I don't think that disclaimer is going to cut it...

[denny]

http://www.west-models.com/ (photos of young girls, really not very work-safe despite not being nude)

Discuss?


(found via theferrett who was found via IRC)

Comments

[swiftangel.livejournal.com]

There are no words for how disturbing that is... *shudder*

[hooverpig.livejournal.com]

Augh. I wish you'd put up some kind of warning as to WHAT that was. Now my skin is crawling off and I feel the need to bleach the inside of my computer. Could have done without that.

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

Duly amended.

[roodypoo69.livejournal.com]

Wrong wrong worng!

Thats all i have to say about that.

[ulorin-vex.livejournal.com]

omg. wtf. and other exclamations. who took those pictures? whose parents would let them take those pictures? how many ways can i say how wrong?

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

I was wondering how the parents justified this to themselves. Although that's assuming the kids still know where the fuck their parents are... the domain appears to be registered in Russia, and there's apparently a lot of child slavery kind of nastiness over there.

[fire-brand.livejournal.com]

surely can't be legal?

[mr_magicfingers]

There's a LOT worse than that in some of the things the parent company publish.

[arachne.livejournal.com]

That's no norm of Law and Morality I want anything to do with.

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I noticed that phrase too. Letter of the law, in some countries, maybe. Morality I think they're scoring a fairly clean miss on.

[kotenok.livejournal.com]

http://www.nf-cash.com/

This is the link to the agency they say the content/work was submitted from.

"Seductive teenies"?

This goes on unstopped, and yet deathboy can't post a video clip of his kid in the bath on YouTube.

This world is STUPID.

[mr_magicfingers]

Have you clicked through any of those? I can't actually believe it's legal in the UK or the US. Yes, they're clothed but barely in most cases and the poses, jesus H christ, that's appalling. Can't believe they're not on some sort of ISP blacklist.

[cokephreak.livejournal.com]

Have you clicked through any of those?
Nope.

Saw the front page.
Decided I wantd nothing to do with it and it would probably rather not have any of those images either on my PC or in my head.

[synthclarion.livejournal.com]

Oh, Russia.

PROPERLY wrong.

[tephramancy.livejournal.com]

I feel sick.

[mejoff.livejournal.com]

Oh jesus fucking fuck, that's just so unbelievably wrong.

[pooloftrees.livejournal.com]

Ugh! I can't form word for my anger and disgust...

[innocent-irony.livejournal.com]

That .. makes me sick.. Talk about mute anger-meets-disgust. Ugh. And why is that not closed down?!

[innocent-irony.livejournal.com]

From http://www.iwf.org.uk/reporting.htm

"The law on images of child abuse is relatively clear. It means any images of children, apparently under 18 years old, involved in sexual activity or posed to be sexually provocative."

I've reported it. And it's parent site. Can I recommend lots of other people do too? Simply because I'll figure it may get more attention that way.

Oh, and it is illegal irrelevant of the source country of the website

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

it is illegal irrelevant of the source country of the website

That's a rather naive statement. If the servers the site runs on and the company and people running it are all in Russia, they will be governed by Russian law and there's probably very little a UK law enforcement agency can do about them, other than 'ask the Russian police to sort it out'. Which, if it's not illegal in Russia, might not get them very far.

So yes, it's illegal here, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything can be done about it when it's happening over there rather than here.

[innocent-irony.livejournal.com]

Um.. ok.. I should have clarified.. Read this:

http://www.iwf.org.uk/public/page.31.43.htm


Basically, what i meant was that they can still take action if it is based outside of the UK. Through other groups, admittedly, but .. meh.

And whatever. I was mainly posting to let you know what action you could take over it. And I'm tired, and very annoyed by the site, so don't give a crap if one sentence in my reply was disjointed and thus incorrect. ( :P )

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

*nod* I did do the reporty thing. It said "In the case of websites hosted overseas, we do forward details of all paedophile material, but any subsequent investigation and removal is entirely in the hands of the relevant authorities in the country concerned", which is pretty much what I said above I guess.

[kelemvor.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the link. Added my two penn'orth.

[innocent-irony.livejournal.com]

Np. Spread the word I guess! Apparently you can also report it direct to Interpol. But that sounds too..JamesBond-esque.

/goes to duvet world/

[pooloftrees.livejournal.com]

It's a Russian owned site, but hosted in Amsterdam. So I've reported it here (http://www.meldpunt-kinderporno.nl/en/), and to the Dutch police, here (http://www.meldpuntcybercrime.nl/english_information.html).

Unfortunately I'm guessing that the Russian organisation will just relocate their site to another country, and while we could get the domain names revoked by the US authorities, they'd just get new domain names from a country that isn't as bothered.

