tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3614841571339583501.post5976486230487726056..comments2023-11-02T08:17:49.134+00:00Comments on Law and Sexuality: Inter-generational Sex: Brooke Shields and Roman PolanskiChris Ashfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12071159399124287824noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3614841571339583501.post-50500529122127653112009-10-04T14:33:47.468+01:002009-10-04T14:33:47.468+01:00While I agree that children should have the right ...While I agree that children should have the right to freedom of sexual expression, it is also the duty of the parent or responsible adult in that childs life to *protect them* and make sure that as they age to a point of being able to dip their toes into the large ocean of decision making they will eventually be navigating on their own, that they don't get pulled into the undertow, then spend the rest of their lives trying to resurface. <br /><br />I personally am a bit confused at how the nude, underage Brook Shields image *still exisits*, let alone that it was allowed to hang anywhere in the US given the recent (and not only) accusation of child abuse when parents took bath time photos of their children, or the fact that most of Traci Lords work has been distroyed. Yes, there is a lot of distance between bathtime child photos, the Shield's image and Lord's early work as a minor, but it does show an inconsistancy in ideas of acceptability in our child porn, doesn't it?? Brook did not come up with the idea to do that photo to market herself...her mother did...and that image is a clear sexualization of that child (which bathtime/baby photos don't necessarily...although could depending on the context). An adult manipulated that child specifically for the purpose of sexualizing her to adults, and therein lies the issue that is the slippery slope of allowing freedom of childhood sexual expression: consent. Children will consent to things they would normally never engage in for the approval and love from addults. Children don't usually have the education to understand fully what they might be engaging in, or have the power and/or self esteem to stop things when they no longer like the choice they made. This is why children still need protective measures in place to make sure they do not venture too far, too fast. No responsible adult allows a child to step out into a busy street to navigate oncoming cars with the rationale that they should be allowed to make their own choices in life...why should this be any different??<br /><br />I do think that age of consent laws have many holes, as not all *legal adults* necessarily do much better at making their personal choices sometimes... But considering how difficult it is to overcome the imprinting of trauma that happens in childhood, what else can we do?? We must err on the side of attempting to protect our children.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com