494- Week 6 Responses

Kelly Stone’s Question:

1) In 1996, the Child Pornography Prevention (CPPA) "[...] made it a federal crime to reproduce, distribute, sell, receive, or possess child pornography as defined by the CPPA" (151). The CPPA prohibited, "[...] youthful-looking adults playing the parts of minors in sexual situations, as well as computer-generated images in which no child was actually involved" (151). Later, the Supreme Court declared the CPPA unconstitutional, as they felt the provisions were "overbroad." Justice Kennedy argued that "[v]irtual child pornography is not 'intrinsically related' to the sexual abuse of children, as were the materials in Ferber" (152). I agree that virtual pornography is not "intrinsically related" to child abuse; however, since it is still child pornography, I believe some sort of restriction should be made on this type of film/"art." I know that this can be a slippery slope, though, as there are many films and pieces of art involving children and sexual engagements.
Q: What do you think about the provisions of the CPPA? Do you think that they took it too far, and that virtual child pornography should not be considered criminal?


My Answer to Kelly’s Question: Sorry for the long email.

I would also agree that virtual pornography is not “intrinsically related” to child abuse and that since it is still child pornography it should have some form of regulation. I do believe the provisions of the CPPA went a bit too far but they bring up a very relevant point about virtual child pornography and whether it should be considered criminal. I do not think it should be considered criminal but consider my thoughts for a moment.
Depending on the effectiveness of the messages in how they are produced, distributed and interpreted, virtual pornography has the capability to encourage society or youth to develop a more accepted/ desensitized emotional response to that specific form of media. While there is nothing intrinsically related or wrong with “youthful-looking adults playing the parts of minors in sexual situations, as well as computer- generated images in which no child was actually involved” my question would be what does this form of digital media encourage? If that form of media reaches an older audience it has the potential to encourage sexual stimulation for people over the age of 18 and association of desire with younger looking teenagers. This in tern could lead to an accepted or desired norm that develops in people over the age of 18 about having younger partners of the opposite sex as sexual partners.
At the same time, if younger teenagers under the age of 18 are surrounded with images or virtual content that is manufactured through a computer and computer generated images (CGI), what’s to stop them from seeing the behavior as acceptable or associating interest in sexual curiosity with the non-human images? They might think that if it is alright for teenagers over the age of 18 that look young to have sexual relationships then why would it not be alright if they were explorative in their sexual questions as well?
I think popular culture has a lot to do with this and if we really take a look at the images, messages and ideas that surround us on a daily basis we see a crowd of constantly portrayed younger crowd trying to perpetually act older than they are. In the United States we have the highest rates of teen pregnancy, STD’s and divorce than any other developed nation in the world. Doesn’t that say something about how norms in this country are beginning to change in terms of how a constantly portrayed world of images that revolved around sex can affect a society?
In answering the question of how to regulate or put restrictions on the kind of content that Kelly mentions in her blog I think the answer is simple…education. If you really want to get a society to accept or understand how certain norms are affecting the world around then and get that society to be competent several movements need to occur. For one, the issue needs to be addressed and brought in the spotlight, not hidden in the darkness of guilt and shame if young teenagers have an interest in sex they don’t want to express for fear of embarrassment. Secondly, this discussion in this blog needs to be integrated in how we teach our children and young teens, as well as people over the age of 18 how to understand the topic or view it. By doing this it reinforces societal norms about the topic allowing for majority power to determine what IS acceptable and preserves freedom of artistic expression in the form of the digital media in question still possible. Additionally, people should be informed of what consequences they can suffer if they dabble in this category of child pornography. The should be informed of what they rights are and what constitutes child pornography to avoid future conflicts and establish a new norm in that area as well.
With the new advances in technology and GCI people are becoming their own producers, distributors and broadcasters of digital media. They will constantly be creating in some aspect and I feel that if those violations or if the media they produce result in a measurable account of acts committed in the name of those digital representations of minors, the producers of that content need to be prosecuted.