Child Porn

Let me rephrase it for you, Vamp. I believe that a picture of an underaged girl has nothing to do on a site containing naked women, that's my opinion.
But I guess, a women spreading her legs so you can see her lungs, is not pornographic.

Yeah sleepless that one actually looks like an underage girl,
unlike the others i have seen here.

And yeah i agree that there shouldnt be underage girls on WBW
but remember that not every girl with a young face is inmediatly underage..

So i hope that in the future we wont all shout wolf again when we see a young face
but actually take a closer look at what her body shape is like.
thats the best way to see if they are underage.

not just by saying "she looks young and has small breasts!"

thats my contribution to this thread.

Damn, what a topic about some pictures. I really don't get the point, i know everybody is against child porn. But a naked girl isn't childporn as much of us allready sad. Most of the girls pointed out are on the edge, they are not girls of 12. A girl of 16 can look like a girl of 14 or 19.. it's so difficult to see. But a girl of 12 you see it right away,.. And that last picture those girls are arround 16 or 18.

I say we only submit pictures with girls who have their birthcertificate in their hands when the picture is taken.

how will we know its THEIR birth certificate?

Shall i start deleting all those girls without birth certificates??? h

The pic I posted was not just based on her face, but on the shape of her body aswell. No, it's not child porn. But on a site with sexual pictures of women, maybe that is in question should be taken down, just in case.

although i dont like to contribute to confilctiv threads i have an opinion about this matters.

i think the porblems with child pornography is the misuse of cihld psychology.
not the pose the gilr or boy is in, nor the age either (up to a point of course).

In my opinion the most relevant point when it comes to understanding child porn is to see is the girl has been lead into that without her concent or intelectual aprobation (sorry but my english is not enough to explain this accurately).

when a girl is 16 yrs old or less she isn´t "forbidden" because her sexual organs are small or anythign like that. It is illegal because she isnt old enough to know what she is doing. It very easy to make a 15 yrs old show her pussy in front of the camera. I ve never done it but some ppl i know did without much trouble. SO i think that the direction where to look when it comes to discriminating which pics are ok to be put on WBw and which aren´t.

If someone has a pic of a girl naked in a nudist beach that shouldn´t be considered illegal since the girls is not doing anything "tricked" (yes of course someone could have doped her and take it there but paranoia must have a limit - cuase if it dont the aliens will come and take you to perform medical test with you !).
Therefore, in my opinion, a perfect way to judge "porn or not" is the attitude more than how she looks. I think everyone here as seen enough porn to judge for their own when a girls is in a sexual attitude (not sexy which is judgeable too).

So i guess i made my point now but i llove to discuss so bring it on.

I agree with what you're saying.
if I understand correctly then you don't think age is the problem, but the level on which she thinks is. her knowledge of the world so to speak.

problem is that these young people need to be protected by law and as certain people are earlier mature/grown up then others it's very hard to tell when each girl is considered mature. so they drew a line. in some countries thats around the age of 18, in others it's 21, in others it's earlier or later.
some girls however, reach their maturity earlier (or later) which is why we see young people naked on cams, hear kids aged 13 or 14 talk about sex like they've been doing it for years, and some actually have... and we can't stop that.

I lost my virginity at the age of 17 but I know men and women who lost it way before me. like age 12 and 13. that may sound sick to you, but these people where actually very mature at that age. more mature then I am right now (aged 24).
the world forms people and some people take on their shape earlier as others. those people are more likely to mature earlier.

just my opinion

Eh, folks...

I accept all your opinions, but there is a terrible mistake of those who say "A picture of a young girl naked is not childporn". That may be right, but it is wrong in the <b>context</b> all the pictures are shown here. WBW shows cool, sexy, beautiful and naked babes for our delight and amusement. There is an explicit sexual context, or are you here looking at naked babes because of "the beauty of photography"? Come on, nobody believes this. There is nothing wrong with pictures of naked girls underaged, but IMHO there is something wrong showing it in a context like WBW behaves. We all should take care of this.

Just my 2 Cents.

elTom

opinions are like assholes, everybody has one.

sleepeless idont think the girls on the link you posted are underaged ithink they are about 16
but sometimes its hard to tell and if there are girls underaged we will delete them but if there are doubts about it or we are not sure like the links emilio posted they will not be deleted

And i can know becouse i had a 12/16 score with the test in the other topic. lol lol

i must aggree with vamp although is not very useful to do so!