| Author |
Message |
sushiman
Member
274
|
# Posted: 7 Jan 2007 07:04:51
Reply
Quoting: jamesriske It's inappropriate for the forum but it's not child porn.
Agreed .
|
MrBigCuckold
Admin
3496
Pictures: 3
|
# Posted: 7 Jan 2007 19:21:31
Reply
blackmamba2 banned
Quoting: wnt2bcuckd we should start reporting these guys IP addresses
i think they use proxy servers or trojaned PCs to post this spam, so ip adress postings can't give good results
|
MrBigCuckold
Admin
3496
Pictures: 3
|
# Posted: 7 Jan 2007 19:28:04
Reply
i think it's one person. i write abuse to his domain registrant
|
MrBigCuckold
Admin
3496
Pictures: 3
|
# Posted: 7 Jan 2007 19:29:48
Reply
Quoting: impotentwhitewimp I'm starting to think some redneck is trying to fuck this site up by trying to associatie it with pedos...please do a thorough search of the posts and remove any sick minors related stuff!
we think and post one thing simultaneously;)
|
efizzz
Member
10
|
# Posted: 7 Jan 2007 20:49:57
Reply
in response to Jamesriske, who either fancies himself a lawyer or is apparently a very poor one...although I'm not a lawyer either I'm going to throw my own unqulified two cents in...
"Child porn is when when a minor is portrayed in a sexual act or if their genitals are displayed at the center point or focal point of the picture." -Jamesriske
-the focal point of a picture changes with context, and the context of this site is purely sexual in content. that brown blob in the bottom corner of your vactation photo, for instance, can become the focus if you were to post it on a site about possible big foot proof. What possible argument could you have to say that the photo's on this site do not SPECIFICALLY IMPLY SEXUAL ACTS (or at the very least are posted for the purpose of sexual gratification)? EVEN ABERCROMBIE, WHICH SELLS CLOTHES AND HAS LEGITIMATE NON-SEXUAL PURPOSES (which this site doesnt, although a thearaputic/support section might be nice), HAS BEEN CENSORED FOR PORTRAYING MINORS SEXUALLY.
Despite what the law may or may not currently read, it is a law based upon precedent with open and flexible language. Do you mean to tell us that minor's engaging in sexual acts while clothed is not illeagle? If Hustler showed pictures of clothed 14 year olds jacking guys off or if penthouse fourum put pictures of seven year olds in the column's of their stories and wrote fiction regaurding them, the law would be re-interperted tomarrow. In Ginsburg V. 7th US district court (okay, thats probably not the case title, but its something every highschooler learns about so you should be able to find it, infamous SF judge Hoffman wasnt it?), Justice Hoffman(or some name close-im too lazy to look it up on Wikki)_ ruled Ginsburg's poetry obscene based upon nothing more than lacking social value-although a Jury overturned this on appeal six months or so later while the future poet laurete languished in unpublished poverty, do you really think any jury in America would be sympathetic to the thought of little girls cuckolding full grown men as having social value?
If nothing else, portraying someone's private family photo as having sexual significance is slander, is misconstruing someone else's creative intent. How would you like it if your daughter, cousin, sister came home crying because her boyfriend dumped her, all his friends seeing her pictures on a site which by now must have thousands of hits a day? I appreciate this site and I appreciate all the wonderful wanks MBC (seriously MBC, you're one of the best friends I never met) has provided for me, but the copywrite violations on this site alone are probably enough to bury it.
"People are so wound up that nowadays, even kids in swimsuits are being called child porn"-Jamesriske
well, yes, when I was in a NYS elimentary school in the eighties, every year we had to watch the same damn video of a Borat-haired werido who kept trying to get little girls to go swimming in his pool and then let him towel them off as the quintestial example of a "bad grownup". Our children, courts, psychologists, and medical professionals use the term 'area your bathing suit covers' as a child-friendly euthamism for the area's one is not to touch/covet on children. If you would like to jerk off to little girls and then justify this to yourself based upon some under-developed, loosely argued leagle technicality, I'll look you up when i get down to hell.
"Next thing you know, our kids would be wrapped up like Muslim women from head to toe. " - Jamesriske
If you read maybe like fifty random pages tops of the Koran or talk to a cleric, you'd realize you'er being ironic. Muslim women are forced to dress this way, right or wrong, because men like you and me exist. men are perverts and women should be protected from them. Literally, this is what the koran says, in the same word for word language of 1300+ years ago.
