Sex, Pornography and Children: Part 4

Ed Hurst, 19 April 2003

Child Pornography

A part of this insane, hysterical view of childhood and sexuality is the current propaganda about child pornography. I say "propaganda" not to dismiss the problem, but to dismiss the noise currently made about it in government announcements through the media.

Most of us realize we have at least a dual nature, in that, though born again in Christ, we yet live with the sinful nature of our human flesh (Romans 7). If we detect the sinful inclinations of our flesh, we are in a position to guard against them, relying on the Holy Spirit for guidance and power. If we deny they exist, perhaps out of some misplaced fear they will consume us -- a lack of faith -- we are sure to fall at some point.

Most men, and many women, can wisely admit that something in youth calls out to us, and engenders various desires. The difference between fallen nature and sinful living is whether we can keep that fallen nature from having a vote in the process of deciding to act. To express shock that a man finds a flirty 10-year-old just a bit sexy is pure ignorance of God's Word regarding human nature. Save the shock for the man who goes on to solicit sexual favors from her. Making girls flirty is the result of modern advertising. Most Christian men (and many sinners, for that matter) can simply ignore it, and will express instead a proper and fatherly admiration for her "cuteness." Though there are fewer of them, a significant number of men face a similar dynamic with boys. But the Freudian myth of scarcely deniable urges -- that every man is on the verge of raping a child -- is simply not true.

What female doesn't know that men are dominated by a visual orientation when it comes to sex hormones? Why else the massive portion of our global economy supporting the enhancement of women's and girls' appearance? No surprise then, that pornography is primarily marketed at men. It's quite unlikely any given man will see that much flesh, and in so great a variety, in real life. How, and even whether, we control this market is a matter for another study. That we have a market in child pornography is the issue at hand.

Adults can legally engage in all sorts of sexual behavior in front of a camera, and most of us would simply avoid looking. The only way children can be photographed in such a setting is if someone breaks the law. Even assuming the child is willing to engage in the sex acts on camera (case histories indicate some kids thought it was just a game, and never complained), we naturally ask: How "willing" can a child be when they could scarcely understand what they are doing? There are plenty of adults who don't understand sex! What's most frightening is that the majority of these children are posed and photographed by their own family -- money is a powerful lure.

A Ph.D. Anthropologist, in a country with no pornography laws of any kind, conducted a thorough search of the Internet a couple of years ago. His target was to collect every child pornography image, as defined by US law, available on the Internet. This was about the time US federal authorities began making so much noise about it, seeking new and intrusive search powers. The researcher found that, dating back as far as the oldest Internet images available, there were about 400 children involved altogether. The whole collection of photos was well under 2000. Most of that came during a surge lasting 3-4 years. In more than 10 years time, over the whole world, the production of Internet child pornography was really quite tiny. Police reports indicate that the printed market is even smaller.

He notes some of the images are stomach-churning, but most are fairly tame, and many just barely meet the definition of "illegal." In communicating with some of the marketers, he found that their sources had somewhat dried up. There are seldom more than 12 new child subjects introduced in any given year. So we note that the practice is revolting, and rightly criminalized, but is on a surprisingly small scale. Compared to other categories of crime, this is a huge success story.

So why do we have claims in the media that so-and-so's computer had an astonishing 10,000 child pornography images downloaded from the Internet? Simple; most of them are not illegal images. There are indeed several hundred new images produced each year of simple child nudity. Say what you will about whether simple nudity should be illegal or not; by their own definitions, those media reports from police of "thousands of images" are bogus. In at least one case, it was leaked that the actual illegal content was about a dozen photos, and then several hundred nudity shots (nudist camp stuff), and quite a few of kids in swimming attire.

The real problem is buried in hype. It's an excuse for the government to intrude on your privacy. That's not just the Internet snooping; they use this propaganda to justify all sorts of intrusions on the sanctity of the family home. How many of us have heard the lie that one child in 10 is sexually abused? The truth is that really very few young children are being abused, and most of them not in the US.

However, given the recent rise of "Children's/Paedophiles' Rights" junk from the likes of the UN, there is a matching increase in closed and encrypted child pornography clubs. Our intrepid anthropoligist can't afford the club fees, so we look elsewhere for information. If we grant that certain non-US police agencies are less likely to mythologize the scope and size of the problem, we are still left with surprisingly few new images -- for now.

New sources of truly disgusting ("torture") images from the East are showing up. The problem is largely how the Eastern cultures view the problem, which is usually quite different from our Western views. The biggest source of new images in the West is the result of chatroom seductions of teens, and very few young children. The police masqueraders in these chatrooms are having a powerful effect in limiting this source, in part to prevent the seductions themselves, never mind the photos the paedophiles might make of their encounters.

The real fault is not the tools used for this. Computers, chatrooms and encryption all have very valid uses, and by far the vast majority of such use is, at worst, harmless to anyone. It is more the fault of our failure as believers to accurately identify and resist the changes in society introduced by Satan. The strictly enforced view that all cultures are equal hinders us sending enough missionaries to change Eastern nations and fulfill the Great Commission. The strictly enforced view that we must tolerate "alternative lifestyles" keeps us from demanding public schools back our values in teaching our children. Already the paedophiles and bestialists are demanding equal tolerance.