NinaF, it should be obvious that the site in question provides ONLY FICTION.

If anybody connected with the site had really been raped they could easily report it to the Police and the contents of the website would in itself all but guarantee a conviction.

Not to mention how unlikely it would be for the actors to willingly provide documentation of age had they actually been assaulted.

It is not clear that the site is illegal, many factors, such as production location, hosting location, are sales by download or posted DVD, would affect it's legality. Check the ACMA website and http://libertus.net/ to try and work this out. It could be quite legal to view the site.

I'm sure other less trusting types are questioning the coincidence that the website which was mistaken for child pornography happens to involve the abuse of women by “misogynists”. I'm sure it was pure coincidence that the one and only site she chose to investigate out of all the millions on the Internet was not on the subject of CFNM, Cougars, or “Forced Gays” where your indignation would be directed against middle aged women or the Gay Community.

The important facts are: the author attempted to test a theory, was unable to accurately recognize the subject of her own study, and therefore drew incorrect conclusions. At the University I attended undergraduates presenting such a flawed paper could expect a fail. A bias however popular is still bias.

R0bert, both you and the author are purposely misquoting Freedom lovers, we claimed that illegal and child pornography was difficult to accidentally come across, it is you and the author who have changed this to claim that it should be difficult to find any material that would offend someone given a long enough search.

The Womp, I'm not misquoting Freedom lovers, I'm directly quoting the author who attributes the claim to various anti-censorship voices.

Hopefully the author will pop in and clarify who the various voices are.

I noticed that you have turned "hard core on-line sexual abuse material is rare and difficult to find" into "it should be difficult to find any material that would offend someone given a long enough search", what's that about misquoting?

In this case it clearly did not involve a long or difficult search.

Perhaps the onus is on the author to demonstrate which anti-censorship voices are claiming that this material is hard to find.

My own sympaties lie with the anti-censorship side of the debate but I've got little time for either side when they deliberately misrepresent their opponents position to further their own cause.

R0bert

R0bert, you take posters here to task for not dealing with the author's point:

"I wanted to test the claims of various anti-censorship voices who argue that hard core on-line sexual abuse material is rare and difficult to find"

1) who exactly has claimed any such thing?

2) what does "sexual abuse material" mean? does it include only actual sexual abuse, or does it include fantasy and role-playing material? is the site that the author sought out of the former type or the latter?

it looks very much like a straw man to me, and a very flimsily constructed one.

The womp,

Even if the site is fictitious it presents as being actual. This sort of revolting trash endorses the rape of minors. I'm sorry. But there is no excuse for this and as tolerant as I am of people's sexual idiosyncracies, nothing gives license for this.

Has it not occurred to you that you do not need to commit a crime against a minor to be harming the cause and rights of minors everywhere? A representation of a rape (even if it is not an actual rape) is deeply concerning and problematic if it is being romanticised and eroticised as it is on this site.

Shame on this site and its scumful following

Wow.....I only read through a couple of the venemous comments after this article and couldn't tolerate the stupidity any longer. I did catch a couple of things though:

someone said: "you googled sex and found sex"

no, she googled sex and found rape, degradation, torture, violence.

If you think that this is sex, you've got bigger problems than can be addressed here and I feel sorry for you.

someone else said "you can't censor a fantasy."

So this is a "fantasy?" Firstly, why on earth are men fantasising about raping and abusing women, second, why are people facilitating such a "fantasy" and why are you defending it? What other violence do you defend? Is it the case that if you can masturbate to it then it must be allowed? Do men view their orgasms to be so important that they would dehumanise, degrade and hurt others? What the hell is wrong with some men?

But it's not a "fantasy" someone actually carried it out, many people did and others are invited to follow suit, according to what Abigail found.

Abigail, thank you for adding your voice to the chorus of those who think that the abuse of women and children is a crime and that we should not be exposed to the footage of such. Ignore the neanderthals defending the right of men to assault women and film it in order to facilitate ejaculation. They need help.

Elka

That must be feigned horror or you haven't spoken with many other women or read about women's fantasies. See here:

http://www.healthyplace.com/sex/psychology-of-sex/womens-top-ten-sexual-fantasies/menu-id-1482/

Have you looked at some of the gay and lesbian pornography sites?

Fantasy is just that and it doesn't imply intent.

Women will not gain from a return to the wowerism and censorship of the Fifties.