Although places like Afganistain may take it too far(in my opinion), the intent of Burka's and the like is to protect women from rape, kidnapping, and the "thoughtcrime" of temptation and imagination-its precisly out of an ancient societial fear of perverts like you and me that these women are subjected to this in the first place. Remember, woman in American society wern't allowed to expose their necks or ankle's untill the 1920's, either. Islam has had far less time as a post-agrairian, diversified-labor culture/economy which make personal liberities possible in the first place.
So if you find a good link to hot and free Persian women posing nude, let me know because that would be awsome and I can't wait to covet some of that hot Farsi ass myself.
|
efizzz
Member
10
|
# Posted: 7 Jan 2007 21:37:35
Reply
Jamestrike, I blew it and owe you an apology. I should have read your previous posts regaurding this subject before I wrote that diatribe, but you just got me so fired up I jumped the gun. You're obviously more well-educated on the leagle aspects of this subject than I am, and just because you dont throw around the fact you have two kids every other line doesnt mean you arnt cleary empathetic regaurding children.
still, you're arguing for a specific position on a controversial subject-why give you're tacit approval for something which may or may not be illeagle when you obviously do not agree with it and arnt serving some form of judically appointed advocacy? I guess it seems very cuckold of you to attempt to perpetuate something you do not like. If you ultimately dont agree with it why risk prolonging wrongdoing by suppling arguments the origional content poster's havent even attempted to profer themselves? Its not like their arnt anymous pedophilies with an average IQ who couldnt supply their own arguments were they legitamate, your not exactly defending the disenfranchiesed here.
The law is changing and open to interpertation. This is an age-restricted site with an explict sexual content warning. The minors involved in all likelyhood did not consent to their pictures being published for this purpose and are minors anyway. artisic endeavors making a statement regaurding socital norms or beauty do not publish in pornographic media by their definition as legitimatly having nonsexual content. You're arguing for something you know is wrong and while I'm glad you're enlightend enough to see two sides to the argument I wish you'd stop supporting child pornography.
|
jamesriske
Member
1291
|
# Posted: 8 Jan 2007 07:16:15
Reply
bigblackmaster,
I hardly think you're a nigger and I'm far from a redneck but I appreciate the humor in what you're trying to say.
Look, sites like this draw all kinds of people and especially those who will try to shut us down. MrBig can't be here all the time but when he does come here, he's very good about deleting the spam and inappropriate posts.
I was on another forum and someone had it shut down by posting illegal pics and then reporting it. It's a common tactic and it might be what this guy was trying to do. You never know.
There are ways to post where you can't be traced at all. Just use a public internet connection at Starbucks or the library for example. Or you can use a sophisticated tunneler service like Metropipe
http://www.metropipe.net/
based in Germany. No one can trace you at all.
Not only that but entire files of pictures and vids can be encrypted and kept on your hard drive by using Truecrypt which is FREE. If you keep porn on your computer, as I do, and want to keep it away from your kids or wife, I recommend using it:
http://www.truecrypt.org/
No one can crack it. No one. Not the FBI or anyone. Hasn't been cracked yet. It's easy to use and FREE. I love it. I named my file as a TXT file and no one in the family has even noticed it yet. I have over 100GB of interracial porn on my computer and feel perfectly comfortable letting my two kids use the same computer. They can't open it without the passcode.
But when I'm alone, I can access it at the touch of a button and enjoy.
|
jamesriske
Member
1291
|
# Posted: 8 Jan 2007 07:25:33
Reply
efizzz,
No harm no foul. I understand that my personal style gets people pissed off because I say what I think and that has always gotten me in trouble.
In all honesty, I do have a problem with people who overly freak out about pedophiles and I'll tell you why. There is a greater danger that they don't give a shit about. Kids being beaten and neglected. That pisses me off more than anything. Flame me if you will but I'd rather go after a man who punches an 8 year old in the jaw than a man who kisses on on the butt.
I'm not going to go into my personal history here or make a big drama post but just suffice to say that I have a personal axe to grind with people who abuse their kids. One of my kids is adopted and I plan on adopting another. I'm not going to run around saying that just because I have kids or have adopted one that was abused makes me an authority but I will say that IMHO people focus too much on mild sexual abuse and totally ignore blatant physical abuse and neglect of kids.
Nothing but nothing makes me see red than seeing someone abuse a kid.
|
babbionz
Member
705
|
# Posted: 8 Jan 2007 10:25:09
Reply
Quoting: HappyD I think "louthlad32" profile should be looked at! Hes posting and claiming to be 15 yrs old. This site is for adults only! if so....ban him!
