It is essential that nudity is clearly distinguished from sex, that children are not treated as inherently sexual and that restrictions on what children can attend is based on fact and not prejudice. Most regulation fails to do so which both discriminates against a minority group and results in harm to the young people that the law is intended to protect.
Much present legislation encourages the assumption that the body is inherently sexual and the misapprehension that the body is inherently offensive. The attitudes encouraged result in widespread and often serious harm. The correlations are strong and the mechanisms are well understood but there is incredible reluctance to face up to the facts. It is not coincidence that the more prudish countries have such appalling outcomes across a wide range of indicators when compared to the least prudish. Most indicators are at least several times worse and some, for example some sexually transmitted infections, are tens of times worse. Age at first intercourse, promiscuity, use of condom and contraception, teenage pregnancy, teenage abortion, sexually transmitted infections, breast feeding, body dysmorphic disorders, the demand for cosmetic surgery and many others. The pattern is the same. More prudish, worse outcomes.
We suspect that the same pattern repeats for child sexual abuse. If children and photographs of children are treated as if they are inherently sexual then people will come to perceive children as inherently sexual.