Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Picture

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: Picture

    Originally posted by BiNaturist View Post
    Thanks for showing the specific photo. There have been other posts regarding the 'Photo Of The Day', but it you read them a day or two later, you've got no idea of which one it could be.
    Glad I actually saw the picture, before saying anything.:snore:
    Personally, I saw nothing wrong...just a family enjoying their nudism. I understand the apprehension one might get at first glance, though.:eek:
    So there.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Picture

      Quote by "sunnysmile_fl"

      Don't read into the law, just read what it says.


      I suggest you do just that.

      Your ignorance of the law shows you haven't a clue what your talking about when it comes to family social nude recreation, including photography, possession, and publishing of nudist and naturist images of subjects any age.

      Plain non sexual naturist and nudist nudity & photography is in no way lewd, obscene, or sexual, and does not even come close to being considered pornography or child pornography.

      To learn the Federal laws description of "Child Pornography and/or Pornography you need to go to any major search engine such as Google, Bing or many others and input " Federal Law - Description of Child Pornography" Re: http://tinyurl.com/23z3y62

      This thread is not about child pornography.


      Can we get back to the topic of a beautiful family and couple enjoying nude recreation with nature in the outstanding images and comments posted.
      Last edited by NakedGary; 11-27-2010, 01:37 PM. Reason: multi-link, bold text.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Picture

        NakedGary:

        Enjoy what you enjoy in your own privacy, that should be your First-Amendment right, but don't share them here int our forums. It's not setting good example for CFI and it's only fueling further arguement that isn't necessary.

        Ans yes, I would like to see this thread either brought back to topic or closed by the moderators. One or the two.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Picture

          Originally posted by Kouak View Post
          Several people have suggested that you should not post nude pictures of children. The main argument is a pedophile might get ahold of it and that would be bad. Others have countered it saying it will not harm the child since the child does not know about it.

          Other discussions have centered around the legalities of having nude pictures of children on a web site or downloaded on your computer.

          Another thing you have to consider when posting a nude picture of your child. Someone who knows your child could find the picture can save it on their computer. As your child grows up, the picture can resurface. Classmates could tease them. This could be tramatic.
          Some very good observations there, Kouak. Those are the key factors that are worth taking into consideration in this particualr matter. To that I have added empathy.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Picture

            One of the rules of civilized debate is that while anyone in entitled to his own opinion, he is not entitled to his own facts.

            As several have pointed out here, Sunnysmile (who, from this thread, would perhaps do more justice to "Cassandrafrown") is simply wrong when he says that the law classifies nude photos of children as pornography.

            On the other hand, Sunnysmile is absolutely correct when he describes the consequences of a prosecution on these charges - even if you win, you've lost your savings, your house, your job, your reputation, and perhaps your family before you emerge "victorious".

            Why then should Clothesfree make use of the freedom to post (occasionally, and rarely explicitly, as those in charge have stated) photos of children participating in naturism?

            One reason was given by PageValleyNude, who said, "Glad I actually _saw the picture_, before saying anything."

            Believe it or not (and I'm sorry I can't find the link for this) at one time Congressional staffers, doing research to make policy on this issue, found they couldn't actually look at the photos about which they were recommending laws be passed. Instead, they classified the photos *based on the file names*.

            Clothesfree is a public site, what it posts can be verified by anyone, and there are Google caches and such. If an accusation is made, it it possible to actually see the photos, rather than relying on law enforcement's smarmy descriptions, in which a photo of a child of indeterminate and irrelevant gender, painting a picket fence, becomes an infant caressing an array of phallic objects.

            Another reason I've already mentioned is that Clothefree's credentials as an authentic naturist site are unimpeachable. It carries a wide array of information, and continued uninterrupted during the months or years that credit-card processor's rules prohibited photos of naturist children. There are sites pushing "family naturism" which seem Something Else, thinly disguised. That charge cannot be brought against Clothesfree.

            Naked Gary is correct that this thread is not about child pornography. Perhaps it's worth raising though, when he posts links to places like the Justice Department and missingkids.com, that I have law enforcement argue that possession of documents downloaded from these places, as indicating child abuse.

            I'm not kidding, I wish I was.

            - Caipora

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Picture

              Originally posted by Kouak View Post
              Several people have suggested that you should not post nude pictures of children. The main argument is a pedophile might get ahold of it and that would be bad. Others have countered it saying it will not harm the child since the child does not know about it.