I second HappyD
Chiama quando vuoi...
|
MrBigCuckold
Admin
3496
Pictures: 3
|
# Posted: 8 Jan 2007 14:26:01 · Edited by: MrBigCuckold
Reply
Quoting: HappyD I think "louthlad32" profile should be looked at! Hes posting and claiming to be 15 yrs old. This site is for adults only! if so....ban him!
banned, thank you 
|
babbionz
Member
705
|
# Posted: 8 Jan 2007 19:53:58 · Edited by: babbionz
Reply
MBC
plese take a look at these morons
http://www.cuckoldplace.com/index.php?action=userinfo&user=39166&activ ity=0
http://www.cuckoldplace.com/index.php?action=userinfo&user=31315
Chiama quando vuoi...
|
oldrope
Member
48
|
# Posted: 8 Jan 2007 22:14:14
Reply
Quite a thread I inadvertently started here, ...Jamesriske, and others make a very good arguments and I do find myself in absolute agreement on his interlectual stance ...however, I try to keep things simple and was not making any interlectual point at all ...I believe those posts, (i.e the children's photo's), were a deliberate attempt at sabotaging this site, some small minded fool's impotent grasp at exercising what little power he is able to muster, and inflecting this on others in the hope that his own infection will set root.
I had not posted or commented at all prior to this, (which may go some way in illustrating my contempt for such people), I am by nature, occupation and training a voyeur of life ( ...a lurker on this site), but i do feel that it needs protection, and Mr big Cuckold should expect all our help and vigilance in this regard ...after all whether i agree with, disagree or even understand some of the posts on this site, it is freedom of speach, thought & action made real - and I thank Mr Big C for his efforts and hard work in this.
My own particular distaste for the use of such imagry, not only stems from personal/professional history but also in that we are all here by choice - we choose to post images, confess the realities or fantasies of our sexual lives and we use this forum as an outlet for these - what choice were these children giving - I personallly do not subscribe to some of the fetishes exercised on these pages, (esp the rape, racial sexual superiority senarios) however, i have the choice, as to whether to "indulge " or involve myself, ... these children did not have such a choice, and that is undefencable.
|
MrBigCuckold
Admin
3496
Pictures: 3
|
# Posted: 8 Jan 2007 22:51:42
Reply
thank you - he is banned and removed
|
efizzz
Member
10
|
# Posted: 8 Jan 2007 23:10:22
Reply
Jamestrike, apparently you mistook my apology as some sort of exoneration...(yes I know I'm a judgemental basterd)
congradulations on having at least the bear minimum moral standards of our society and of a parent, but that sucks you didnt respond to my aqusation that it seems like your basicly saying kiddie porn is okay without saying so.
then today you post ways to mask this behavior. Personally I dont think you're a skilled enough wordsmith to be playing both sides of the fence, and it sort of looks like you know all the leagle and technicle ways to get away with child pornography, and you kind of seem to be falling more on the crooked side of the fence, which would be especially true if blocking ISP's/use of blocking apps were illeagle (are they? or is nobody reading this shit?).
this is why I think you're an especially sneaky and crooked bastered:
the subject of a picture becomes fetishsied in the minds of the viewer. This is a term academicly used in the feild of communications which refers to the subject (12 yr old brooke sheilds/gallery in manhattan)as having a worth (jackoff fodder for perverts)divorced from value(the young female form as a natural beauty/a part of life).
If you look at a magizine add of a blue mini with two racing strips, for instance, your mind thinks about this more than if you see the same car in real life. You're interest in the subject of the picture/video is greater because of the context of the media it was presented in. Another example would be the difference between seeing a group of aquantencies at a concert and seeing the same group in a video of a concert you didnt go to-they seem more spectacular because they're on the screen.
so anyway, that sceene/movie you keep refering to which shows brooke sheilds as a naked child encourages the audience to fetishize what they are seeing. that which is fetishized becomes objectified when the signifcance of the subject as portrayed through the media and in a specific intellectual context eclipses the significance of the object in real life (as will happen when someone obessively masturbates to these images).
You're telling people in a sexual context like this site where they might find sexual material origionally intended for other purposes. You are literally perverting the origional artform-a long since forgotton movie for auertures or photos for bohiemian art fags in an elite and exclusive setting are symbolic of different messages than the sexual inuendo you are imparting by even mentioning them on this site. People like you broadcasting legitimate art in sexual media are exactly why leaders in places like China or the FCC are so afraid of allowing free speech in the first place.
