Much as it seems reasonable to expect LJ to judge fannish creative works by the standards of their fannish communities, if one were to judge posts in an LJ community journal founded by paedophiles by *their* community standards, well. You see why LJ can't apply that kind of standard.
(Though, if there were a hypothetical LJ-community for people with paedophilic desires whose purpose was to help its members not to act on those desires, its community standards might well preclude glorification of sexual activity with minors of the sort which SixApart is trying to keep off LJ.)
I got into (briefly, and got right out again once it became clear the other user was a liar, a moron, a troll or all three) an argument with another commenter on one of the lj_biz posts who suggested that it was hinky to regard anyone under 18 as a sexual being, and claimed never to have experienced any sexual desire or curiosity before the age of 18 themselves. *Humans* are sexual beings, as any psychologist can tell you. Plenty of infants and toddlers figure out all by themselves that touching their own genitals feel good. Some of the hard-line proposals for enforcing prohibitions against paedophilic abuse would lead to kindergarteners being arrested for playing "I'll show you mine if you show me yours." Which is a somewhat long-winded way of saying: Yes, I agree with you!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2007-07-21 06:43 am (UTC)(Though, if there were a hypothetical LJ-community for people with paedophilic desires whose purpose was to help its members not to act on those desires, its community standards might well preclude glorification of sexual activity with minors of the sort which SixApart is trying to keep off LJ.)
I got into (briefly, and got right out again once it became clear the other user was a liar, a moron, a troll or all three) an argument with another commenter on one of the