The picture I've linked to above is what many of us would call a "non-nude child model" and most people would glance at it and think little of it beyond perhaps the girl in the picture being "cute" and then they'd move on. Not so for those fuzzy little trolls affectionately known to the world as llorts. They see the above image and scream "zOMG It's CP!!111"
Go ahead and give the image a click and see what comes up. I hate to burst your bubble but it came from an advertisement for swimming suits. Shouldn't it say something when a swimming suit advertisement is enough to send people's blood temperature skyrocketing into the stratosphere? It should -- but who has time to think when there's another opportunity to attend a public lynching over the internet?
Oh my... This one's even worse! The dastardly bastards cut off her head! Some one call Law and Order: SVU and fast!
And yet, when you click on the image, you discover its another innocent ad for swimming suits. It's got nothing to do with child porn... or is it? That's the problem you see -- it's all so very subjective.
"I know it when I see it," Justice Potter Stewart of the US Supreme Court is famous for saying, but how many finish the sentence and finish the quote with his original "and the motion picture involved in this case is not that." So how is it the subjectivity of whose viewing the images change the pictures of an innocent child model into the depravity of child porn? Objectively, the image remains the same regardless of WHO is looking at it.
What is the truth? The truth is you're engaging in thought crime.
