pornography illegal in the UK.
Beleive it or not, in the 1990's it was still legal to make and view child pornography.
Thankfully now it is illegal.

US laws are stricter than most European laws, and some of them are downright ridiculous. The UK is one of the better countries for youth rights...I've researched such laws myself. I don't advocate child pornography one bit. I agree with you there. I just think that it should be ok for young people to buy and download porn and have sex, not have some adult try to seduce them into a relationship. Coercion is wrong, no matter what. If coercion is the issue, then why don't we focus on true rape and coercion rather than just porn itself? That's where the problem lies. Adults like to seduce young people because it's illegal and it gives them a power trip over the younger partner.

In addition, why is 18 the perfect age? It's arbitrary.

What is the law in Germany for such things?

think it's 16 to have sex, and 18 to buy porn, although they really don't enforce things as much in Germany as much as they do in other countries, like *cough* the United States. I noticed countries who are weaker on "pedophilia" laws (I'm talking about those who are too hard on teenagers) tend to have fewer problems than really restrictive countries like the United States.

Well, how many times does a child tell "mum" that somebody is touching them inappropriately and they are not believed? And let's not forget that the perpetrator often either bribes the child or threatens to do something nasty to them if they tell.

Part of the reason kids are often not believed when they report abuse is that then their mum is put on the spot. She may not want to confront the father/stepfather/grandfather and if it is the male breadwinner in the family, she then has to contend with the spectre of trying to support herself and her kid/s on her own.

I know the child's welfare should be paramount, but people are often weak and lacking the ability to deal with these situations.

I don't think pornography should be made available to children - it is ugly, stupid and boring in most cases.

Children have no need for porn. Most adults have no need for it either. I regard porn as like gambling, illicit drugs, sport and organised religion. If all of these things disappeared overnight the world would be a better place.

Why sport?