The models never display a notion of coercion. Their expressions are comfortable and relaxed. While clearly staged modeling, the striking aspect is the self esteem and natural desire to be attractive. To tell one of these girls that they were doing something wrong would be quite new information to them. And as perfectly as they are crowned, the proposition would be difficult to persuade them of. Jimbo's comment has also deeply confused me, as of all people, I would never expect him to respond in such direct opposition to so many of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. But those things can be disputed, and when it comes to such a controversial subject as this, I will respect Jimbo's opinion. Besides, he is founder.

Cheston, Paul (25 October 2001). "Mass killer fights for porn in jail". London Evening Standard. Evening Standard Ltd . Retrieved 20 October 2014. Unencyclopedic: I do not see anything at Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not which supports the claim that a list of productions is unencyclopedic. I would like to continue to contribute to Wikipedia, and to get along with the current community. Can someone explain to me what part of my entries above are trolling? I need to know so I won't do it again. An Insight into Child Porn". WikiLeaks. February 2002. Archived from the original on 10 February 2011 . Retrieved 20 February 2011.The following statements could be "easily verified by any reasonable adult without specialist knowledge", although such verification may possibly be illegal: Ok. Let's make it clear. I agree with FloNight. There is no verifiable source for any informations about "LS Studio". The only information we have is about a child porn ring shutted down in Ukraine. Unless somebody can provide verifiable and reliable source for this studio work, this article has not his place in Wikipedia. I agree for a AfD as WP:V and WP:RS. -- Sam67fr 20:28, 5 April 2006 (UTC) These arguments are valid. None of the referenced articles mention LS Studio by name. And since the actual verifiable output of LS Studio is possibly illegal to verify, it seems that as far as Wikipedia is concerned, LS Studio did not exist. This is unfortunate, because regardless of the controversial nature of LS Studio, it did exist.

The agency's operations spanned several cities in Ukraine. They would regularly advertise on TV, in local newspapers and radio, calling for children with a "model appearance". Parents, believing in opportunities for their children, brought in their kids, and the agency's workers would create explicit content. [3] These magazines are targeted at gay and bisexual men, although they may also have some female readers, and may include male-male and occasionally male-male-female content and/or male-female content. Such publications include photographs or other illustrations of nudity and sexual activities, including oral sex, anal sex, and other forms of sexual activity. These magazines primarily serve to stimulate sexual thoughts and emotions. Some magazines are very general in their variety of illustrations, while others may be more specific and focus on particular activities or fetishes. While early collections often featured nude girls in natural poses, later collections also contained many images of girls in sexually suggestive poses. Should the article perhaps explain how LS studios is different from say somebody like David Hamilton? Because as it is now I really can't see why LS was raided when compared to David Hamilton's work?? Although I could be slightly superfical here in viewing the work of each of them.Ls land / issue 48 photo picture image and wallpaper island models ism 002 chracthyvenews riset imx : to 25 retro ladies set 14 355 c18 fairy setsexiz pix 32...