Posted by Lapis: 
Is there anything wrong with having legal aged models posed to appear like underage girls?

Well, in my opinion yeah, because I'm of the mind that it's kooler to have legal aged plain jane librarians posed to appear like sexy Playboy Playmates. That's just my preference.

Posted by Jing: 
shrugs
what's the big deal with underage girls anyway? girls nowadays are so sexually active at a young age that it seems almost silly
it's only really exciting when it's really taboo and nowadays it's a pity that "underage" girls are already so sexually mature. That spoils the whole barely legal fantasy for us horny men.

Ay carramba!

Posted by Jing: 
shrugs
what's the big deal with underage girls anyway? girls nowadays are so sexually active at a young age that it seems almost silly
it's only really exciting when it's really taboo and nowadays it's a pity that "underage" girls are already so sexually mature. That spoils the whole barely legal fantasy for us horny men.

So what are you getting at? Are you admitting an attraction to underage girls? Because your post is quite disturbing. I hate to say this but not ALL young girls are sexually active. I think the barely legal thing just goes a tad bit too far IMHO. Just because they are developing at 12, 13 or younger does not necessarily mean they are ready to have sex with old creepy guys.

Posted by Lapis: 
Is there anything wrong with having legal aged models posed to appear like underage girls?

If it looks like child porn... think about what kinds of people are an audience to those types of photos... I'd say yeah there is something wrong then.

Alexandria... I believe he spoke in jest.

Posted by Kuree: 

Posted by Lapis: 
Is there anything wrong with having legal aged models posed to appear like underage girls?

If it looks like child porn... think about what kinds of people are an audience to those types of photos... I'd say yeah there is something wrong then.

Thank you kuree.

I'm gonna go vomit now..

Posted by Alexandra Paris: 

Posted by Jing: 
shrugs
what's the big deal with underage girls anyway? girls nowadays are so sexually active at a young age that it seems almost silly
it's only really exciting when it's really taboo and nowadays it's a pity that "underage" girls are already so sexually mature. That spoils the whole barely legal fantasy for us horny men.

So what are you getting at? Are you admitting an attraction to underage girls? Because your post is quite disturbing. I hate to say this but not ALL young girls are sexually active. I think the barely legal thing just goes a tad bit too far IMHO. Just because they are developing at 12, 13 or younger does not necessarily mean they are ready to have sex with old creepy guys.

I think it's very hard to put a number on when sexual maturity occurs.  It happens at different times for different girls, and for some girls physical maturity happens before emotional maturity and vice-versa.

For this reason I think age of consent laws are as dumb as laws about the drinking age.

But as for shooting, I think it's case-by-case.

It's not just "old creepy guys".  The top modeling agencies are signing girls at quite young ages to do some rather steamy stuff.

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 
Yes, because there is such a huge difference between 17 and 18.

Exactly. 

However, I find it interesting the age of consent in most states is 16, while the age when one is no longer a legal "minor" (i.e. can enter into contracts, etc.) is 18.

Posted by Anthony Citrano: 

Posted by Alexandra Paris: 

Posted by Jing: 
shrugs
what's the big deal with underage girls anyway? girls nowadays are so sexually active at a young age that it seems almost silly
it's only really exciting when it's really taboo and nowadays it's a pity that "underage" girls are already so sexually mature. That spoils the whole barely legal fantasy for us horny men.

So what are you getting at? Are you admitting an attraction to underage girls? Because your post is quite disturbing. I hate to say this but not ALL young girls are sexually active. I think the barely legal thing just goes a tad bit too far IMHO. Just because they are developing at 12, 13 or younger does not necessarily mean they are ready to have sex with old creepy guys.

I think it's very hard to put a number on when sexual maturity occurs.  It happens at different times for different girls, and for some girls physical maturity happens before emotional maturity and vice-versa.

For this reason I think age of consent laws are as dumb as laws about the drinking age.

But as for shooting, I think it's case-by-case.

It's not just "old creepy guys".  The top modeling agencies are signing girls at quite young ages to do some rather steamy stuff.

You've got a definite point.  I've assisted on fashion shoots where 14 year old girls were totally dolled up and made into sex objects -- while their crazy stage mothers stood by with stars and dollar signs in their eyes.  And everyone over 30 remembers Brooke Shield's "softcore period"...Fashion is a very creepy business sometimes.  I feel much more comfortable shooting the porn that I do, because I know everyone I work with is of age.

