Now this is just scary (more 6a/LJ, but important)

[rm]

http://community.livejournal.com/fandom_flies/7349.html

Comments

[marzipan-pig.livejournal.com]

"Some of these individuals may then attempt to lower the child’s inhibitions by gradually introducing sexual content into their online conversations and even send pornographic images to the child. When children are shown images of peers engaged in sexual activities, they are led to believe this behavior is acceptable. This lowers their inhibitions and makes it easier for the molester to take advantage of the child sexually."

I think I can see where NCMEC might be coming from with this; an adult using Snarry art to groom kids would *cough* suck.

Spelling out their intention would have helped, though (ie, that LJ/6A is so concerned about their involvement in this potentially devastating scenario that they ask that we not post any images, even drawn, depicting child or teen sexuality, and that they plan to destroy and ban all such images and report them to the NCMEC.)

Stating intent and consequences is a basic communication skill, important in adult-child and adult-adult interactions.

[rmjwell.livejournal.com]

A part of me is strongly tempted to simply contact NCMEC, point them at the Image of Bannination and just ask them how they would treat a report of such an instance.

[marzipan-pig.livejournal.com]

I think it's worth doing; if it's the law, then what IS their perspective on online fan art? What about ambiguous age art? What is the context if it's presented in a fannish context? NCMEC is going to have to deal with these questions sooner or later, if they haven't already, though maybe calling more attention to the whole situation isn't the right approach.