'harm'

"How are those girls being harmed anyway?"

You obviously are not familiar with the theory of photographic harm.

In several native American traditions photography was considered to trap or "steal", in part or in whole, a person's soul. There's a long, convoluted reason for why some native Americans believed this, but Americans of European descent generally attributed it to gross ignorance and superstition.

However, in recent years various "child advocates", desperate for a theory that would support their prejudices and bigotry, adopted and adapted this theory for their own. Now, thanks to their great insight and wisdom, we know that the subjects of child pornography - or other sexy photographs of children - are victimized every time a pedophile looks at the photograph, regardless of whether the subject was victimized at the time the photo was made (because, of course, bathtub photos and the like are harmless if taken and viewed by non-pedophiles). This is because every time a pedophile looks at a photograph of a naked child, the child's soul is murdered by some mysterious supernatural process. Oddly enough, viewing a photo of a child being murdered does not do any harm to a child's soul. Obviously the supernatural forces at work here have their own logic that we mere mortals cannot hope to understand.

The really amazing thing about all this is that I am not making this up. True, I have synthesized the statements of various "child advocates" into the only system which accounts for all the statements that they commonly make, but they really have repeatedly claimed that every time a photo is viewed the subject is re-victimized - in fact, they are quite adamant about this article of faith - and quite a few have actually claimed that these photographs murder children's souls - their words, not mine. I couldn't make up crap like this if I tried.