Posted by theda: 
The audience is irrelevant.  Child pornography laws exist to protect children from being exploited. An adult dressing as a child is assumed to be in full command of their faculties and mature enough to decide what they want to do.  It doesn't matter what you think of the audience who likes barely legal porn. What matters is that children are not actually involved.

I was just going to say the same thing. He asked a question about legal aged models posing to look like younger girls, something that seems to be common on the internet these days, yet for some reason people are changing the topic. Stop spinning the fucking topic and answer his question! If you don't like it that is fine but don't start discussing under age models in relation because it has nothing to do with what he asked.

Posted by ( ANT ) Mgaphoto: 

Posted by theda: 
The audience is irrelevant.  Child pornography laws exist to protect children from being exploited. An adult dressing as a child is assumed to be in full command of their faculties and mature enough to decide what they want to do.  It doesn't matter what you think of the audience who likes barely legal porn. What matters is that children are not actually involved.

I was just going to say the same thing. He asked a question about legal aged models posing to look like younger girls, something that seems to be common on the internet these days, yet for some reason people are changing the topic. Stop spinning the fucking topic and answer his question! If you don't like it that is fine but don't start discussing under age models in relation because it has nothing to do with what he asked. 

Wow! Its 8 in the morning and I already need a drink.

First the model is female. Second... this was a question of morality as I read it. Legal and wrong are two different words. I believe the word "wrong" was used here.

I believe its wrong for anybody minor or adult to be photos where the viewer will believe the subject is *underage* and engaged in sexual activity. You believe the audience is irrelevant, fine. I don't. If I was a model that would help me figure if its wrong or not... what attention and from who will it receive.

But maybe that's just me.

EDITED TO ADD:

ps... Leila, Sorry... tmi. lol.

Posted by Marcus J. Ranum: 
What if someone takes Poser-3d and renders a computer-generated image of a flat-chested female-looking data-set that has child-like features and is engaged in erotic activity? Is that child pornography? Or what about composite images? If someone puts the head from a 12-year-old onto the body of a 19-year-old...?

I guess what I am asking is whether there has to be a victim for this particular crime?

mjr.

You raise a good point.  In the case of putting a 12-year-old's head on a 19-year-old's body, you are still involving the image on an actual child in sexually explicit matieial.

I believe (though I could be wrong), fictional children engaged in fictional sex acts may still considered child pornography from a legal standpoint.  However, I feel that is a victimless crime and I don't consider victimless crimes particularly valid.

While the intended audience influences what modeling assignments I personally choose to take, I do not feel I'm in a position to pass judgement on what adult models willingly choose to do in their modeling. I may feel uncomfortable being viewed in a certain way, but that has no bearing on the comfort level of others. I should also point out that pornographic materials must carry a clear label that all models are infact over the age of majority in their jurisdiction.  People who buy barely legal porn know the girls only *look* young.

Posted by Anthony Citrano: 

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 
Yes, because there is such a huge difference between 17 and 18.

Exactly. 

However, I find it interesting the age of consent in most states is 16, while the age when one is no longer a legal "minor" (i.e. can enter into contracts, etc.) is 18.

Which states would that be? I thought for most the age of consent was 18.
But that really isn't relavent to the topic anyway.

Posted by Leila: 
Which states would that be? I thought for most the age of consent was 18.
But that really isn't relavent to the topic anyway.

The age of majority is 18 in most states (if not all) in the US. That is the age at which one is considered an adult and can enter into contracts in their own name and so forth.

The age of consent is a different matter, dealing only with sexual consent. That age varies from 14 to 18, but 16 is very common.  I'm not sure how up-to-date ageofconcent.com is these days, but it had a pretty extensive list both for individual states in the US and other nations.

Posted by Leila: 

Posted by Anthony Citrano: 

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 
Yes, because there is such a huge difference between 17 and 18.

Exactly. 

However, I find it interesting the age of consent in most states is 16, while the age when one is no longer a legal "minor" (i.e. can enter into contracts, etc.) is 18.

Which states would that be? I thought for most the age of consent was 18.
But that really isn't relavent to the topic anyway.

even more off topic is the fact that the legal drinking age is 21, while the military takes them at 18.

Posted by theda: 

Posted by Leila: 
Which states would that be? I thought for most the age of consent was 18.
But that really isn't relavent to the topic anyway.

The age of majority is 18 in most states (if not all) in the US. That is the age at which one is considered an adult and can enter into contracts in their own name and so forth.

