I wish the press would not call it child porn....

[Phoenix1]

Re the story in the news about the father/son convictions: I wish the press would not call it child porn, they are crime scene photo?s - indecent images of children. This phrase offends the victims, undermines the crime and therefore the justice - which facilitates the offenders.

I agree and I think the term trivialises the actions in a way.
Mind you I don't think all newspapers would refer to it that way!

I HATE all these stories, we seem to have been flooded with the of recent. People are so evil.

I am not missing the point and you are really not making the point. 'Child pornography' is unequivocal in its meaning and, anyone with an ounce of intelligence, knows exactly to what it refers. Even those who peddle pornography as a business go out of their way not to use the term because they know it is negative... They couch what they do in terms like 'adult movies', 'erotica', 'glamour modelling' to make it more acceptable.

I agree Ivor it does, and this trivialisation shows up most when victims of it try to get justice or help because of it.

Just so I?m clear Cognito, are you saying that some people alter a negative by using more positive words to make it sound more acceptable?

You may be emailing the wrong people.

In a case where there are active court proceedings, journalists operate within quite a tight legal frame. They cannot "extrapolate" what they've been told by the police because they haven't seen the footage themselves so can only go on what they are told by the police. So if the police say they have recovered "images of child pornography", that's what the news coverage will report. You could argue that, for example "images of child abuse" must be one and the same thing (and I would agree with you), but you wouldn't want your chosen form of words to be the thing that causes a trial to collapse. In an active case, you say what the police say. So for a change in terminology, you need to lobby CEOP I'd argue.

I work with CEOP and can honestly assure you that they never use that phrase, indeed they brief against it. A person is never convicted of CP they are convicted of indecent images which seems to get lost in translation from the courts to the media

We?ve worked hard with the government to get this phrase removed from its policy with some success (it?s a work in progress) but it?s been a tough road as there are so many who just don?t see the harm and no amount of showing them seems to reach them.

Oh that's interesting Phoenix. I don't do crime reporting any more so maybe I'm out of date.

They have often led the way on this whole issue :0)

The point is, it is offensive to victims and perpetuates a strange kind of anti-victim prejudice that prevents its victims from getting proper justice and support.

I remember this crime back when it was called ?art? and there was no legal recognition of any crime against the child, so no justice, protection or help to recover.

Then this so-called ?art? was redefined with words as a crime - as ?indecent images of children? category 1 to 5 - then the paedophiles redefined the crime as CP to make it sound more sellable the pa£dophil£s ?dark market?.

I work now with those victimised by this crime and the fact is we find the term offensive and can?t understand why this isn?t enough.

If it really is ?just words? that don?t much matter to most people, then why not just change them to the less offensive actual words of the crime itself ?indecent images of children??

I completely agree with you OP.

A colleague in a previous job was arrested, charged and convicted of possessing indecent images of children.

I was shocked by a few colleagues who didn't actually know what it was, because it was termed child porn. I had to explain to a 20 year old colleague, that, no, it's not images of teenagers posing for slightly risque soft porn shots, some of whom may be slightly underage. She genuinely had no idea that 'child porn' covered, as you say, horrific crime scene photos.

I think there needs to be much more understanding by the media and the public in general. The term porn seems to normalise things - and I mean that of every kind of porn, but that is another thread altogether!

I agree Samantha, thank you. I guess when people first complained about the very offensive and prejudicial ?n? word, they got much the same resistance in some quarters as we now get and as they did, we will continue to stand against the use of the CP phrase until it is no longer socially accepted ? please don?t call it that?

Op, I have never really thought about the connotations of 'child porn' before, I understand your point and agree.

Somehow child pornography is a blurry description, it could be anything from an image of a baby being sexually abused to a willing teenage participant being talked by a boyfriend into posing provocatively.
I think I understand how sufferers may feel as though the name is somehow trivialising the crime.

I believe phrasing photos of abuse as 'Indecent Images of Children' leaves less doubt about the content and the serverity of such crimes.
It reminds people that such photos are not acceptable, they are a documentation of the violation and abuse endured by children, babies even young adults who do not have a choice and are unable to protect themselves from such things happening.

As an Adult i watch Porn, its Legal and between partners can be fun, to use the Phrase 'Child Porn' is not acceptable it almost is being put in the same catagory which is offensive, wrong and rather disturbing to even think about, What i watch i say again is Legal the Adults who participate are willing and of a legal age but more importantly consenting. The Phrase 'Child Porn' suggests the children involved may be willing and consenting, they are not it is abuse and the photo's taken are Indecent images, to use any other Phrase is barbaric, you would never come accross a photo of a horrific car accident where someone was killed and hurt badly traumatised for life then call it 'art' it is what it is a horrific car accident. We need to use the correct term or Phrase that is only right for the situation and consider the ordeal that these Victims have been through with as much sympathy and understanding as we can.

Could you clarify your earlier comment. I'm a bit slow today..

Phoenix1 Sun 19-Jun-11 22:28:39
''For me personally it is the difference between a child prostitute and a prostituted child.''

I am presuming that you are highlighting the influence that the precise wording has on a sentence??
Using your example above, people would not refer to a child being sold to abusers as a 'child prostitute', but, would say he/she is a 'child being prostituted'. The later definitely sounds more empathetic, and makes it clear that the child has no choice even though they are actually the same thing (every child who is involved in prostitution is being exploited and abused).

God language really is sooo important isn't it.

Yes you have it in one and we see the problems that the wrong words can cause so it is important to us to try and change the way people talk about us :0)

Thank you Different-point I could not have said it better