Nude Child Photography OK?

Is nude child photography, purely from an artistic point of view, acceptable?

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 42.9%

  • No

    Votes: 12 57.1%
  • Total voters
    21
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thoreau

Thoreau

Valued Senior Member
Do you believe that photographing children (under 18 y/o) in the nude, both male and female, purely from an artistic aspect, nothing sexual, is acceptable?

Whether yes or no, please explain.
 
Last edited:
No, because children can't give informed consent.

(God, that was quick. Succinct too.)


thread_lock.gif
 
Babies are born naked. As long as it's not kids having sex or something, I see nothing wrong.
 
Do they have children in nudist societies? It's not that different.
 
MZ3Boy84 said:
Again, see first post. When I say chidlren, i am referring to minors under the age of 18.
Click to expand...
I'd say 16 and over is OK, provided that the subject is fully aware of what they're participating in. Did you have a particular kind of 'artistic' photography in mind? Can you say what the purpose of taking the photographs is, ie what will be done with them? Or is the question more general than that?
 
redarmy11 said:
I'd say 16 and over is OK, provided that the subject is fully aware of what they're participating in. Did you have a particular kind of 'artistic' photography in mind? Can you say what the purpose of taking the photographs is, ie what will be done with them? Or is the question more general than that?
Click to expand...

Much more general. I posted this question because I came across an interesting portfolio the other day that contained children in the nude. I myself see no problem with it. The contents of the photo's where completely non-sexual, mainly just emphasizing on the beauty of the natural human body. This particular portfolio had not just just children but adults alike. Overall, I believe it to be acceptable as long as there is no sexual connotation, or anything related to the sort.
 
samcdkey said:
*its a sting operation, idoit*
Click to expand...

LoL? What? Seems someone's a bit paranoid. Got a guilty conscience or something? lol Just pickin on ya samcdkey. And I will agree that I was pretty specific on this issue and its contents.
 
She's way too suspicious.

The context, sammy:
MZ3Boy84 said:
Much more general. I posted this question because I came across an interesting portfolio the other day that contained children in the nude. I myself see no problem with it. The contents of the photo's where completely non-sexual, mainly just emphasizing on the beauty of the natural human body. This particular portfolio had not just just children but adults alike. Overall, I believe it to be acceptable as long as there is no sexual connotation, or anything related to the sort.
Click to expand...
Well?
 
MZ3Boy84 said:
LoL? What? Seems someone's a bit paranoid. Got a guilty conscience or something? lol Just pickin on ya samcdkey. And I will agree that I was pretty specific on this issue and its contents.
Click to expand...

Do I know you?:bugeye:

And no its not specific enough for me. To whom is this "art" directed? What is the purpose of this "art"?

Are the girls children sucking lolipops?:mad:
 
Last edited:
samcdkey said:
And no its not specific enough for me. To whom is this "art" directed? What is the purpose of this "art"?
Click to expand...
Does it matter? Are you implying that it's ok for "art buffs" to perv over kiddies but the rest of us can't?


Seconds to Cesspool: 3.. 2.. 1..
 
samcdkey: Your thinking wayyy to much into this. This is a very general question. Like I said, there is no sexual innuendo or connotations. No girls sucking lollipops or anything of the sort. It is targeted to the general public, say, at an art museum for example. I repeat, THERE IS NOTHING SEXUAL ABOUT THE PHOTOGRAPHS.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top