"Not always" like what? 99% of the time it's harmful? >>A UN agency is again immersed in controversy for a recent report suggesting there is no conclusive evidence that children exposed to pornography are harmed. Pfff... It's worse than the title implies... They stated they found no evidence they were armed... Like "well since there's no evidence... it's all good!!!!Wohooooo!!!" So now I guess it's perfectly fine to expose kids to gay bondage rough sex porn... What about stuffs with animals while we're at it? It's porn... I mean what are we talking about here, what kind of porn are they talking about? This study is a sham, no one would put bambi and madmax on the same page just because it's "movies", same deal >>The report published by the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) addresses how government policy can be used to protect children from harmful, abusive and violent content online. Its conclusion is based on a European study of 19 EU countries that found in most countries, most children who saw pornographic images were “neither upset nor happy.” **In fact, the report UNICEF relies on says 39 percent of Spanish children were happy after seeing pornography.** So... Are they saying they exposed children to porn here for a scientific experiment?... Because it sounds like exactly that... ... I've seen a blowjob on a crypted channel for about 3 secs when I was 10 or something, I still remember the sequence... Nothing traumatic but my brain kept it in memory for all those years... So I guess it's safe to say that this information was kind of very "impactful" ... In pedo cases also, the victim, the child, isn't always "traumatized", and that's where the worst part begins, the fact that they enjoyed it, that they experienced pleasure, make them look for it when they reach adulthood and the pedo cycle repeats... Not traumatized my ass