Note: This story was dynamically reformatted for online reading convenience. Child pornography videos are taboo and disturbing material to most. This is the 4th in a series of critical essays on various fictional videos, but written as if a real analysis for perhaps a child-care agency, or teaching material for a medical or psychological or child-developmental department. Each essay follows the following format: A background and context to the video and girl(s) in it. Descriptions of the girl(s). Description of the video's events. Discussion on the 'power' of the video. Finally, a 'rating' is given for how disturbing it is. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * VIDEO (with sound): `LITTLE GIRL DOMESTIC RAPE'. This video is a mere one minute, single scene unbroken by edits, although one can't help thinking there may be larger-scale footage out there of this girl's abuses. She is 8 or 9 years old, with shoulder-length brown hair and seems pretty. `Seems', because throughout the footage she is wearing a large blindfold which covers most of her face. She is also completely naked from the outset, displaying an average build for her age - slim, in other words - but one which may tend to more fullness later in life. Her skin is fair in colour. She is bent over the back of a sofa, her feet not touching the ground, but her palms easily reaching down to the seats. We did not see whether she had put herself in this position under instruction, or if she adopted it herself. At any rate, she is at the ideal height for the nude man behind her to rape her. The camera is static, showing the scene from side-on, and it seems there is no third party in the room. This adds to the strong sense of preparation and purpose behind the video. The man wants the camera to witness his specific goal, and he seems to know what he wants to do. This is practised, not a `first foray' or a spontaneous abuse, although it may not have being going on long in their lives. The first thing we see is his hand holding her around a shoulder, or slithering a little over her body, whilst his other hand is pushing lubrication into her crotch and between her buttocks. At first glance, one might think he is just having a grope there - hardly any less illicit - but to those who have some knowledge of paedophiles' ways it is obvious. Seconds later, it is confirmed, as he guides his erect penis to her crotch. We have a strong feeling this is a concerted effort to rape the child, rather than just exploratory poking around, and it is deliberate rather than unrealistically forceful. We feel immediately thankful for that at least, but the average viewer is nevertheless shocked by proceedings. The man's stature contrasts so markedly with the girl's, and their relative positions reinforce the utter controlling nature of the event. The girl is totally passive at first, and we hear only the odd little gasp. "Keep still," the man says, as he probes with his penis. He is American. There is no telling his relationship to her, but it looks like a typical living room. Just as we think he might accept the limitations of such of young body, the fact of the matter is starkly revealed: the girl cries out in discomfort. They are short, intermittent yelps at first. "Be quiet," he says, a little irritable. Now we feel he must be her father, because she had given no justifiable cause for irritation, but his familiarity with her mannerisms during these deeds are probably what ires him. We acutely feel the dark irony to this, since it is she that is having the legal and moral wrong done to her. An adult charged with her protection is instead simply using her for his sexual gratification, with a kind of casual indifference, neither all-out violent nor loving. This is not `sensual' paedophilia, but `objectifying' paedophilia. His obvious attempts to penetrate her go on unabated. He is not going to be discouraged by any protestation or anguish on her part, but WILL have his penetration. About half-way through the video, as we get past the initial shock-fascination, we find ourselves thinking: `Oh, what hole is he actually doing?' The more knowledgeable probably have already figured it out, by his angle and the angle of her bottom. He is indeed not `raping' her, as in vaginal violation, but he is trying to get his penis into her anus. The camera is not close enough for us to be 100% sure, but the anatomical perspective is telling. In a sense it is even more shocking that we cannot see the youngster's small anal entrance pushed apart in the way it MUST be, but her sounds are the terrible documentation of it. In the last 30 seconds her yelps are far more pronounced. Even though we have no experience of doing this ourselves, we feel they are specifically anal violation yelps rather than vaginal by the timbre. "So, this is what a girl-child who is being anally fucked sounds like,' we find ourselves thinking, with emotions that are either pitying or `educationally excited'. Perhaps a mix of both for most men who view this, if they were honest. We find ourselves once again guessing at her age, now that we have more vocalization to go on. She seems a little too babyish-sounding for 9 or 10, but more like 7 or 8. However, this could be the effect on her of such an assault. We understand - if we did not in the first place - that `assault' is indeed the word for this, no matter how measured the man is in his objective. His one and only concern for her is evidently not to cause the terrible injury which could result from a recklessly done child-sodomy, but even this is probably only in the interests of his own security from discovery. As for the emotional impact on her - the sheer subservience and victimization she must feel, the vanquishing of innocence and the memories she will carry with her - he cares not. "Shut up!" he stresses again. He is focused, badly wanting to succeed. Just perhaps it is an expression of his guilt. He does not want to `hear' her, but only to enjoy her. Towards the end, her whining increases in insistence and pitch, and he cups his hand over her mouth. The muffled whining continues, as does the penetration, no more than 2 inches actually `in'. Any attempts she makes to move away from it are ineffectual, gravity and her position on the sofa back making it impossible. `Yes, this is a choice position and tested', we reflect once again. The whining - simple crying now, really - continues in muffle, as the footage cuts out without denouement. `Yep, definitely anal,' we reflect once again. Our thoughts immediately give way to dark wondering: `Well, did he ejaculate up her?' Surely he did, after having gone so far in his child abuse. This begs the question why the cut-out? Could it be part of a longer vid, where the rest - including close-ups perhaps - has to be paid for on the dark market? We can have no doubt that plenty of men would want to see it. Or perhaps he did injure her after all, and did not wish to show this. Perhaps the truth is mundane and dirty: the girl let out some faeces, a common consequence of anal penetration. She could hardly be an expert at taking this, after all, and her obvious acute distress makes this more likely. Such a thing would be an odious passion killer to all but the most perverse men, making the effort ultimately seem like a tawdry fail. We can only speculate on how the scene ends, and what else has gone on in the life of this faceless girl or subsequently, and for how long. We know, however, that we've witnessed absolute child abuse and we must make our emotional response, deciding to side more with the child victim or feeling some `understanding' of the man. Why the blindfold? To conceal her identity (his face was never in shot)? It would also not be surprising if it was simply to humiliate and scare her more still. This guy clearly both enjoyed a little girl on a purely sexual level, but almost certainly enjoyed her distress in itself too. Video Rating: Disturbing. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * any feedback or discussion welcome to ep1968@hotmail.co.ukChild porn Essay4