Please don't go all Katie Ka-Boom on us.
Wait... please do. That way, I won't have to.
Stupid brainless twit. NOT ALL SLASH IS PORNOGRAPHIC. Not all het is nice, fluffy G-rated crap, either. You fucking moron.
Taken from ProtectKids.com:
pornography-A generic term that can refer to materials that are either "legal" or "illegal" to disseminate under the circumstances. "Pornography" encompasses all sexually oriented material intended primarily to arouse the reader, viewer, or listener. See Webster's Dictionary; Miller v California, 413 U.S. 15, 18 n. 2 (1973); Final Report, Attorney General's Commission on Pornography (1986), Chapter One, "Defining our Central Terms." Serious works of art, literature, politics, or science; "mere nudity," medical works, even though they deal with sex or include sexual references or depictions, would not be considered "pornography" in the context of their legitimate uses. On the other hand, since obscenity can include both actual and simulated conduct, all "Hard-Core Pornography" that depicts penetration clearly visible ("PCV") is "implicitly" within the application of the constitutional criteria of the Supreme Court's obscenity test. See Mishkin v New York, 383 U.S. 506, 508 (1966), Miller v California, 413 U.S. 15, 29 (1973).
material harmful to minors-Known as "variable obscenity" or the "Millerized Ginsberg Test." See Ginsberg v New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968); and Miller, Smith, Pope, supra. It is illegal to sell, exhibit, or display "harmful" ("soft-core") pornography to minor children, even if the material is not obscene or illegal for adults. See also Com. v Am. Booksellers Ass'n, 372 S.E.2d 618 (Va. 1988), followed, American Booksellers Ass'n v Com. of Va., 882 F.2d 125 (4th Cir. 1989), Crawford v Lungren, 96 F.3d 380 (9th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 1249 (1997). "Harmful to minors" means any written, visual, or audio matter of any kind that :
1. the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find, taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion, and
2. the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way with respect to what is suitable for minors, ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated; sadomasochistic sexual acts or abuse; or lewd exhibitions of the genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or post-pubertal female breast, and
3. a reasonable person would find, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.
Children under 13 aren't supposed to register with LiveJournal anyway. *growls* Do your goddamned research before making declarations. Mmmkay?