Most people on this site might be mature, rational, sane adults. But all it takes is one freak to do something horrible, and given the nature of this site for all know you could be helping to enable an awful lot of freaks, especially in discussions about child pornography. You cant provide rationalizations and computer programs which further child pornography and claim to be against it.
Also. changing the subject and saying what you really hate is physical child abuse (is there a difference??) sounds like you're giving an automatic response. the one where that A+ girl who buys adderal off your friend or a lifelong drunk driver says at least they dont do illeagle drugs. The one where the guy convicted of having child porn says at least he'd never do anything to touch or hurt a child.
Oh and while I waist hours of my life on the internet one more thing-
I'm 25 and have had a computer since my family got our first 8086 when I was like ten. Sooner or later, you're kids if they grow up with a computer and they have any technicle curiosity whatsoever are going to wonder how the family pc's hard-drive is partitioned. its not just curiosity, their going to be using that space for their MP3's, porn, digital camera, powerpoint projects, and all other manner of what will always be somewhat memory-intesive data. It really doesnt matter if they find your ten gigibyte text file, their going to add up their 12 gigs of songs to your 4 gigs of work stuff ect and wonder where all that space went. If their old enough they'll just assume you've got a huge porn collection on the computer and probably be too ackward to mention it but maybe not too interested to find it. If their younger, they'll probably ask you point-blank where all the space went. Or just your wife will find it. Invest in some mem sticks, or better yet your own laptop-you can close the monitor in an emergency and its a good excuse for headphones. Or just be an even better father which you are obviously proud to be and use restraint. I get more racial porn than I can shake a stick at (but then again, thats my interest level not yours) without having to download ten gigs of it. If you're still reading this by now, believe that I speak from experiene on being sneaky-about a year a go my whole world began to unravel when my then live-in now ex-girlfriend discovered before I did that yahoo messenger had been dumping setup exe's into my applications folder every night while she slept and I thought I was being so cleaver.
|
jamesriske
Member
1291
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 06:10:12
Reply
Actually, I consider guys like you to be the most dangerous when it comes to kids. You apparently see sexuality in pictures of girls in bikinis. So much so that you have to label them child porn and imagine all sorts of machinations in the minds of others and go off into ridiculous posts that hardly make sense.
I just see a kid in a bikini.
|
MrBigCuckold
Admin
3496
Pictures: 3
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 06:13:43
Reply
jamesriske sorry but girls in bikini are girls in bikini, but girls in bikini in erotical poses (unusual poses for real normal kids) are kids erotic
|
jamesriske
Member
1291
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 06:16:56
Reply
That's true, Mr. Big. I was writing specifically about girls in bikinis. I made no mention of girls in erotic poses in my post.
What's your point?
|
efizzz
Member
10
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 09:16:08
Reply
Do you realize that instead of responding to anything I said, you slandered me instead? You made false statements about my charicter you could not have arrived at from what I have publicly said? I thought I was talking to someone who knew about American law and by implication knew the rules of argument and how avoid slanderous or libealious statements, now am I to understand that this is not the case? You had me confused, the way you know so much specifically about child pornography law...
so, by what you've just said in you're last post, its okay for a grown man to have pictures of teenage girls he doesnt know in bikini's on his computer? Please, dont tell me about your beach photo's from that last family vaction you've hidden in a .txt file. Some readers might fear for your psycho-sexual health at that point.
First I accused you of justifing the kiddie porn on this site without coming right out and saying it, then I accused you of not even bothering to deny my accusation, and you still havent denied it. I've been trying not to swear but that is fucking creepy. Why dont you just write it? why dont you just write "EFIZZZ i do not mean to endorse child pornography and I do not induldge in sexual fantasies regaruding children"?
why dont you explain why its okay to tell people, unasked, how to block their ISP in a discussion thread about how to protect the site from illeagle material being posted? IF YOU ARE AGAINST CHILD PORN, PLEASE WRITE AND TELL ME WHY YOU DID THAT-IT REALLY LOOKS LIKE YOU THINK YOU'RE JUST SMART ENOUGH TO BE CUTE AND THAT YOU DONT REALLY HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AT ALL.
Are you not reading my entire post's, or am I writing badly?
