Child porn?

my mother has photo's of me in the bath as a baby plus one rather embarisining one of me trying to paint a trailer and ending up covered in brown paint. everytime i see something like this or the henderson saga i wonder how long till someone accuses parents with harmless pitures like those of child porn.

Its the same as bells thread about the couple trying to tell her the pedophiles would get her kids because they were playing naked. Its just sad
 
Asguard said:
my mother has photo's of me in the bath as a baby plus one rather embarisining one of me trying to paint a trailer and ending up covered in brown paint. everytime i see something like this or the henderson saga i wonder how long till someone accuses parents with harmless pitures like those of child porn.

Its the same as bells thread about the couple trying to tell her the pedophiles would get her kids because they were playing naked. Its just sad
Click to expand...

Obviously, children outside playing naked, especially running around in some water sprinkler thing, as obviously not everybody has swimsuits, I think is a lot more acceptable, than adults engaging in such behavior. Small children, before puberty, are often assumed to have childlike innocence, so while it may suggest supposed "poor judgment," I'm just not so sure, what's the big deal that anybody would be upset about such a thing? And I would more expect it among immigrants, who may not always be completely up, on what the community standards are anyway, and also, because they more relaxedly, have a larger number of children, more going along with the natural flow of human life unhindered. Perhaps that also relates a little, to not being so readily ashamed of children out playing in their "birthday suits."

Are we so afraid of the naked beauty of our own bodies? Are we so ashamed, that we must always have on clothes, even where society says that be to be clothed, isn't expected, such as in locker rooms and public communal showers?
 
actually it sadens me the way sociaty deals with the human body in general. What would be so bad if i walked naked down the street?

would it really cause that much damage to someone? anyone that its worthy of being a crime? how could it cause that much damage that its treated the way we treat rape and put on a sexual offenders register?

humanity in general sadens me
 
I remember years ago a lady who took Anne Geddes kinds of photos who got reported for child porn. She made them look like water fairies and put stuff over their genitals, but it was done after the fact so she was actually taking nude photos of them.

I have no idea what became of her.
 
Asguard said:
actually it sadens me the way sociaty deals with the human body in general. What would be so bad if i walked naked down the street?

would it really cause that much damage to someone? anyone that its worthy of being a crime? how could it cause that much damage that its treated the way we treat rape and put on a sexual offenders register?

humanity in general sadens me
Click to expand...

Because if you, being a grown adult I presume, walk down the street naked, you are an "obvious" pervert, and must be punished. It was God who clothed Adam & Eve, after they had sinned, discovering their nakedness and becoming ashamed. They had lost their innocence.

I am quite willing to "overlook" certain things, that society seems already inclined to accept, for very understandable reasons, say like mothers breastfeeding in public. I'm very much pro-babies, pro-human life, so I understand why it should be allowed. Especially since it's common in developing countries more pronatalist than us. But not every situation, is "understandable." We segregate restrooms, locker rooms, and public showers, by sex, so that some limited public nakedness can be permitted.

And I wish more communities would get serious about cracking down on "sagging," as it is really quite rude. What is it all about, foolish black guys walking down the street with their pants half falling off of them, showing off their underwear? Are they just "advertising" for promiscuous sex? Do we need more nasty STDs going around our communities, running up medical care costs?
 
Pronatalist, i think your in the wrong section. The crack pots are all in the forum "religion" if you wish to post about god and adam and eve here please provide DNA proof for all three of them:)
 
Pronatalist said:
....And I wish more communities would get serious about cracking down on "sagging," as it is really quite rude. What is it all about, foolish black guys walking down the street with their pants half falling off of them, showing off their underwear? Are they just "advertising" for promiscuous sex? ...
Click to expand...

dammit dammit dammit. so many missed opportunities. :bawl:
 
Orleander said:
I remember years ago a lady who took Anne Geddes kinds of photos who got reported for child porn. She made them look like water fairies and put stuff over their genitals, but it was done after the fact so she was actually taking nude photos of them.

I have no idea what became of her.
Click to expand...

Well I don't know about that lady, but from what I have seen, Anne Geddes does no porn. All her photos are beautiful and properly respective of the immense value and sacredness of each and every human life. Her photos seem rather pronatalist to me, encouraging people to responsibly have lots of babies naturally. Human babies are much like the most wonderfully beautiful imaginable "flowers" of a sort. At least in Anne Geddes sort of photolistic expression. What better to decorate the global garden with, but cute and adorable babies coming alive? I even have one of her more recent books I guess, with a photo, page 192 I think, of a visibly pregnant mother with her bulging belly, and a daughter, maybe age 6?, admiring the mother's swollen pregnant baby, presumably knowing her baby sibling is inside there. And the mother's natural vaginal hair shows too. That they are all naked, and the photo is taken from the side, not trying to show too much or be vulgar, suggests that it is not "sexual," but rather pronatal, respecting the natural flow of human life, similar to how I like to opine in text. I thought it a very beautiful photo, showing off the immense natural beauty of a naturally-growing human race, in which apparently quite many people do still accept the natural flow of human life, unhindered by shoddy Big Pharma contraceptive potions and poisons. From inside of human bodies, more human bodies are forming, and that all the more people thus get to experience life, is very beautiful.
 
Asguard said:
Pronatalist, i think your in the wrong section. The crack pots are all in the forum "religion" if you wish to post about god and adam and eve here please provide DNA proof for all three of them:)
Click to expand...

You obviously haven't done your homework.

Didn't I see some program on PBS or something or other, that tracing cell midochrondia backwards or something, they come back to a single woman? But then they of course, ignore the obvious religious implications, and under the guise of "science" or whatever, call her "Lucy," and not Eve.

Anyway, is that DNA-enough for you?

