Small Breasts lead to pedophilia, Aussie Senator claims.

[Bob Hubbard]

Aussie censor balks at bijou boobs
Gets confused about other female bits also
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/28/australian_censors/

Breasts came under the spotlight a year ago, as Senators Barnaby Joyce and Guy Barnett commenced a campaign against publicly available porn. Rounding up magazines from corner shops and filling stations, Senator Joyce claimed that publications featuring small-breasted women were encouraging paedophilia.

According to Fiona Patten, Convenor of the Australian Sex Party: "We are starting to see depictions of women in their late 20s being banned because they have an A cup size.

Also, female orgasms are to be banned.

At the same time, the Australian Sex Party claims, Federal government censors are directing Customs officials to confiscate depictions of the female orgasm when it is accompanied with an ejaculation, as the Classification Board is also starting to classify films that feature female ejaculation as RC. Films that show both male and female ejaculation have routinely been given an X rating since 1983.
The new ruling follows a boom in the numbers of adult films featuring female ejaculation since the pioneering research of Professor Emeritus Beverly Whipple was published in her book The G Spot.
The films are being banned on one of two grounds:
1) That the depictions are a form of urination which is banned under the label of ‘golden showers’ in the Classification Guidelines or
2) Female ejaculation is an ‘abhorrent’ depiction

Then there's Germany

Both issues have featured recently in Europe. Back in November 2008, Hustler Europe filed a constitutional complaint against a section of German law that criminalises sales and distribution of content depicting "adult actors who show a youthful appearance".

So much for cute little farm girls in shorty shorts, pigtails and a tied shirt.... Mary Ann!!!!!!!!!! (think Kirk screaming Kahn in ST2) lol.

 

[Drac]

So much for cute little farm girls in shorty shorts, pigtails and a tied shirt.... Mary Ann!!!!!!!!!! (think Kirk screaming Kahn in ST2) lol.

Good visual....

 

[Tez3]

Does one have to be Australian to join the Sex Party?


I was nearly Australian, my parents applied for the £10 emigration but changed their minds at the last minute.

 

[Jenny_in_Chico]

"2) Female ejaculation is an ‘abhorrent’ depiction "

Many people have never heard of female ejaculation, and think it has something to do with urinating during sex. This is the basis upon which it is being banned. People are willfully ignorant about this subject, preferring to rely upon what they assume to be true rather than upon the anatomical, physiological and experiential evidence.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I'm all for outlawing legit problems like pedophilia, but sometimes I honestly wonder if we elect people with brains.

 

[Flea]

They're right you know.

Consider the chilling aftermath of Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction:

"By the time CBS cut to an aerial view of the stadium, the damage was done," said Wasserbaum, who has also worked extensively with orphaned and amputee children in Third World war zones. "I've found that children can be amazingly resilient, but this event was too much for many of them to take. The horrible image of that breast is likely to haunt them for the rest of their lives."
According to the 500-page report filed by the FCC, more than 90 percent of the children who saw the exposed breast said they were "confused and afraid."
"Mommy has dirty chest bumps," said a 5-year-old boy quoted in one of the thousands of case studies compiled by the FCC. "She's like the bad lady on TV. I'm afraid Mommy will take off her shirt and scare everyone. I hate Mommy."

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I've seen thousands of breasts over the years and I am here to tell you that I have not been effected at all.

 

[CoryKS]

I've seen thousands of breasts over the years and I am here to tell you that I have not been effected at all.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

[celtic_crippler]

Pedophilia is wrong, but anything between consenting adults should be left to the consenting adults.

I can't stand others trying to ram their beliefs down everybody elses' throat. Let them go and be stupid by themselves. Leave me the hell alone.

If female ejaculation seems somehow "bad" to you... then that's your hang up. Keep it to yourself or seek therapy for it. A woman having an orgasm doesn't hurt anyone or jeopardize anyone's health or well-being.

Some people need to get over themselves... and can you believe my friends consider me a prude!?!?

 

[MA-Caver]

I've seen thousands of breasts over the years and I am here to tell you that I have not been effected at all.

Well, that's because you're not a child Bob. :uhyeah:

The films are being banned on one of two grounds:
1) That the depictions are a form of urination which is banned under the label of ‘golden showers’ in the Classification Guidelines or
2) Female ejaculation is an ‘abhorrent’ depiction

Definitely a quotation from the ignorant. Definitely one who doesn't understand the female body and what it's capable of doing. Definitely a guy who needs to get out more.

Small breast causing pedophilia... gee I guess I'm a perv because my gf who is 22 years younger than me (she's 26 yrs old btw) and has a small b cup size falls under this ignoramus' criteria.

Love to hear the jokes created by Aussie's over this particular censor.

BTW Flea, your Janet Jackson article is by the Onion... not to be taken seriously... ever! but I guess you knew that and your sarcasm is noted.

Haven't people got better things to do?

 

[Ken Morgan]

Glad to see they're doing a scientific study and consulting experts before they make an ignorant decision. Oh wait.....