The age of consent is a different matter, dealing only with sexual consent. That age varies from 14 to 18, but 16 is very common.  I'm not sure how up-to-date ageofconcent.com is these days, but it had a pretty extensive list both for individual states in the US and other nations.

It doesn't seem very up to date. It still has the age of consent listed as 16 for CT when i know they recently changed it to 18. Also they have a lot of places still saying gay sex is illegal.

Posted by Leila:
Also they have a lot of places still saying gay sex is illegal.

That just made me laugh out loud.

Posted by Leila: 

Posted by theda: 

Posted by Leila: 
Which states would that be? I thought for most the age of consent was 18.
But that really isn't relavent to the topic anyway.

The age of majority is 18 in most states (if not all) in the US. That is the age at which one is considered an adult and can enter into contracts in their own name and so forth.

The age of consent is a different matter, dealing only with sexual consent. That age varies from 14 to 18, but 16 is very common.  I'm not sure how up-to-date ageofconcent.com is these days, but it had a pretty extensive list both for individual states in the US and other nations.

It doesn't seem very up to date. It still has the age of consent listed as 16 for CT when i know they recently changed it to 18. Also they have a lot of places still saying gay sex is illegal.

This one says it was "last updated February 16, 2005."

Posted by Marcus J. Ranum: 
What if someone takes Poser-3d and renders a computer-generated image of a flat-chested female-looking data-set that has child-like features and is engaged in erotic activity? Is that child pornography? Or what about composite images? If someone puts the head from a 12-year-old onto the body of a 19-year-old...?

I guess what I am asking is whether there has to be a victim for this particular crime?

mjr.

At this point in time, every federal statue that addressed this matter was deemed unconstitutional by the supreme court.
COPA, COPA II, and the others.
However, Some states, VA. is one of them, Have gotten around the unconstitutionality of the laws by enacting Decency statues.
Those have not been fully challenged yet.

The one in Virginia was challenged and overturned by the appellate court earlier this year.
However, My understanding is that the AG in VA is appealing.

Posted by Ty Simone: 

However, My understanding is that the AG in VA is appealing.

I will agree that Judy Jagdmann is more appealing than Alberto R. Gonzales.

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 

Posted by Leila: 

Posted by theda: 

Posted by Leila: 
Which states would that be? I thought for most the age of consent was 18.
But that really isn't relavent to the topic anyway.

The age of majority is 18 in most states (if not all) in the US. That is the age at which one is considered an adult and can enter into contracts in their own name and so forth.

The age of consent is a different matter, dealing only with sexual consent. That age varies from 14 to 18, but 16 is very common.  I'm not sure how up-to-date ageofconcent.com is these days, but it had a pretty extensive list both for individual states in the US and other nations.

It doesn't seem very up to date. It still has the age of consent listed as 16 for CT when i know they recently changed it to 18. Also they have a lot of places still saying gay sex is illegal.

This one says it was "last updated February 16, 2005."

Heres a good example of why not to belive everything you read on the internet. While that page does say it was updated in 2005, it also lists that first webpage as it's source. If you look at both pages someone obviously just copied and pasted the original which clearly has outdated information.

Posted by Leila: 

Posted by Anthony Citrano: 

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 
Yes, because there is such a huge difference between 17 and 18.

Exactly. 

However, I find it interesting the age of consent in most states is 16, while the age when one is no longer a legal "minor" (i.e. can enter into contracts, etc.) is 18.

Which states would that be? I thought for most the age of consent was 18.
But that really isn't relavent to the topic anyway.

Leila, you're right.  In retrospect it was a bit off topic.

I (thankfully) cannot rattle off the states where it's 15, 16, 17, etc... but I do know in most US states it is 16.  I see a few links have been posted, perhaps those will help.

Edit: good article on Wikipedia on that topic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent

Posted by theda:  ageofconcent.com 

The fact that the domain is even registered disturbs me.

Posted by Kuree: 

Posted by Lapis: 
Is there anything wrong with having legal aged models posed to appear like underage girls?

If it looks like child porn... think about what kinds of people are an audience to those types of photos... I'd say yeah there is something wrong then.

Alexandria... I believe he spoke in jest.

I hope it was. Because jokes like that are not really cool with me.

BTW my name is spelled A-L-E-X-A-N-D-R-A there is no 'i' in it. Several people have done this when mis-prouncing my name so I would like to nip it in the bud now.

Alexandra not Alexandria