BY POSTING LITTLE GIRLS ON THIS SITE, YOU ARE EROTICIZING THEM BECAUSE IT IS A SITE ABOUT SEX
MRBC was saying bikini pic's can be eroticized despite the Bikini. Which is what I told you too. In fact I wrote you a neat little textbook style lesson using all the correct vocabulary. Are you reading and thinking, or just arguing for the sake of it? because if you're not going to take into account whats already been written than your post's do nothing to contribute.
I dont see sexuality because of little girls in bikini's any more than the next healthy man, which is as close to zero as possible and basically none. Because I dont spend too much time dwelling on girls in Bikini's.
I dont brodcast where to see them, and If I do find out somebodies jailbait I avert my eyes (another lesson you could learn which is all over the Koran).
Please dont try and turn this around on me because its a desparate tactic and you couldnt convince reader one of that based on what I've posted. I'm that cute popular slightly metrosexual kid you daughter might depend on so that she has the social support to wear a bikin in public in the first place. Of course I can tell the difference between a sexual prededitor and a normal person without being a preditor myself. Why dont you understand the concept, I thought you were a parent?
I've been trained as a camp counselor, a private tutor, a school tutor, a TA, and a Boy Scout leader and every single one of these institution's doesnt require a rocket scientist and every single one of these program's tells you how to spot sexual preditors without being a diviant yourself.
If you'd been inside a school in the last thirty years, you'd know that certain attair worn by underage children is deemed "distracting". It's a nice PC way to say that the principle/administration doesnt think your kid is sexy but someone might. The precedent is there that I'm not a child pornographer just because I understand theres a time and a place for a bikini and a time and a place where a bikini would make a little girl look trashy. Its the same thing as when feminist's, child psychologist's, and dietitian's complain about Brittney Spears/the GAP sexualizing little girls at younger and younger age's to adverse affects. These people, as I see myself in writing this, arnt the one's you should be worried about-we're catching the kid's from falling off the edge at the end of Salinger's book because of parents who are too busy or too lousy to do their jobs.
If you have little girls and they walk around in bikini's, some men are going to be attracted to them and they shouldnt-this is a fact of life. I just think that what you write seems like, to me, you're encouraging them. encouraging them to go home after seeing your little baby, logon to cuckoldplace, and whack off thinking about what he saw using pictures somebody posted using the ISP blocker you provided. You've given him the tools to do this. Why? So what, I acknowledge this kind of man exists and I think we shouldnt post pics of kids on sex sites because of it. As a father, shouldnt you feel the same way on this I do?
Its a small world, a smaller country, and an even smaller internet community out there. You have kids. Wtf?
|
lacuck
Member
238
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 15:45:26
Reply
I agree with you James, this guy's an idiot and probably a pedophile himself. I've never seen anyone overreact the way he is.
I can't even read his posts with the poor spelling and all but can you believe that he thinks it should be illegal for a grown man to have pictures of girls in bikinis on his computer? My God. Thank God he's not in any position of power. He reminds me of the Taliban, we would all be running around covered in head to toe!
Oh hey Eiffzz, I'm sure pedophiles already know how to hide material on their computer and post anonymously. According to your logic, anyone who repeats the information that he did is helping pedophiles? LOL Here's another encryption program: Kremlin. Am I now a peodphile too? LOL You can also use free proxy programs such as hidemyass.com although they keep their log in information on file. Metropipe, being based in Germany, shreds their log in files daily. THERE! I bet Im a superpedophile according to you now! LMAO
I just can't believe how insulting and rude you are and what a troll you are. All that the poor guy wrote was that he was against the pictures being on here but that they were not necessarily illegal. That's it. I read his post many times and frankly, I find him to be very rational and informative. But now you go off on these wild rants telling us all about your perverse sexual scenarios of masturbating to pictures of kids.
What a sicko, you are effizz, please get help. You're obviously supressing your own feelings and desires of being a pedophile.
|
jamesriske
Member
1291
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 15:53:12
Reply
I think it's safe to say at this point that the guy is a whack job and has some sort of problem in this area. Wouldn't surprise me one bit if he's eventually caught and arrested for some type of sexual offense in the future, if he already hasn't been.
|
lacuck
Member
238
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 16:56:47
Reply
Agreed.
Can't believe someone would freak out so much over some pictures of a girl in a bikini. I live by the beach and see it all the time. I guess whackos like him would put a huge drape around the beach?
Now watch, he'll accuse me of being a pedophile too.
