[Nyororin]

Originally Posted by dogsbody70

I have not looked at the original website posted on here. I thought it was all PORN which makes me feel sick

I assure you, porn and abuse of children makes me ill.
It is the legal stuff that is not pornography that I was talking about.

We are not allowed to take photos of our children in plays, Nativity plays nowadays-- nor video them.

I pass a childrens playground every day but am not allowed to talk to the children-- even though Ipass almost every day when I walk my dogs.

I find this also pretty disgusting, to be honest.
Children cannot live in a bubble. There really aren`t that many pedophiles out there. Their numbers have been going down from what I understand... And regardless most abuse is by someone close to the child - not by a stranger. Stranger abduction and abuse is extremely rare.

By making it so incredibly hard for anyone without a direct family link to the child to get to know them or intervene, it makes it easier for abuse to happen. Being too concerned is suspicious, so people will actually ignore signs of a problem because they are concerned about what people will think of them for getting involved. Robinmask gives a good example with the crying child study.

Just last night while shopping, a small boy lost and crying for his mother was scooped up by an older man and carried over to the service desk. No one suspected him of anything, and the mother thanked him profusely as apparently the boy had snuck on to an elevator when she wasn`t looking and was on a different floor. Teachers at my son`s kindergarten hug him, pick him up, encourage the kids to give each other hugs, etc. Mothers and fathers coming to pick their children up will often stop and play with other children too, and no one leaps to assume they have ulterior motives.
I think it`s very sad to limit a child`s contact with the rest of the world based on a fear of a bogeyman that is hundreds of times more likely to be close family if there at all.

That may have been true 20 years ago, but now, thanks to the Internet, these photos may come back to haunt a child when they get older.

Let us assume that there is a culture where boys are dressed as little girls until they are 10. In 10 years, at 20 - will those photos haunt the guy? No. There isn`t a cultural stigma against them.
Japan doesn`t have the sort of stigma against those sort of pictures as somewhere else. I went to school with a girl who did modeling as a child, and she was the first to show off the photos. There was even a video of them following her around while she played in a bathing suit, etc. It clearly wasn`t haunting, as there wasn`t the stigma or reaction that would be received in a western country.

And I kind of disagree that "the biggest difference between a child modeling a swimsuit in a clothing catalog and in a magazine is mostly the angle of the photo and the poses they choose to use." The biggest difference is that the clothing catalog is only trying to sell the swimsuit- the magazine will sell the child.

That is what happens to the photo after it has been taken. This is where my opinion seems to differ greatly from the common western one. What happens to the photo after it has been taken has no direct effect on the person in the photo. Whether the photos are used in a catalog or a magazine doesn`t change the experience of the photos being taken.

Most of these photo things are one-shots. Parents take their children to a modelling photographer, where a bunch of pictures are taken. Different styles of shots are sent off to different publications and agencies. 99.99% of the time that is the end of it and 80,000yen has been wasted on high priced photos. Occasionally, a magazine will pay to publish a few of the photos to gauge interest and sales potential - popping them into the magazines that are aimed at the audience most likely to pump cash into the idol industry. If a certain one of them stands out, they may ask for more photos or refer them to another photographer for a shoot. Most of the time though, the photographer is not affiliated with the magazine at all if the photos are not pornography.

When these magazines get into deep trouble, it`s when they solicit girls who are old enough to think they`re giving permission... And take advantage of that. (Think the around 18 set) It`s still child pornography, but it`s a LOT different to lure a 17 year old into stripping for the camera than a 12 year old.