And isn't it an amazing coincidence, that humans seem to be universally reproductively compatible with one another? Most any human male, and any human female, of suitable age, no matter of which mixed races, seem rather capable of having babies together. As in the Bible talking about how God's creatures, reproduce AFTER THEIR KIND?
 
Pronatalist said:
You obviously haven't done your homework.

Didn't I see some program on PBS or something or other, that tracing cell midochrondia backwards or something, they come back to a single woman? But then they of course, ignore the obvious religious implications, and under the guise of "science" or whatever, call her "Lucy," and not Eve.

Anyway, is that DNA-enough for you?

And isn't it an amazing coincidence, that humans seem to be universally reproductively compatible with one another? Most any human male, and any human female, of suitable age, no matter of which mixed races, seem rather capable of having babies together. As in the Bible talking about how God's creatures, reproduce AFTER THEIR KIND?
Click to expand...

Lucy is not the same species as us. I think the bad thing is that people always associate nudity with sexuality and for the most part it has nothing to do with sex. Like in my thread I started about being naked a lot of people get naked just because they are more comfortable. I know sex isn't on my mind when I don't feel like putting a shirt on. I just don't feel like wearing clothes, so it don't has nothing to do with sex.
 
Asguard said:
actually it sadens me the way sociaty deals with the human body in general. What would be so bad if i walked naked down the street?

would it really cause that much damage to someone? anyone that its worthy of being a crime? how could it cause that much damage that its treated the way we treat rape and put on a sexual offenders register?

humanity in general sadens me
Click to expand...

It would make progress down a crowded city sidewalk much faster - everyone would get well out of your way!
 
CutsieMarie89, i was mowing the front lawn yesterday (no not naked:p) and i left the mower out the front when i finished and came inside, stripped off my grass splatted clothing down to my underwear and got a beer.

anyway PB started winging that i should put the mower away so i went out the front and got it and she went mental at me for not putting on pants
 
Typically, the second I walk in the front door, the pants come off. I am just far more comfortable with as little clothing on as possible. I actually get ribbed for it, because on a few occasions I've actually started to take my pants off when I bring a friend home...sometimes it's a female...and not one that I'm trying to bone...it's a bit embarrassing to have your jeans around your knees before you remember that your friend is behind you...
 
JDawg said:
Typically, the second I walk in the front door, the pants come off. I am just far more comfortable with as little clothing on as possible. I actually get ribbed for it, because on a few occasions I've actually started to take my pants off when I bring a friend home...sometimes it's a female...and not one that I'm trying to bone...it's a bit embarrassing to have your jeans around your knees before you remember that your friend is behind you...
Click to expand...

I don't like much clothes on either, at home. Clothes are hot, stuffy, lumpy pockets, uncomfortable, don't fit so well, too tight. I like to run around my home in my boxer underwear. But that's at home. That just won't do anytime I expect a guest. Better put a T-shirt on and some pants, maybe shoes too, in case I want to go outside. Guests don't understand or feel uncomfortable around people with scarcely any clothes on, for no apparent reason to be so lacking in clothes.

It only takes a minute to slip on some shorts and some shower flip-flops, to run outside for a minute.

Come on, reasonable social graces shouldn't have to have people remind us, that clothing on is expected.

Now should people have to wear much clothing around other family members, or at a mid-night trip to the bathroom? I leave that up to largely the parents, to set those standards, as they see as appropriate. I'm sure it varies, from family to family. Probably at least wear some PJs or underwear. Maybe slip on a bathrobe. I haven't worn pajamas, since I was a little boy.
 
and what would be the problem if we didnt want to put on clothes?
where isthe harm which justifies overriding our autonomious choice?
 
Asguard said:
and what would be the problem if we didnt want to put on clothes?
where isthe harm which justifies overriding our autonomious choice?
Click to expand...

Come on, don't you already know the answer? In "civilized" society, we don't want to be distracted all the time, by seeing people's genitals. Among God's creatures, humans are among the most horny, or so they say, and yet, most normal people, do like to think of many things other than sex, throughout the day.

We have to draw a few moral boundaries and lines, as to what is socially acceptable, and what isn't. Even at the beach or swimming pools, where society now says you can wear a bikini or speedo if you want, look at all the people who don't wear such skimpy attire, wearing swimwear with a bit more coverage. Why? I'll leave that for you to figure out or until a later post.

Now of course, I don't consider TV during prime time, or YouTube, showing a live human birth, a baby's head naturally crowning, emerging from the vagina as "porn," because it's the beauty of the natural flow of human life. And obviously, babies are born naked, and can't reasonably be clothed, until after they are born.

I am very conservative, and very pro-life, to the point of urging large families and shunning unnatural "birth control." But I am rather lax actually, on reasonable people-being-clothed standards. For example, I never had any objection to see my coworkers, where I used to deliver pizza, come into the back section, where we were mixed company, and change into their pizza place uniforms. I sure didn't expect them to go into the toilet room restroom, that was litterally a tiny "water closet." Hardly room to change your mind in there, let alone clothes. I didn't change clothes at work, as I came to work already in uniform. But aren't we all adults? It's not like I ever "saw" anything. People just turn towards the wall and quickly change clothes. And I suspect that people in other cultures, sometimes aren't so "uptight" about anything that supposedly might be remotely sexual, as Americans sometimes are.
 
Asguard said:
CutsieMarie89, i was mowing the front lawn yesterday (no not naked:p) and i left the mower out the front when i finished and came inside, stripped off my grass splatted clothing down to my underwear and got a beer.

anyway PB started winging that i should put the mower away so i went out the front and got it and she went mental at me for not putting on pants
Click to expand...

Seriously, it was a bit much to see.
fat_guy_in_girl_underwear.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top