The other day, someone posted a story about Playboy promoting pedophilia in a 1978 issue on GAW. In addition to that, the post had sketches of underground tunnels coming from the Playboy Mansion.
I showed my red-pilled wife the story which caused her to turn into an internet autist thoroughly researching the topic during which she came upon an interesting story that I'd never heard before.
In 1975, 10-year-old Brooke Shields, with the permission of her mother, was photographed totally nude, with make-up, and oiled up. A Playboy publication called "Sugar 'n Spice" published the photos. A total jaw-dropper even to us senior-level red-pilled folks.
To further the red pills, in the 1980s, Brooke tried to stop the further usage of the pictures, but a judge ruled that she was bound by the contract her mom signed, and the pictures weren't child pornography. They were even used in a museum or two.
Here's a link to the Wikipedia article about the controversy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garry_Gross
I thought this was a great way to show normies how this stuff is promoted and protected at the upper echelons of society.
If you get a normie red-pilled with this, you can lead into how the judges, political leaders, etc are all compromised. How else could a judge rule that something that's literally child porn, is NOT child porn?
The choice is YOURS to know.
The movie Pretty Baby was scandalous and her pimp mother would do well to beg the Almighty God for forgiveness. And we need to beat all parents who destroy children in this way!
Surprisingly, Brooke says she remained a virgin until college when she gave it up for Dean Cain at age 22, which is impressive considering everything else.
I remember the big controversy surrounding the Calvin Klein jeans ad that Brooke Shields did:
https://www.aaaa.org/timeline-event/brooke-shields-sparks-controversy-calvin-klein-jeans/
Sad to say, but it's pretty tame by today's "standards."
Work on the mothers. If you convince most mothers someone is going to hurt their kid, you better stand back.
I agree...most mothers. But what happened to Brook's mother, and the mother's of the kids that let Michael Jackson abuse them? I'm a mom and have a 2-yr-old granddaughter. I'm absolutely one of the ones you're referring to...stand the hell back if you come at my family, BUT there are those out there that'll sadly throw their kids under the bus for a few bucks. Those are the worst dregs of society in my view.
Michael Jackson may actually be innocent. https://youtu.be/6pnoQqlygQs
I've heard some compelling arguments around here that Michael Jackson might have been set up by the people who were actually doing what they accused him of.
I’m thinkin the same. I’ve witnessed the backwardness of our judicial system.
Great point.
Mj was in love with her… I think that was one of the things that broke his heart deep down
Then why didn’t he marry her?
She didn’t like him like that
Why would she not have run away for somewhere safer
Why do you think Bob Hope was all over her.
https://www.authorsden.com/visit/viewarticle.asp?id=71145
https://listverse.com/2020/08/28/top-10-sexually-explicit-films-featuring-children/
Fuck I memory holed this myself. I forgot all about this, I remember this came out a few years ago or was at least brought back up.
I grew up watching blue lagoon. Was way too young to see it but then again I recently learned of the den I was raised in… all on purpose…
I watched it too. They were trying to program us. Their updates haven’t been working lately. It’s beautiful to see everyone waking up.
Yeah, I’m done. It’s sad but I think we’ve all been so abused but are taking our minds back from the cabal. It truly is the great awakening!
Good post
How did they get away with it? Easy — because “she” is a he, and a topless little boy isn’t very scandalous.
Elite Gender Inversion. It’s generational, and they are born into it.
Brooke Shields: A Transvestigation https://youtu.be/oGeea4lxCy8
exploited transgendered child
Yes, we still tiptoe around the fact that many of the famous models, actors and musicians were born the opposite sex and transgendered. It's difficult to accept how much we've been deceived.
How does a judge rule this? I’ll answer this question.
For a nude photograph to be considered pornography it has to be for “the prurient interest” meaning it is intended to be sexually arousing. This is why pictures of children National Geographic arent child porn. Sure any pedo could find any nude pic of a child arousing to them but the photo itself has to be obviously meant to be overtly sexual and arousing in nature. I think you can debate whether Brooke Shields photos fall into that definition or not, but just thought i give you the rationale behind how something is looked at as porn or not under the law.
The judge didn't see a 10 year old with make-up, full frontal nudity, and all oiled up as child porn. That's not a tribal girl going about her normal every day business...Knowing what we know, NO excuse for this judge. Not to mention a Playboy publication published the photos. The very definition of Playboy is...arousal....
It was in a porno mag dude
she was oiled up and wearing makeup
don’t be daft
Like i said just pointing out the legal reasoning behind the decision which doesn't always match the morality of it. Im not defending it just explaining how the standards for pornography are seen in the eyes of the law. I recommend reading the case, as its interesting either way, but im a law nerd
An underage girl
in a pornography magazine
oiled up
in makeup
full frontal nudity
If the legal interpretation of that is not pornography, then the legal opinion is a lie, torturing the truth in order to call a lie the truth.
Sorry man, but that judge is a pedophile. The law sees it as pornography. The judge in the specific case was corrupt.
Again. Im not disagreeing. But the law is not the same standard as the public standard. Never has been. Read the case, even if you disagree with the rationale youll learn something
the public standard and the law are the same thing. The judge was bought. The judge’s decision was not a reflection of the law, it was a reflection of the judge’s corruption of the law.
“The public standard and the law are the same thing”
Uh no. Sorry you dont understand how the law operates in issues of morality if you think that. You can argue that they SHOULD be but definitely no.
The law defines child pornography as being for the purpose of sexual stimulation, does it not?
A judge that finds a picture of a ten year old girl in makeup, oiled up naked in a porno mag as “not pornographic” is corrupt and corrupting the law.
The price for fame goes beyond the money, and last for eternity.
All I knew about was the blue lagoon movie. So, the guy who was her co star (later in Greatest American Heroe). Was he abused as well?
Don't know about abuse, but Christopher Atkins was in Blue Lagoon, William Katt was in Greatest American Hero.