15 April 1980 (2 of 3) (unpublished) NOTE: This is one of three letters I wrote in response to the April 13, 1980 L.A. Times article under the headline, "Homemade 'Kiddie Porn' Increasing, Experts Say". Each of the letters had a different approach, and I used pseudonyms for two of them, as the letters were mailed separately. All three letters are included as links at this site for reference and comparisons. ************ Whenever articles appear on emotional subjects such as "Kiddie Porn" (April 13, 1980) -- the term itself is riddled with emotional appeal -- the Times would do well to make sure the widest possible approach is taken by its reporters. I agree with and support efforts to eradicate all types of true child abuse, but in the interest of accuracy and further scientific understanding, I must point out the one-sidedness of the reporter's approach. For all the "experts who agree" there are always qualified experts who disagree. Furthermore, it may well be that regardless of the intense emotional reaction to such activity, the incidence of physically non-abusive homemade "kiddie porn" may be relatively small. Fact: Damage to children in such situations does often happen, but most experts agree that it is caused by the reaction of police, parents, and society, not necessarily by sex or photography. Fact: Much child pornography actually involves sexually mature teenagers who are still legally children until 18, but are well past puberty on their way to adulthood. Fact: Men molest girls in far greater numbers than they molest boys, which strains the credibility of the statement that more boys are involved in child pornography. Articles like this one do nothing to further research in this critically needed area; in fact, the emotionalism aroused (apparently intentionally) by police and others through articles of this nature in the long run may be counter-productive. In that event, everyone will suffer, including the children.