From that December 1953 Playboy cover when Marilyn Monroe first solicited millions of our future scientists, judges and national leaders, there are so many child predators online, says one officer, it’s like “shooting fish in a barrel.”
Thousands of authorities with vast legal, employment, economic and social power over women and children have been arrested recently for child pornography and/or child sexual solicitation.
Along with scores of teachers, some lawyers, clergy and such, in the last few months a Wharton School university professor, a Senate aide, the U.S. Olympic Committee marketing director, an FBI agent, a sheriff’s deputy, a Missouri mayor and a married, female prosecutor (and PTA president) were all arrested for child pornography and/or abuse.
A Georgia judge just had a sex torture audio tape returned to him (his “private fantasy”), and an Oklahoma judge was just convicted of using a sexual device under his robe and exposing himself during jury trials.
I now consider all pornography “erototoxins” – all are toxic forms of eros.
Nowadays grade school chums sit at their computers pasting classmates’ pictures over “adult” pornography, and click! Susie, Janie, Barb and Tommy appear on millions of computers and cell phones worldwide. This is called “pseudo-child pornography.”
Before you can say “Little Bo Peep,” little girls who wannabe like Britney or that Hilton person are sending sex shots of themselves worldwide. Fame, fortune and romance are really round every corner.
Like the Supremes, we are so sophisticated, clever, so aware, so educated now.
And why not? In 2002, the U.S. Supremes rejected the part of the Child Pornography Prevention Act that prohibited “computer or computer-generated image or picture, that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct.”
For example, on Jan. 19 the New Hampshire state Supreme Court overturned the conviction of an official Amherst Camp Young Judea photographer who had inserted the camper girls’ faces onto pornographic pictures. Since he did not market his erototoxic images, the court made his abuse legal.
This means anyone can eroticize your children’s photos for autoerotic use at home – or perhaps for a home party?
The New Hampshire decision was signed by Chief Justice John Broderick. Justice James Duggan spoke for the three legalizers who said the pictures were “distasteful, reprehensible and valueless.” Nonetheless, they quoted America’s “long and sacred tradition” that they are sure allows men to place children’s faces on the bodies of writhing, tortured naked women for autoerotic services.
Several of the girls’ images included lewd captions alongside their pictures.
Associate Justice Gary Hicks dissented: “I believe that a child need not actually engage in the sexual activity depicted in morphed child pornography to be a victim of sexual exploitation.”
The photographer’s lawyer said, as the children were being utilized to serve the accused’s “private fantasy” his arrest was an attempt at “thought control.” Yet discovery of these pictures meant they are neither private nor a fantasy, but public and real.
Moreover, the frontal lobe (“thought”) would be inactive during the use of these erototoxic images for arousal and climax.
New Hampshire’s Attorney General Kelly Ayotte said:
“We believe that incorporating identifiable pictures of real children (into pornography) certainly does present harm to children that should be protected by law.”
Right now, scores of websites display free, high-tech child/infant pornographic illustrations that are more vile and brutal than could ever be produced by real child photography. The “art” shows children “enjoying” their most horrific tortures, assuaging millions of viewers’ consciences and suborning juvenile and adult barbaric copycat crimes.
Americans historically held that morality was a public matter, for our morality dictated our societal civility. The prescient Tom Paine warned, “When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary.”
Related special offers: