*Your completely true consern isn't a matter of if - it's a matter of ---where.

And of --when of course, I remember  years ago in the 60's there was an advertisement for sunoil company with a drawing of a nice little girl on a beach which panties were pulled down by a cute little naughty dog, exposing her bare white bottoms. I think it was a funny picture, but if in those days the girl was replaced by an adult women, the company would have been accused of making pornography. Today no-one would raise an eyebrow (in the western world) if this advertisement was with an adult women, even if she was topless. But it would be impossible to make it with the little girl.
I don't say there wasn't child abuse in the 50's or 60's, every child (I was one of them) was warned not to go with adult men (!) or take candy from a stranger. But no-one spoke about it and when you asked why, the answer was avoided, because you didn't talk about sex.
Since the sexual revolution in the sixties, people speak  more freely about sex and I think that's a good thing, because sex itself isn't bad. But that revolution also revealed the most darkest and perverted side: the child abuse.
Personally I think that you don't understand the full impact of it as you don't have children of your own. I would castrate the (censored) who touched one of my daugthers with my own bare hands, and I would poke his eyes out if you would have taken pictures of them naked.
But if he would get his kicks of a drawn fantasy, or a poser rendering, I wouldn't care a bit as long as he keeps his hands off my and other peoples children.

regards,

Bopper.

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?