Have I suddenly lost my command of English?

[trixtah]

Look, I'm having a really wanky set of interchanges over on vintage_sex regarding a post someone made which linked to a bunch of erotic drawings - one of which featuring a representation of a man having sex with a child.

I objected quite strenuously to the link being posted without warning, and now I'm being told that the image concerned was not "child porn", and - patronisingly - my own experiences are essentially colouring my perception of what the situation is. I'm not denying the latter fact, but I also don't think my PoV is irrelevant here.

So, is a picture (a drawn one) that features an adult man having sex with a child "child-porn" or not? If not, why not, because I really am not understanding the point these people are making.

Here's the discussion thread, if you'd like to look. I'm not trying to rope anyone into the argument on my behalf - I'm wanting to know if there is something really obvious about what they're saying that I'm failing to grok. I also think I would be a lot less irked about this if the OP acknowledged that perhaps a warning would have been in order.

Thank you.

Comments

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

Ok, I think that is the premise they're coming from - that if there is no "exploitation" of a real child, then it doesn't count as "child porn".

I actually don't care about what the legal definition of the term is, in the US or any other country - I was using it personally to describe a piece of pornography that featured sex with a child. I even clarified that that was my meaning/intention in my comment when it seemed we were on a goalpost-moving mission.

Whether or not we call representations of sex with children "child porn" or "rumplestiltskin", I would still appreciate a warning of such content. If it seemed that a real child was being abused, I would have had no hesitation in baying for the balls (and legal penalties) of the person concerned. But to have my - I think entirely justified - request for a warning over squickable content ignored and moved to a debate over semantics is annoying in the extreme.