Let's think about this critically:
Say a female child is born into a poor village, to an even poorer family.
A few years pass, and the father of the family (also the main breadwinner) dies. This leaves the family without adequate money for food or healthcare.
The mother makes a deal with a cartel/organized crime group, and sells her child into sexual slavery for a substantial sum of money.
The child will obviously have to be taken care of (fed, clothed and sheltered) and can't be abused too much or risk showing bruises for films/pictures. Also, although the child may be forced into sex, the child is a product and therefor would be protected by the criminal organization.
If you were to consider the average lifespan and lifestyle of a child in a situation where he/she had not been sold into sexual slavery, you really must consider whether the change is that negative. If they are raised from an early age, where being a 'sex slave' is all that they really know, how would they know it was wrong or bad? In fact, they might grow up gaining great pleasure from it.
I guess until the rest of the world is 'first world' quality, you can't legitimately make the claim that it is abuse. For all you know, it might have been the only way for the child to survive.
tl;dr: morality is subjective.
|