 

[Bill Mattocks]

The Senator is probably making a common mistake. He is confusing pedophilia with hebephilia and ephebophilia. Pedophiles have a sexual preference for pre-pubescent children of either sex. Hebephiles prefer pubescent children, and ephebophiles are what is commonly terms 'dirty old men' for holding a preference to post-pubescent but young people of either sex.

Besides the mistake in labeling, he has the problem backwards. Most men in western society are ephebophiles, and advertisers know it. They cater to that predilection with advertising designed to appeal to their target demographic - in this case, middle-aged men, by providing images of teenage girls. The fact that Hustler used to publish a successful magazine called "Barely Legal" is proof of this.

Western society condemns such predilections at the same time, so few men will freely admit they are ephebophiles, and most exhibit strong angry responses towards those who accuse them of it. Society also tends to react harshly to true pedophiles and hebophiles, who are often considered the worst of the worst. For example, in the USA, men who are convicted of the most heinous murders or rapes are released at the very latest when their sentences are completely served. Those called 'sexual predators', who are often pedophiles or hebophiles, can be held for life using a term called 'civil commitment' which imprisons them for life no matter how much of their original term is served.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009350910_websexpredator17m.html

Under Washington state law, sex offenders can be confined indefinitely if it's determined they're a danger to the public.

I'm not saying such confinement is wrong - I'm just pointing out that we don't even give such harsh treatment to murderers. If they serve their time, we release them, no matter how terrible their crimes were. This shows how much we are revolted by pedophiles, while many of us are attracted to young people ourselves - just not quite THAT young.

Food for thought.

 

[Ken Morgan]

I'm not saying such confinement is wrong - I'm just pointing out that we don't even give such harsh treatment to murderers. If they serve their time, we release them, no matter how terrible their crimes were. This shows how much we are revolted by pedophiles, while many of us are attracted to young people ourselves - just not quite THAT young.

Really? You guys don’t have a way of keeping people in?

We’ve got “Dangerous Offender Status”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dangerous_offender#United_States

Not perfect but it keeps some of them in for a very long time.

 

[Carol]

. For example, in the USA, men who are convicted of the most heinous murders or rapes are released at the very latest when their sentences are completely served. Those called 'sexual predators', who are often pedophiles or hebophiles, can be held for life using a term called 'civil commitment' which imprisons them for life no matter how much of their original term is served.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009350910_websexpredator17m.html


I'm not saying such confinement is wrong - I'm just pointing out that we don't even give such harsh treatment to murderers. If they serve their time, we release them, no matter how terrible their crimes were. This shows how much we are revolted by pedophiles, while many of us are attracted to young people ourselves - just not quite THAT young.

Food for thought.

In the U.S. we do absolutely nothing with people that are attracted to other people regardless of what their age is. A person can potentially be as attracted as they want to a child, a teen, or an adult. Society and the law only gets involved that action is expressed. Simple attraction is not enough to cause trouble, there must be actions involved.

I suspect the majority of sex offenders in the U.S. are not paedophiles. I have no doubt that many are, but I think the majority are not. My understanding that the strong punitive measures against sex offenders are more of a testament as to how they largely cannot be rehabilitated, not out of revulsion for who they are attracted to.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

In the U.S. we do absolutely nothing with people that are attracted to other people regardless of what their age is. A person can potentially be as attracted as they want to a child, a teen, or an adult. Society and the law only gets involved that action is expressed. Simple attraction is not enough to cause trouble, there must be actions involved.

Some of those 'actions' can be 'possession of child pornography'. Before you say that child pornography itself is a crime, current US law defines child pornography as any depiction of a person as a child - that includes adult women made up to look like children (without the accompanying disclaimer that all models are indeed 18, etc) and drawings of children.

I suspect the majority of sex offenders in the U.S. are not paedophiles. I have no doubt that many are, but I think the majority are not. My understanding that the strong punitive measures against sex offenders are more of a testament as to how they largely cannot be rehabilitated, not out of revulsion for who they are attracted to.

The majority of 'sex offenders' in the US are most likely not pedophiles, I'm sure. However, civil confinement is almost exclusively confined to what is termed 'Sexually violent predators'. That is, pedophiles who act on their impulses with children. Not rapists.

We lock up pedophiles for a long time - which is fine, I certainly have no problems with that. Then we often refuse to let them out even after they've served their prison terms. We don't do that to rapists.

Rapists often re-offend too. I believe my original point stands. We have a singular revulsion for child molesters (pedophiles who act), and we also punish pedophiles who do not molest, but who indulge in their perversion by looking at porn.

This is primarily because pedophilia is considered a personality disorder - a sickness. Rapists are not considered to have a personality disorder. Go figure.

 

[Carol]

The majority of 'sex offenders' in the US are most likely not pedophiles, I'm sure. However, civil confinement is almost exclusively confined to what is termed 'Sexually violent predators'. That is, pedophiles who act on their impulses with children. Not rapists.

We lock up pedophiles for a long time - which is fine, I certainly have no problems with that. Then we often refuse to let them out even after they've served their prison terms. We don't do that to rapists.

