The US is mass producer of "barely-legal" nude-anything movies etc (including "innocent" booby-stuff, not necessarily porn), where the barely legal refers to what is ok legally but other than that must presumably fulfill the saddest dreams..... Parafotos films are adult-booby-flicks under the name of serious naturism. Clean nudist fun? One must be kidding. But hey, some men just get a kick out of it.
I don't think these euro-russian are any of the above, at best maybe exploitative. Some will even say they are art!
JM - this poll is what you think of those "teen booby flicks", i.e., so-called naturist videos, often from russia or eastern europe that feature mostly if not exclusively young nude girls and of which the focus seems to be boobs and boobs only.
As I tried to say in my other post above, the phenomenon is not restricted to so-called naturist teens or for that matter naturism. But alas, that was the topic of some of the original posts that have been active the last weeks (forgot all the topic titles).
NB: JM, I sent you a PM on another post, did you see it?
I most likely could have done a better job of wording this survey.
I was asking about that "Ivana Kupala" film (To Whitestokes) because of it's Paganistic plot, it interests me, but if it just a bunch of naked Russian Teen girls, dancing around a Bon Fire....I will have to pass.
Originally posted by studentdoctor:
Why would it be a pedaphile trap when they are perfectly legal?
I don't know about your area but in my parts we had a District Attorney with a reputation of shooting first, asking questions later when it came to almost anything to do with under-aged subjects. In the minds of too many, "naked equalls sex". Unfortunately, many with that point of veiw tend to be the 'squeeky wheel' that gets most of the attention. Then too, the D/A would ask why would any adult want to veiw a video of naked childern...with the implication that if you 'enjoy' watching that sort of thing, you must be a pervert.
Still don't think photos and videos with nude young'ums, no matter how inocent, is not risky? Just ask parents who made the mistake of going to Wal-Mart to have photos of their child's bath developed. Just to have DFSS place a visit.
I see the films as pretty much pornographic in nature, but does that mean these children are being exploited negatively? Not necessarily. Maybe they ARE just naturists, and making the videos adds a cash bonus to the lifestyle.