              Another thing you have to consider when posting a nude picture of your child. Someone who knows your child could find the picture can save it on their computer. As your child grows up, the picture can resurface. Classmates could tease them. This could be traumatic.
              One can't be too careful... Hold it. See this item from today's Daily Mail:
              Their eyes crudely blacked out to disguise their identities, these little girls look as if they might be the victims - or perhaps perpetrators - of a crime.

              But this disturbing image was actually issued in a school yearbook.
              It is the result of the bizarre ‘photography policy’ of headmistress Vicky Parsey, who bans parents from taking pictures in school for fear children’s faces will be superimposed on obscene internet images.
              Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz16VqHYzLs

              You see, the kids don't even have to be naked - someone could superimpose their heads on other photos! And to avoid that, it's worth preventing parents from filming the school nativity play.

              Everything in life involves balance, weighing risks against advantages. It seems to me that the people who run Clothesfree.com have struck a measured balance. And it seems that this British headmistress has stuck off into the deep waters of paranoia.

              - Caipora

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Picture

                Originally posted by Kouak View Post
                Another thing you have to consider when posting a nude picture of your child. Someone who knows your child could find the picture can save it on their computer. As your child grows up, the picture can resurface. Classmates could tease them. This could be tramatic.
                Classmates could tease them and it could be tramatic can be an arguement used for anything outside what is considered normal. A nude child photo would not recieve anymore or less judgement then a haircut, clothing, or acne. If the potential "victim" of teasing was taught before hand that nudity was not wrong or something to be ashamed of to begin with, would the teasing be as effective?

                I was teased for choices I made about my appearance but what bothered me was the behaviour of the teaser and not what they chose to tease me about, it did not bring me shame, I did not feel any worse about myself, the "trama" was from the actions of the person.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Picture

                  Originally posted by nimrod View Post
                  Classmates could tease them and it could be tramatic can be an arguement used for anything outside what is considered normal. A nude child photo would not recieve anymore or less judgement then a haircut, clothing, or acne. If the potential "victim" of teasing was taught before hand that nudity was not wrong or something to be ashamed of to begin with, would the teasing be as effective?

                  I was teased for choices I made about my appearance but what bothered me was the behaviour of the teaser and not what they chose to tease me about, it did not bring me shame, I did not feel any worse about myself, the "trama" was from the actions of the person.
                  Nimrod your point is out of context just enough to be considered beside the point of our discussion. In otherwords you've sidetracked the issue. General teasing is common in virtually any point of childhood but ridiculing and ostracization because of the acknoledgement of the existance of an inappropriate or pornographic image that was publicised of that child is on a far grander scale and its effects can scar a person for life.

                  I have seen it firsthand where someone who is otherwise a good person and an excellent employee or worker is instantly ejected from an otherwise good and secure job simply due to the ascknoledgement of the existance of some inappropriate images of that person having been publicised on the Internet someplace. Once it's there it cannot be made to go away completely and no doubt the girl in question in this particular instance is still being haunted by the existance of those images and that it is severly limiting what employment and social engagement opportunities may be available to her, not to mention the opportunities of employent she may have had but then have vanished before her eyes so many times because the incriminating photos are always catching up with her. It's a horrible, horrible curse that Society tends to lay on people who they deem 'did something naughty' when the people administring to the curse aren't looking at the very 'naughty things' they might be doing themselves.

                  So why ever let anything like that get started by means of the CFI website and why ever let a thing like that make CFI the catalyst to what will ruin lives of children and their futures? I think and would hope that CFI administrators are keen on this aspect and we ought to listen to what they have to say in regards to this hot issue.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Picture

                    Enough is enough, as posted and quoted This thread was not started on or about "Child Pornography"

                    Quote by "nakedgary"
                    This thread is not about child pornography.

                    Can we get back to the topic of a beautiful family and couple enjoying nude recreation with nature in the outstanding images and comments posted.
                    Quote by "sunnysmile_fl"
                    Ans yes, I would like to see this thread either brought back to topic or closed by the moderators. One or the two.
                    Quote by "Caipora"
                    Naked Gary is correct that this thread is not about child pornography.
                    Being that a few un-informed posters want to continue to hi-jack this thread, and post off topic on "Child Pornography,
                    I suggest and request that this thread be locked to further posts.

                    There is plenty of open CFF threads on the off topic of "Pornography" & "banned images" if you wish to continue on that subject.

                    Re: http://www.clothesfreeforum.com/sear...archid=2058255

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Picture

                      ALL Right!

                      The topic was about a picture that is no longer up for view. The owner of the site and Chief Mod have already commented and there are other threads to discuss the picture of the day.

                      This one's closed!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X