LGs

[jimlintott]

LG stands for little girls and pedophiles are apparently using web sites to rate public activities that have great LG viewing. The Montreal Children's festival is one according to this article.

I saw a bit on the news the other day and I am not sure what to think about it. On one hand, pedophiles sicken me, on the other I don't know how you can stop people from looking at other people in public places. I'm sure pedophiles were scouting these types of events before the web.

I know that non-pedophiles will discuss where the best girl watching (and I assume boy watching) is. It isn't a surprise that pedos do this too.

Should these sites be shut down? Should it be stopped? Can it be stopped? What about sites like hot or not?

I'm not sure it can or should be stopped. It is more than a little creepy to think that someone could be eying up your little kid and having sexual fantasies. I guess they could do the same about you or your dog too but pedophilia is creepy.

 

[Beerina]

Last time I went to Hotornot.com, it was pictures of adult women (and some men), awaiting ratings by any heartbeat with a mouse. But that was about 3 or 4 years ago. I'm afraid to go there now. (Or maybe I was thinking of amihotoraminot.com.)

 

[jimlintott]

Last time I went to Hotornot.com, it was pictures of adult women (and some men), awaiting ratings by any heartbeat with a mouse. But that was about 3 or 4 years ago. I'm afraid to go there now. (Or maybe I was thinking of amihotoraminot.com.)

The only reason I brought up hot or not is that looking at other people, most likely sexually, is something we find quite normal. As soon as it is children the reaction is different.

It would seem that making pedophiles remove their web sites yet allow sites like hotornot seems like a double standard. Maybe it's a double standard we need.

 

[Charlie Monoxide]

Jerzy Kosinski (speling?) in his novel "The Painted Bird" had an interesting solution that a farmer used on someone, who he thought was eye-balling his wife ....

Charlie (being there ..) Monoxide

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

LG stands for little girls and pedophiles are apparently using web sites to rate public activities that have great LG viewing. The Montreal Children's festival is one according to this article.

I saw a bit on the news the other day and I am not sure what to think about it. On one hand, pedophiles sicken me, on the other I don't know how you can stop people from looking at other people in public places. I'm sure pedophiles were scouting these types of events before the web.

I know that non-pedophiles will discuss where the best girl watching (and I assume boy watching) is. It isn't a surprise that pedos do this too.

Should these sites be shut down? Should it be stopped? Can it be stopped? What about sites like hot or not?

I'm not sure it can or should be stopped. It is more than a little creepy to think that someone could be eying up your little kid and having sexual fantasies. I guess they could do the same about you or your dog too but pedophilia is creepy.

A later CBC Radio report said the server was in the Netherlands so there was not much Canada could do. The even sadder news was that parents interviewed said that they would not be taking their children to the festival because of the reports.

 

[This Guy]

I agree that it is a disgusting thought, that someone would go to a children's/family event for the purpose of getting some visual excitement from watching the children.

I think there is little that can be done about it though. I would certainly keep a close watch on my children at these events, to lessen the possibility that they might come in contact with/be grabbed by, one of those creeps.

I think if I were Canadian, I would be more concerned about the last paragraph of the linked article -

"But there are ways for authorities to block some sites, as has been done by the Canadian Coalition Against Internet Child Exploitation, a group of internet service providers (ISP) and police forces."

I'd at least want to know who has the authority to decide which sites can be blocked, and under what grounds, and which sites were being blocked. My point being that it at least leaves open the possibility that the ruling party MIGHT could block sites with damning information or opposing views, and that's a scary thought to me.