How do you feel about "Barely Legal" pornography?

Right? The reason I decided to ask this question is because my boyfriend and I recently bought some "Barely Legal" porn. HE chose, of course, and ended up getting a set with a magazine and three DVD's, all sharing this theme. The DVD's aren't so bad, actually. Most of the women didn't really look 18, let alone younger. I think it lied. One woman looked upwards of 40. But the magazine, it was terrible. There were so many young-looking girls. One was only 4'11" and had braces. It just creeped me out. I told him I found his interest a little worrying and to bear in mind I'm not going to look young for my age forever (I'm 21, almost 22, but I could probably pass for under 18). But it's okay. I know he's not a creeper or anything and probably just wanted younger girls as opposed to older women. He's a fan of BIG boobs and won't find them with the "barely legal" girls so I think we're okay. Lol. less

Every woman has a different chest size, and most of us are quite proud of our boobs, large or small. As for experience - nobody, male or female, starts out knowing everything about sex.

I don't think this was your intention, but your comment brings to mind the idea that girls who are smaller-chested and inexperienced should just give up. It's a little hurtful, even if you didn't mean it. less

yeah, that post bothered me too, but I let it go. I didn't think there was a way I could answer it without sounding defensive or like a _____.

Sometimes I find it's better if I just don't say anything, because the words will be read the wrong way. less

You know, it doesn't bother me, and I am a fan of porn. In fact, a number of my titles are from the Barely Legal series. I don't like braces as much, but that's because I don't find braces attractive, but I do find the body type very attractive.

I know that the girls are of age, and I can appreciate what the producers are marketing towards. There is a niche for everyone, and this series is really catered towards people who find the high school girl fantasy attractive, and great for couples who integrate that kind of role-play in their sex lives, myself included. For me, its not much different than the school girl costumes that are all over the place, and commonly accepted.

To each his own, but I view the barely legal genre as a healthy source for people inclined to that fantasy. I see consenting adults producing entertainment for their customers. Period. I don't think its fair to make people feel like scum because they are entertained by something perfectly legal, only because it bothers you.

If someone is healthy enough to realize the difference between watching "fantasy" porn and actually going out and participating in illegal activities, they don't need to be told they are horrible, perverted people. They are acting out a healthy drive in a healthy way. As someone pointed out, it is biologically normal to be attracted to 14-18 year old girls. It wasn't strange to be attracted to them in high school, at a time when it is normal to develop sexual tastes and attractions, so why is it abnormal to maintain that attraction after you turn 18?

My general opinion: If you aren't interested in it, don't watch it. If you are uncomfortable with the content, then find people seeking illegal snuff films with ACTUAL underage content to condescend towards. Leave innocent people enjoying legal entertainment alone. less

I do apologize if I've offended anyone, though. I suppose I could have worded my opinion better? I don't know, really. That's my opinion and that's all there is to it. It doesn't make anyone else right or wrong. If you think this stuff is attractive, that's great. That's your thing. Keep doing your thing, as long as it's legal. But I don't think this stuff is attractive. That's me. That's my thing. I'm allowed to feel that way. I'm allowed to express my disinterest in the stuff. I'm allowed to say it's creepy. That's my right, just as it's your right to say it's attractive or arousing. less

If these angry posts are directed towards me, I think that's really a bit much. I thought we were allowed to have our own opinions. I'm allowed to think it's creepy because to me, it is. I shouldn't have to suppress my opinions to make others happy because you can't make everyone happy and you're better off being yourself. A lot of people think it's creepy so it's not like it's just me. I'm not being judgmental simply by stating my opinion. I believe I said "To each their own" but I guess people pick and choose what they want to see so they can get angry about nothing. less

I don't think you were offensive at all. It is your opinion and you are TOTALLY entitled to it. It's a sore spot for me, because this is an area where people tend to get SERIOUSLY judgmental and abusive. It's a hard line to argue for, because more often than not, people who are against it quickly group those who are attracted to the Barely Legal genre it in the pedophilia arena, which isn't fair. I think you asked a great question, and there were plenty of responses that were fair, and logical.

Got to love the written word. Sometimes a logical, thorough argument can sound really angry. My use of 'you' didn't actually mean YOU.

I'm a fan of debate, and try to keep emotions level or absent. The trickier the topic, the harder it is. less

Particularly, the porn that advertises girls with flat chests, braces, and other things that are obviously intended to make them look like they're well below the age of 18. Personally, I find it extremely creepy and bordering on pedophilic. I've seen "barely legal" "models" (we'll call them) who look as young as 13 and I can't find anything sexy about that. More power to you if you like that kind of stuff, though, so long as the girl really IS 18. less

All I have is the personal experience of a friend and a very limited group of folks I've encountered with pedophilic to ephebophilic sexual preferences. As with anything else the effect of this kind of porn can only be evaluated on an individual basis and it wasn't my intention to make a definitive statement on how it would be received. I should have said that it "CAN appease their sexual frustration" rather than "WILL appease", and I apologize for not being more careful with my wording. It's also relevant to note that my comments were contextualized by the tone of the original post; had I read your earlier post beforehand I'm sure I would have responded differently and with a broader perspective. You added a lot of substance to the conversation that wasn't present on the first page (which was all I'd read at the time of my post). As it were I was just offering one side as a counter to the opinions I saw.

I totally agree that certain presentations of this kind of material are dangerous in the same ways that conventional porn can be dangerous. Even if there is the illusion of consent (the girl agreed to get in the van and have sex with the three guys waiting naked in the back, after all) it still feeds into rape culture when porn after porn puts out the message that girls should be willing and subservient. I don't, however, equate attraction to persons under the age of 18 with the want or need to rape. So many people have these attractions and would never dream of acting on them because there is no possibility of consent. For this group someone who simply looks young could be an equivalent substitute. I think watching simulated minor-adult porn with actors of a legal age is a safe outlet; whether or not watching porn has the power to turn someone into a rapist is a different argument.

As for age based consent laws, I appreciate and understand them in some regards but I disagree with laws that would put a 19 year old in jail for having consensual sex with a 16 year old even if they're both in high school or both in college. I don't mean range as in "0 to 18", I mean the range in age between a person and their partner. The idea that 2 or 3 years on either side of 18 make a person definably capable or incapable of consent is absolutely arbitrary. Sorry if my phrasing left too vague an impression since there was a very specific meaning behind it.

I wouldn't advocate an unqualified tolerance of anything. Again, my comment wasn't meant to be a complete analysis and was admittedly unclear. While I don't think anything would easily desensitize someone to the consequences of sex with a minor or child, we seem to be in agreement here for the most part. I'd be happy to move this to a private message if it's something you'd like to discuss further? less