Anyone have any Russian contacts? I think this person/organisation needs a little "social justice":

Kiril Borushko (support@nf-cash.com)
Chernobilska 18-28
Moskow
Moskovskaya oblast,902104

(Just to be clear, I'm not advocating anyone being killed, roughed up though, that's another matter...)

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

You surprise me, didn't think you'd be in favour of vigilante action :)

Thanks for the links, good job.

[pooloftrees.livejournal.com]

I just googled the name from my post above, and found this page in Danish:

http://www.pornodebatten.dk/viewtopic.php?f=12&p=65

The worst thing is, it's from September/October last year, and mentions the parent company and another of their sites, and while I can't speak any Danish, the words "kriminel" and "Holland" jump out at me, which makes me wonder if our efforts to report them will come to nothing...

[olithered.livejournal.com]

The technical contact for the domain may well have nothing to do with the content.

Even if they did, why is a threat of violence acceptable?

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

They are the admin and billing contact too. I'd say that means they're either the owner, or a managed hosting company, in either case they're probably very aware of what kind of content is on the sites they're running.

Which doesn't stop your question being valid of course.

[pooloftrees.livejournal.com]

I'm sure they'd be quick to point to who was responsible for the content...

I'm not usually a violent person (see Denny's reaction (http://dennyd.livejournal.com/683745.html?thread=4018657), and he knows me IRL), and am usually the first to say that violence isn't acceptable, but exploitation and promoting the abuse of children makes me angry. My first two girlfriends each had a kid, and when I see stuff like this, I imagine if I saw them being treated as a sex object or abused.

So, basically, I'm not acting rationally in this case, and (stepping outside of the discussion) violence isn't acceptable, but my feelings above make me want to see some kind of justice, and sadly I suspect those responsible and involved in this website, and possible peripheral sexual abuse are unlikely to see the inside of a courtroom or jail cell...

[ninneviane.livejournal.com]

To say jaw is slightly a jar is a gross understatement...wrong doesn't seem ample wordage. What on earth were the parents thinking??? And who on earth rationalises that because these girls are dressed it's any different to them being stark naked...I'm not seeing a difference :/

[valkyriekaren.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's pretty wrong. What worries me is that parents would let their kids be photographed like that.

[skx.livejournal.com]

Nothing much to add, if that site doesn't contain erotisized depiction of children, and thus being illegal, its walking a damn fine line.

Not pleasant.

[hamsterine.livejournal.com]

I think this is a true reflection of the way many pre-teen and early-teen girls copy older girls in the rather sexualised version of fashion and femininity that is so popular.

It's nothing you can't see in, you know, real life. Many kids are, perhaps inappropriately, dressing in certain ways and taking a interest in being attractive and "sexy" before they are actually interested in sex. Additionally, many underage people are genuinely interested in sex. The effect of such displays on adult bystanders ranges from arousal to disgust. To be honest, I think expression of the latter emotion can be as harmful to the child's later sexuality as the former- at least this is how I feel about adult reactions to my own sexuality as a child.

I am playing devils advocate here to some extent, but I think it is important to remember that, rightly or wrongly, many little girls would find it a dream come true to be a model and to look "gorgeous" or even "sexy". It is impossible to know how these kids feel about the work, but it may be that they do not feel abused or uneasy. And that's the crux of it- the kid's wellbeing. Not weather some guy wanks over the pictures in private. The key word is PRIVATE. If someone sees a kid looking pretty and feels that way, then fine, as long as they draw a great big line at actually acting those fantasies out (adult roleplay excepted, of course).

I think it should all come down to what happened to a child in the making of the material, not the end result. The big rush to censor pictures of kids for anything potentially arousing seems a bit strange to me. If a kid hasn't actually been abused, then hopefully the kid is safe and happy. What's the problem? In fact, I'd take it further and say: what's the problem with underage nudity? There are loads of pictures around of me and my cousins playing nude in the garden when we were kids. I really don't give a crap if someone who sees them finds them sexy, although I doubt that they would.

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

Good points, thank you.

[mirabehn.livejournal.com]

Ick. Feel physically sick now.

If it were just random photos of little girls dressing up for fun like that I'd go, okay well they're enjoying themselves, rather young but never mind, fair enough, I'll go and look at something else. I'm sure my niece has dressed in similar ways with her friends (okay, similar to *some* of those, anyway...).

But the way it's being marketed... Ack. I don't think I even have the words. That it's a Russian site really doesn't help.

[hythloday.livejournal.com]

Here is a comment to make sure everyone reading your journal knows what a good person I am in sharing their taboos.

[kissycat1000.livejournal.com]

AOL

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

Here is a reply to confirm that I join you in your state of conformity.