To remind posters that the term 'Child Porn' is offensive?

[BucksFrizz]

It implies consent when they are actually images/film of children being sexually abused.
If we keep bumping this, maybe people will get the message.
Thank you

You are definitely 100% not being unreasonable. It's one of my pet hates. When I raise it with people and they say they don't think it's that bad I always ask them 'if it was your child, would you call it 'porn'?' The answer is always 'oh. Well no I wouldn't' '.

YANBU

The BBC need to stop.

Yanbu. The term is not used in courts. It's called indecent images of children.

But I think a lot of people just use the phrase without thinking about it or what it means

From where I'm sitting it seems some people have decided to change the meaning.

YANBU

I can’t believe that people still use such an offensive term.

It’s child abuse FFS!

But I think a lot of people just use the phrase without thinking about it or what it means
*

But if they have in fact thought about what it means, as slarti and I have above, then surely they would see it is not indicative of or implicating consent/acceptablitiy/not being categorically wrong...... because the words themselves do not mention consent in their definition.

Nikephorus
Even if a child was technically voluntarily selling themselves for sex you'd not think they'd 'played a part in the abuse'

You would think so but the govt disagreed, children have been denied compensation as they'' consented to their abuse.'' Children cannot give consent.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/11/scandal-child-sex-victim-denied-compensation-officials-rule/

''In a letter turning down her request for compensation, the CICA official told Ms Woodhouse: “I am not satisfied that your consent was falsely given as a result of being groomed by the offender.
“The evidence does not indicate that you were manipulated or progressively lured into a false relationship.”''

The correct term is ''images of child abuse''. Its essential to use it as a constant reminder to people who excuse offender behaviour.

It’s child abuse FFS!

The two terms are not mutually exclusive. Quite the opposite, they are irrevocably synonymous. To accuse anyone who uses the term child porn of suggesting it isn't abuse is itself offensive.

“ it doesn't matter what words you use, it's the activity behind them that counts. Don't waste time having a go at people for using 'the wrong words', put all your emotions into solving the basic problem.”

It absolutely does matter what words you use. That is fact.

Language is important. Totally agree with the posters who asked if it were your child would you be saying child prostitution and child porn? Or an abused child/images of child abuse.

I agree yanbu wholeheartedly and I'm really really not often bothered by political incorrectness.

Even more offensive is 'kiddiporn' which I have heard elderly people using.

I know it doesn't mean the users of the phrase are any less horrified than anyone else, but we need to stop euphemistic language so that everyone can understand clear boundaries.

Please, if you use that term, stop.

Well I’m lucky enough in my life that the phrase doesn’t cross my vocabulary. It obviously does affect people though and I’ll keep that in mind from now on. However I will never hear the words ‘child pornography/prostitution’ and think there’s an element of consent from the child involved. It is an oxymoron, no right minded person would (in my opinion) ever hear those words and use it as a way of excusing or normalising such vile acts. However, I’m obviously in the minority in that thought, and I wouldn’t argue my opinion further.

“pornography, technically and in its definition is images intended to sexually excite. There is no implication of consent in the term pornogeaphy.”

“prostitution by definition has no mention of consent”

Llanali I think you are being very naïve here, and not coming across well.

Totally agree. It’s an abhorrent phrase that (IMHO) opinion minimises the dreadful suffering that the children involved have been subjected especially since the advent of phrases such as “property porn” and “sporn”.

However, it pales in comparison to the truly horrific “kiddy porn”.

But if they have in fact thought about what it means, as slarti and I have above, then surely they would see it is not indicative of or implicating consent/acceptablitiy/not being categorically wrong...... because the words themselves do not mention consent in their definition.

It's still offensive.

Agreed

BBC just clearly said 'child abuse images'

@deadgood and @sn0tnose

I have already up thread more than once accepted that people find it offensive and I shan’t use the phrase anymore.

I also stated it was not for me to decide what is or isn’t, should or should t be offensive to others. I was merely showing my view point that I do not see an implication of consent in words that do not relate to consent.

YABU

Yes, I realize I am in the minority, but porn is not the same thing as erotica.

Erotica = sexual images intended to arouse
Porn = (paid/forced) sexualized abuse that is either filmed or photographed

Have a look at Hot Girls Wanted if you don't believe me. I think it's still on Netflix.

Using the term 'Child Porn' to describe the sexual abuse of children is accurate.

I also stated it was not for me to decide what is or isn’t, should or should t be offensive to others. I was merely showing my view point that I do not see an implication of consent in words that do not relate to consent. Really? Because it looked like you were more concerned with arguing about consent.

Well I’m sorry that’s what it looked like.
I never ever once said I thought the children consented or that it meant it wasn’t child abuse. It is, of course it is.

As I said, I’ll not use the phrase again. I don’t intend to offend people. But I also don’t get offended by the phrase.

Llanali is right.

Pornography is intended to cause sexual excitement. The word does not mean or even vaguely imply that the people being filmed or photographed have consented in any way.

Of course the term "child pornography" is appalling, because those are two concepts which should never go together. But it is accurate and in no way incompatible with the term "images of child abuse."

Surely nobody here thinks that all "adult" porn is made by happy, willing, fully informed, unexploited participants?

Am going to go against the grain here to say that 'child abuse imagery' is actually a sanitised term. 'Child porn' is the stronger term because when you say that a man has been caught downloading child porn, everyone knows what men do with porn - they masturbate to it. Whereas a man caught 'viewing child abuse imagery' sounds very passive; the specific sexual purpose of it is elided - after all, anyone could 'view' child abuse imagery for any number of purposes, including legitimate ones, such as law enforcement officers reviewing material for a case against child pornographers.

Further, images of child abuse also include things that aren't sexual in nature, such as photos of a child's bruises in a police file. And 'imagery' obscures the fact that people produce these images for a specific purpose, i.e., masturbation material for paedophiles, whereas 'porn' draws attention to that fact.

Of course, everyone 'knows' for what purpose men are downloading child porn; I'm not claiming that the use of 'child abuse imagery' means people will actually be ignorant of the fact that paedophiles are seeking this material in order to masturbate to it, what I'm saying is that using sanitised phrases to describe it actually distances us from the full, ugly horror of what's going on: that there are people, overwhelmingly men, who are sexually excited by watching children being raped and tortured.

In my line of work we use the term 'indecent images of children'.

An even more sanitised phrase. Think of the visceral response 'child porn' induces vs the polite, almost prim 'indecent images of children'. That's part of the reason people prefer these sanitised phrases that implicitly elide the fact that this material is produced as a masturbatory aid. It's less viscerally upsetting, creates emotional distance.

Am fully prepared for most people on this thread to disagree with me.