Abstract
Abstract ‘Child pornography’ is a misleading term. This is not the tawdry glamour of Playboy centrefolds, nor yet the gory gynaecology of hard-core. In fact it is not pornography in any real sense: simply the evidence – recorded on film or video tape – of serious sexual assaults on young children. Still people choose to confuse it with adult pornography, lending it an air of spurious legitimacy and titillation, an aura of faintly harmless ‘naughtiness’. When in 1988 the British government announced plans to make possession of child pornography an offence, a (woman) columnist in The Times opposed the legislation on the grounds that the problem was not sufficiently serious to warrant such ‘censorship’: ‘One is revolted at the idea of children posing for pornographic pictures, but while the use to which the pictures may be put in someone’s mind is abhorrent, I can’t really see that simply photographing a child exploits him ’.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
