Re: Child porn as thoughtcrime

[mpd@netcom.com (Mike Duvos)]

frantz@netcom.com (Bill Frantz) writes:

 > It seems to me that the logic of these answers would make
 > the movie, "Carried Away" illegal.  According to a Boston
 > Globe review (reprinted in the local rag), "... his
 > character cheats on his longtime girlfriend with a new
 > student who's only 17, ..." Depending on how this is
 > depicted in the movie (Rated R), it seems to me that this
 > could go over Hatch's line. (BTW, the review rates the movie
 > 3 stars out of a possible 4.)

This is an interesting point.  There are a plethora of foreign
films, and some domestic ones, which contain frontal nudity by
persons under 18, as well as suggestions and sometimes even
fairly explicit depictions of acts such as masturbation or sex
between adolescents or (horrors) between an adolescent and an
adult.

None of these films has a rating worse than an (R) from the
censors at the MPAA, and a lot of them have glowing reviews
singing their praises by the likes of Siskel and Ebert, Judith
Crist, and John Hartl.

Paradoxically, the US Government has never prosecuted a
mainstream film under child pornography laws, evidently feeling
that this was a can of worms they didn't dare open, or at the
very least, not wanting to risk losing the case and establishing
a precedent

So while people are getting prosecuted for a grainy computer
picture they downloaded from the Internet, which some pediatric
"expert" testifies "appears to depict a minor", such glowing
cinematic moments such as the hardon comparison scene in Bernardo
Bertolucci's "1900", or Jill Clayburgh masturbating her teenage
son to orgasm in "Luna", are freely available to anyone who wants
them, and even get shown on Premium Cable to boot.  Not to
mention the child nudity in films ranging from the ancient
"Macbeth" to the adolescent boy loves boy epic "You Are Not
Alone."

Showtime must have run David Hamilton's "Tendres Cousines" at
least a zillion times when it was first released, as well as
prominently featuring it in their weekly softcore erotica slot,
even though it featured the rather explicit seduction of a 14
year old boy by an older girl, complete with nudity, flushed
cheeks, and panting orgasms.

If the Hatch bill in one form or another passes, will the
government still continue to ignore the art film market in its
quest to stamp out depictions of child sex?  How will the
artistic community react when the feds start throwing people in
jail, and burning the master prints of critically aclaimed films,
under the excuse that the mere existence of such material
"sexualizes" children and "encourages child abuse?"

Should make for some interesting court tests. 

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     mpd@netcom.com     $    via Finger.                      $