Poll: shapeshifter porn

[Gabanuka]

Y-Y-N

Did any of you think that people could say "Oh it was just a shapeshifter" as an excuse for real child porn? At least with the other two if it was the actual person its completely legal.

 

[bobmus]

Yes, No, No.

Though the dead person rule can be discounted if they've been dead for a century or something.

 

[Thespian]

I answered "No, No, Yes."

I am assuming that they didn't have the permission or anything. But you shouldn't be allowed to just do it of your own accord, because yeah, that's basically ID theft?

However, I personally am all for anything that makes it easier on people forced into sexual inactivity due to their sexual orientation being towards children.

 

[Starik20X6]

My brain says NO-NO-NO, but my libido says YES-YES-NO.

I can only imagine that it would feel incredibly violating to know someone else is exposing your body to the world. Unless of course it was ok'd by the original person, but then I'd have to wonder why, say, Scarlett Johansson would be ok with someone else flashing her boobs everywhere and go to so much effort to have her own nude pics censored.

As for the deceased, as sexy as Marilyn Monroe was, I'd just feel wrong getting off to not-her. I don't know if I'd be very pleased if I knew my legacy would be people pretending to be me doing all sorts of stuff with 'my' body.

No way for the kid one.

All in all, I can see a shape-shifiting call-girl being the new most sought-after thing in existence.

 

[tigermilk]

Perhaps the question should be:

Porn with a "shapeshifter" of yourself, your family and friends and your children?

That is before addressing the myth that child abuse imagery/footage acts as a release valve not a catalyst.