Old enough to work, old enough to have sex, not old enough to make a sex tape for you to sell?

[Delta4Embassy]

In addition to the usual age of consent debate is the issue of not allowing (any more) minors under the age of 18 to make sexually explicit film or videos. Think this came about in 1982 in the US when the Supreme Court declared child pornogarphy legally obscene making movies like "Pretty Baby" technically child pornography.

But if the age of concent in a given state is 16, which is also the age required to get a full-time job, then isn't forbidding two 16 year-olds who consent to sex together, making a video recording of themselves having sex together, then selling the video of the sex some kind of restraint of trade or other anti-business law? Currently, no film, video, or photographic depiction of under-18 minors engaging in sexually explicit behaviours is legal pretty much anywhere in the world. Even in places where the age of consent, and age to work is well below 18.

So basicly the law's saying that while you can have sex like a grownup, work and pay taxes like a grownup, you can't make money making sex tapes like grown ups until you're 18. While I understand the intent behind this, it's also a double-standard prejudicial to people's ability to earn a living like adults.

What if anything should be done? Raise the aoc to 18? Lower the age to produce consensual SEM for sale to whatever the aoc is? Something else?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Another oddity occurs. Most juridictions say you must be at least 18 (or some places 21) to view pornography. But these same places let you have sex well under those ages. So what, you gotta keep your eyes closed?

 

[there4eyeM]

The answer to both the above is "yes".

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Canada just had a case prompting this thread in fact. While their laws and our's don't overlap or anything, it raises a lot of the interesting oiddities of law both countries share in common. Namely a lower aoc than would be legal to profit or benefit from lawful sexual acts selling recordings of them.

Supreme Court ruling blocks adults from exploiting apparent teen consent - The Globe and Mail

I've read this twice now and still fuzzy on the verdict. Seems like they go more by the spirit/intent of the law, than the letter of their own laws than we in the US do.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yeah, Canada prompted this thread.

Sure it did

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Yeah, Canada prompted this thread.

Sure it did

Ya know, if you and the others wanna read these things can just go to the aggragate site like I do. Don't have to wear "I'm a hypocrite. I read the threads, every one of them, but then mock them to make it appear I don't enjoy them." signs around your necks.

 

[jameson245]

As I see it, pornography is sharing moments that should be respected and protected as private acts.
When people are FORCED to participate in those tapes, it is a crime as bad as rape. Not forced? Tape whatever you want but, gee, keep it to yourself.
Our kids don't need access to that stuff. Since the beginning of time they've had fun figuring it out on their own, at their own pace, enjoying acts THEY find to be enjoyable. Figuring out what works and what doesn't is half the fun.

Imo, sex is a private act, porn has few real benefits and should not be promoted. Jmo