Newest Members
Won'tGiveUp, sillyputty, Pytbull, manipulated, donmarks
12383 Registered Users
Today's Birthdays
Beluga (64), Isreal101 (65), Phil Sober (41), phil1973 (41), Teddy Bear (63)
Who's Online
4 registered (pattom, Bardo, 2 invisible), 27 Guests and 7 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
12383 Members
74 Forums
63644 Topics
444492 Posts

Max Online: 418 @ 07/02/12 07:29 AM
Twitter
Topic Options
#85353 - 03/28/02 10:24 PM Boylove pornographer defiant
Anonymous
Unregistered


Court's child-porn ruling upsets activists
Pornographer defiant after judge finds some literary merit in his stories.

March 28, 2002

By OLIVER MOORE
Toronto Globe and Mail


VANCOUVER, British Columbia -- Saying his court case was fought for the "freedom of Canadians," child pornographer John Robin Sharpe, 67, was swaggering and defiant after a British Columbia Supreme Court judge ruled that his sex stories involving children have artistic merit and aren't criminal.

The decision, which child advocates say will encourage pedophiles to abuse children, was the latest ruling in a seesaw court battle involving the B.C. courts and the Supreme Court of Canada over whether Sharpe's widely vilified poems and stories are crimes or art.

Justice Duncan Shaw of the B.C. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Sharpe's story collections, contained in "Sam Paloc's Boyabuse: Flogging, Fun and Fortitude - A Collection of Kiddiekink Classics" and "Stand by America, 1953," are morally repugnant but have some literary merit, and he even likened them to the works of the Marquis de Sade.

The stories include tales of men having sex with boys ages 12 and younger; boys having sex with each other; children being flogged; torture, capture and confinement of boys; sexual slavery; and painful circumcision.

"In my opinion, 'Boyabuse' and 'Stand by America, 1953' have some artistic merit," Shaw said in a ruling released Tuesday. Shaw found Sharpe not guilty of two child- pornography charges related to the writings, but convicted the retired city planner of possession of child pornography related to hundreds of photographs seized at the Canada-U.S. border and at his Vancouver apartment after a trip abroad in 1995.

The ruling does not strike down the child-pornography law. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled previously that some material is allowable if it has some artistic merit.

Children's-rights advocates were appalled, saying the ruling legitimizes sexual violence against children and will encourage pedophiles to write and distribute material that encourages sexual exploitation of children.

Annabel Webb of Justice for Girls said Sharpe's stories are dangerous to children - not artistic.

"There is no doubt in my mind that if the public sat down with the material that Sharpe produced, that most people would be horrified and disgusted," Webb told reporters outside court. "What's happened is that it's become an abstract debate about literary merit and artistic merit."


Sharpe said he waged the public battle because Canada's child-pornography laws limit freedom of expression.

Asked if his stories encourage sexual abuse of children, Sharpe dodged the question: "I hope it encourages other people to stand up for their rights and to fight against pernicious laws," he replied.


Top
#85354 - 03/29/02 03:22 AM Re: Boylove pornographer defiant
Jim C. Offline
Member

Registered: 03/23/02
Posts: 63
Loc: New Mexico
Tinfoil,

I'm appalled and outraged at this ruling, that anything within the realm of child porn could be considered artistic. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. In my search of the web, I have found no sources for child pornography victims. Any suggestions? Had I not been selected by a child pornographer, I don't think I would have responded to a later perp who was much more violent.

Jim C.

_________________________
In all of time and space, there is but one you and one me...

Top
#85355 - 03/30/02 09:07 PM Re: Boylove pornographer defiant
Anonymous
Unregistered


Hi Jim. I believ that most victims of adult males who sodomize children are in great part victims of that sort of pornogrphy. Dealing with such men same as horse thieves were dealt with in the Old West sounds like a winner of an idea to me.
Tinfoil does'nt have a single politically correct bone in his body.
Git a rope,boys!

[ March 30, 2002: Message edited by: Tinfoil ]


Top
#85356 - 04/03/02 07:01 PM Re: Boylove pornographer defiant
Just Call me J Offline
Member

Registered: 07/14/01
Posts: 204
Loc: Inland Empire, California
So spelling and grammer mean more to the judges than the content of the stories???

I am not bothered by a Mapplethorpe exhibit, because I can choose not to look at it. It doesn't harm me, nor anyone else that it exists... but child porn does.

And yet I find myself reminded of the book "Lolita" which has been worked into a movie. Twice. Having not seen either film, I don't know what sets that apart (seeing as it is accepted as "art," despite the controversy surrounding it) from the filth published by Sharpe.

Perhaps it is the existence of consequence in Lolita that sets it apart. However there is little to defend a piece designed solely for titillation. "Literary Merit," my ass. How could that judge hand down that decision in good conscience?

Jeremy

_________________________
We're in this together. - Nine Inch Nails

Top


Moderator:  Chase Eric, ModTeam 

I agree that my access and use of the MaleSurvivor discussion forums and chat room is subject to the terms of this Agreement. AND the sole discretion of MaleSurvivor.
I agree that my use of MaleSurvivor resources are AT-WILL, and that my posting privileges may be terminated at any time, and for any reason by MaleSurvivor.