Should you have to be 18 to feature in porn?

[MisterMaggot]

The age at which one can legally feature in a pornographic film or images, hardcore or softcore, is 18. This age was set by the 'Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography' in 2002. Despite this the age of consent for sex is usually lower than 18 in most nations/states.

Why is it acceptable for individuals below the age of 18 to have sex but unacceptable for them to feature in pornography? Why is it justifiable to make sexual images/video of a teenager aged 18 but not 16? If lawmakers are concerned about potential exploitation why isn't the age at which one can be in porn 21 or above?

It should be noted that in the UK the 'Sun' and other British tabloids frequently featured topless 16 year old's until 2003, this had no adverse effects on child welfare in that country.

[ClydeLee]

Why would it be 21, That doesn't even make sense? I suppose because you can connect that to the drinking age? That itself makes no sense and is just older social conservative fear backing the policy and keeping it's rule intact. It would be likely better off being adjusted as it causes plenty of issues.

At 18 you are legally adult. It's a states rights issue to being able to give sexual consent, but you can't control a pornographic image to be held within state boundaries in a state where it is legal.

[earmuffs]

Two different things.

Having sex as a teenager happens all the time. Teens experiement, they start dating, they become interested in the opposite sex (or same, I aint judging), they have their first kiss etc.. etc.. it's all very.. social.
It's a social, friendly, first love thing etc.. More innocent I suppose.

Porn however.. porn is more serious. Less friendly and sociable.

Compare it to like firing a gun in the backyard trying to knock bottles off the back fence, and going to war. Little extreme but I think it gets my point across.


When you are a teen I think you think you're an adult, but it's not until you are an adult and you've moved out of your parents home etc.. when you notice how much of a child you actually were.

[MisterMaggot]

(30-01-2013 06:56 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Porn however.. porn is more serious. Less friendly and sociable.

So you think it's acceptable for an 18 year old to be gang banged by a bunch of black guys? You don't think an 18 year old might regret that decision?

Quote:Why would it be 21, That doesn't even make sense?

The poll says 21 or over.

Quote:At
18 you are legally adult.

But not mature enough to drink alcohol. Why mature enough to feature in a porn film which could ruin your life?

[amyb]

(30-01-2013 06:56 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Two different things.

Having sex as a teenager happens all the time. Teens experiement, they start dating, they become interested in the opposite sex (or same, I aint judging), they have their first kiss etc.. etc.. it's all very.. social.
It's a social, friendly, first love thing etc.. More innocent I suppose.

Porn however.. porn is more serious. Less friendly and sociable.

Compare it to like firing a gun in the backyard trying to knock bottles off the back fence, and going to war. Little extreme but I think it gets my point across.


When you are a teen I think you think you're an adult, but it's not until you are an adult and you've moved out of your parents home etc.. when you notice how much of a child you actually were.

Teens experiment, but most of the time, their experimentation is not on internet paysites or released on DVD. I think the age of consent matters here not just for consent to sexual activity, but maturity to say whether or not one wishes to have video footage of themselves covered in cum sold for profit. And the presence of mind to think about possible future consequences of being in porn (it can limit your future career options, cause social embarrassment, and you'll have to explain it to future romantic partners and/or children. for some people, the business apparently causes emotional scars, as well).

Deciding the legal age for adulthood is problematic and a bit arbitrary, but it has to be done, I suppose. Not to say everyone who is in porn at age 18 is especially mature, but I'm saying that at that point, they are legally responsible for their decisions.

So anyway, I think for legal reasons, one must draw a line somewhere when it comes to maturity and consent, and 18 is probably as good an age as any. Also for the reason that many young kids probably aren't mature enough to make a sane and informed decision about whether or not they should be in porn.

Porn is not regular sex. Porn is sex for profit in front of a camera. Has nothing to do with friendliness, I'd say, but more with the fact that there is a permanent record of it.

[Luminon]

(30-01-2013 07:40 AM)MisterMaggot Wrote:  The age at which one can legally feature in a pornographic film or images, hardcore or softcore, is 18. This age was set by the 'Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography' in 2002. Despite this the age of consent for sex is usually lower than 18 in most nations/states.

Why is it acceptable for individuals below the age of 18 to have sex but unacceptable for them to feature in pornography? Why is it justifiable to make sexual images/video of a teenager aged 18 but not 16? If lawmakers are concerned about potential exploitation why isn't the age at which one can be in porn 21 or above?

Sex is natural, it may have a lower age of consent and in most countries it indeed does. But... there is a dirty, filthy thing in porn indeed and that is business. The unhealthy influence of camera, point light, script and shutter on sex is well-described in medical journals. It has been also proven that camera steals your soul, more precisely, the soul is stolen by an army of hairy, drooling fat men who pay money for the porn. Money, that is another dirty, filthy thing that big corporations want you to use.

If you want some healthy, natural, organic porn, go to the amateur video websites, some pieces there even show a presence of love.

[Filox]

Seriously?

[Vera]

(08-02-2013 05:19 AM)MisterMaggot Wrote:  

(30-01-2013 06:56 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Porn however.. porn is more serious. Less friendly and sociable.

So you think it's acceptable for an 18 year old to be gang banged by a bunch of black guys? You don't think an 18 year old might regret that decision?

How exactly did you arrive from earmuffs' answer to the conclusion that he thinks the gangbang of a 18-year old is acceptable?!?!?!?!

Also, what exactly does the skin colour of that bunch of guys have to do with it? Would it be less unacceptable if they were white?

[Lucius]

It would appear to me that the only reason the age requirement is set to "18" is to maintain legalisation. Whether a girl is mature enough to make a rational decision about getting involved in pornography at the age of 18 or 21 is an entirely different question altogether. ClydeLee and earmuffs both make some very valid points. Once a girl turns 18, she is considered, in the eyes of the law, an adult. As such, the consequences of her actions will be dealt with accordingly. Some girls are more mature then others, despite being younger. Everyone is different and unique. As such, the effectiveness of setting the age requirement from 18 to 21, I feel, does not create much of an impact in this regard.

As for the comparison between girls having sex at 16 and participating in porn at 18, I'm in agreement with earmuffs.

[Luminon]

(08-02-2013 06:18 AM)Filox Wrote:  Seriously?

50% seriously, 50% tongue in cheek. I'd say the commercial exploit of porn industry dirties people more than when a couple makes a video and somehow it gets online. It is embarrassing when it gets to the school or employer, but a healthy dose of shame is a good thing. We're in a society today that has no shame at all. Nothing matters anymore. I'd say we should return to the essence of things, to the right motivation. Then we won't need laws that allow or forbid us to have sex. Everyone has a different level of maturity, in reality we'd need a different age of consent for everyone. We only make firm laws because we can't rely on motivation and shame to keep people from getting hurt. Our society is breaking down, it doesn't hold together by relationships, so we try to patch the holes with laws. I know, it's complicated, laws are better than nothing, so it is good to have some kind of flexible anglo-saxon jury system that can customize the law. In my country law is explicit, it's insanely elaborate to account for everything and it takes up to 8 years to convict a man.