Rapists often re-offend too. I believe my original point stands. We have a singular revulsion for child molesters (pedophiles who act), and we also punish pedophiles who do not molest, but who indulge in their perversion by looking at porn.

This is primarily because pedophilia is considered a personality disorder - a sickness. Rapists are not considered to have a personality disorder. Go figure.

It is a sickness, exploiting a child that may not have the tools or the knowledge to understand what is going on is clearly not normal behaviour. We don't punish paedophiles that look at adult porn. Rapists do have a personality disorder, the difference being rape of adults as behaviour that falls under sociopathy or psycopathy.

The punishment of sex crimes in general in the U.S. has taken the track it has because of the likelyhood of the offender harming another victim. I think the reasons for civil confinement and distinctions as sexual violent predators are based on how likely that particular individual is to reoffend, and also reflects how the sentences for such crimes usually aren't life or the death penalty.

 

[Blade96]

They're right you know.

Consider the chilling aftermath of Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction:

Well, that's because you're not a child Bob. :uhyeah:

No, its because society is ****** up to here *points to head*

Its ok for a baby to get nurishment from one, but when they are weaned, they think a child would have screemy meemy nightmares if they laid eyes on one. Actually, no, scratch that, in many places its wrong to breastfeed. like there's something wrong with a mother who dares to do it in public.

Here's where I tell people who think that way to grow up out of it.

Small breast causing pedophilia... gee I guess I'm a perv because my gf who is 22 years younger than me (she's 26 yrs old btw) and has a small b cup size falls under this ignoramus' criteria.

Love to hear the jokes created by Aussie's over this particular censor.

yep, and i guess this is another way to satisfy our weird society's craving for bugger Baywatch looking breasts too.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

The punishment of sex crimes in general in the U.S. has taken the track it has because of the likelyhood of the offender harming another victim. I think the reasons for civil confinement and distinctions as sexual violent predators are based on how likely that particular individual is to reoffend, and also reflects how the sentences for such crimes usually aren't life or the death penalty.

I don't agree. We let perpetrators of other types of sex crimes, violent ones, go when their sentences are served. We reserve civil confinement almost exclusively to sex offenders who are child molesters. The death penalty is very seldom given in the USA, and a life sentence almost always has the possibility of parole, so it's not really 'life' for the most part. Indefinite sentencing means they are confined until they die, without having been sentenced by a court for a crime (other than the crime they already served the alloted time for).

Imagine being on a jury, and you hear a case of a young man who had sex with an underage girl. You agree that he broke the law, find him guilty, and he's sentenced to say a couple years in prison. However, when he is due to be released, the state classifies him as a sexual predator and civilly confines him for the rest of his life. No parole, no trial. Just a hearing and then he's gone forever. Maybe he deserves it. Maybe not. But usually in this country, we punish people based on what they did, not on what they might do.

And again, I'm not saying that it's wrong to protect ourselves from child molesters. Of course we must do that. I'm noting the disparity in how we handle a violent rapist, for example, or a gang-banging murderer, compared to a pedophile child molester. We as a society consider the child molester the worst. But we market 'young sex' to adult men - we apparently like the idea.

 

[CanuckMA]

OK, so we set a minimum breast size, say 38DDD, and anyone smaller gets free implants. :ultracool

 

[Carol]

I don't agree. We let perpetrators of other types of sex crimes, violent ones, go when their sentences are served. We reserve civil confinement almost exclusively to sex offenders who are child molesters. The death penalty is very seldom given in the USA, and a life sentence almost always has the possibility of parole, so it's not really 'life' for the most part. Indefinite sentencing means they are confined until they die, without having been sentenced by a court for a crime (other than the crime they already served the alloted time for).

Imagine being on a jury, and you hear a case of a young man who had sex with an underage girl. You agree that he broke the law, find him guilty, and he's sentenced to say a couple years in prison. However, when he is due to be released, the state classifies him as a sexual predator and civilly confines him for the rest of his life. No parole, no trial. Just a hearing and then he's gone forever. Maybe he deserves it. Maybe not. But usually in this country, we punish people based on what they did, not on what they might do.

Your logic is faulty there. If A Then B only means If A Then B or If !B then !A. Just because If A Then B is true does not mean If B Then A is true. I

Therefore if most sexually violent predators are paoedophiles, that dos NOT mean that all paedophiles are sexually violent predators.

In addition, the sex offender registry has different levels that address the criminal's risk to re-offend.

http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eopster...ps&b=terminalcontent&f=sorb_levels&csid=Eeops

And again, I'm not saying that it's wrong to protect ourselves from child molesters. Of course we must do that. I'm noting the disparity in how we handle a violent rapist, for example, or a gang-banging murderer, compared to a pedophile child molester. We as a society consider the child molester the worst. But we market 'young sex' to adult men - we apparently like the idea.

It's that whole biology thang. :lol: There is a difference between a child and an adult, and that difference is much greater than the difference between an older adult and a younger adult. Exploiting a child that may not have the tools or the knowledge to understand what is going on is clearly not normal behaviour.