Unbelievable.
|
efizzz
Member
10
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 17:57:09
Reply
alright, you are all a bunch of dirty old men. I'm complaining because for the last half of my life or so I've found myself cute enough to have to exersize some discretion which many men dont understand and friends with young women who get objectified in public by creepy old men. I come from the town of the collage town creeper and I used to live in the city where he was finally caught on rape charges. around here girls are still too unnerved to walk home from the bar alone and I'm sick of old men refusing to join our feminized century and condoning the behavior which freaks them out. These bathing suits are worn for sexually attractive peers, not people with cameras, and I guess you repressed freaks will never understand because you spend too much time walled off behind a screen.
I'm freaking out because of first hand knowledge about girls being raped. It sucks when your friend takes years to recover from something she cant even talk about.
I'm freaking out because girls wear those bikini's for other girls and boys their own age to find them sexy, not so somebody can take pictures of, or not so creepy old men can watch them. I'm writing so much because I'm waiting for a tooth to be operated on and I'm in too much pain to either go to work or jack off or be social so im bored and this is a great exercise in ethics and usually you dont find an opponent who's this much in the dark.
common sense people. theres no other reason to have pictures of woman you dont know other than sexual reasons. Obviously I'm over-reacting but obviously I'm preaching to the wrong crowed. go ahead and eat your creampies. go ahead and use sexual objectification as an outlet to racism. I dont know what I was thinking, i guess i thought people could see a clear moral high ground despite being members of this perverted site and I was wrong.
MBC, thanks for the captions, pirated vids and stories. But you really are pandering to a bunch of racist sexiest sexual maladaptives. Looking at pictures of underage girls on your computer or the internet is illeagle and immoral and I didnt need to minor in ethics to know that. I wanted the best of both worlds-perveted fantasies but not to induldge in anything out and out harmful as a member of said internet site. I guess that was too much to ask.
I wouldnt put a huge drape around the beach, lacuck, i'd just protect my daugheter from perverts like you by endowing them with the self respect not to have to dress like a trashy whore. You live around the beach, you must realize how many of you're nehbors have telephoto lenses and telescopes. I've lived around the beach too. There are tons of perverts. Maybe its because Regan let all the vets outta the looney bin in the seventies or maybe its just human nature when little girls are dolled up like sluts that some guys arnt man enough to handle it.
as far as i'm concerend this site has been boiled down to this one post and in a day or two i'll unsubscribe entirely. You are all filthy, disgusting, and unable to admit a most basic truth that coveting minors is immoral. enjoy you're sexually repressed , dirty old man lives. Thanks for teaching me a lesson that the dirtiness of the fantasy is indicitive of the filthiness of the fantasizer's mind. I tried to treat ya'll like responsible adults and all you could do is assume I had some alterior motive. enjoy fantisizing about her with the other man, im going back to real life now where there is no other man and I dont need to resort to little girls to get off.
ps; yes i've found underage girls attractive-i'm a flirt, im good looking , and i've been hit on by jailbait lots of times before. They dont even get in my car without me asking their age. the beach is the worst. 15 year olds feel a sense of validation when cute slightly older guys hit on them, and its the only place they can lay around in their underwear. It's presicesly becuase a 16 year old can look and act like a 21 year old that I care-I know how easy it would be to take advantage of a child. fortunately I have leagle, physically real outlets. I guess in all likelyhood none of you have ever been in the position where a girl is attracted to you in the first place and im just yelling into the wind.
-PS: JAMESTRIKE, if your not doing anything wrong, why not share this conversation with your wife, and see how the mother of you're children feels about your attitudes regaurding sexuality poronography and childhood development.
is somebody actually going to respond to the content of my post, or all you all just going to say i'm over-reacting and thus by default must be guilty myself? This logic, by the way, was what was classified as the second stage of the Salem Whitch Hunt.
|
lacuck
Member
238
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 18:24:03
Reply
Well, I can't read all of your ramblings but I find it odd that you would accuse me of being a pedophile or imagine that I look at or have pictures of girls in bikinis on my computer. Whatever gave you that idea?
""""Looking at pictures of underage girls on your computer or the internet is illeagle and immoral and I didnt need to minor in ethics to know that.""""""
And as James pointed out, it may be immoral but it's certainly not illegal to have pictures of girls in bikinis on your computer. If that were the case, then all the Sears catalogs would have to be recalled and all the swimwear site on the net shut down.
It's rather silly for you to write such things. I realize that your friend or whatever was raped, and that is horrible, but don't go around creating ridiculous laws and standards to punish the rest of us for the criminal behavior of the few. I totally agree with James that child porn is unacceptable and that even clothes and non sexual pics of kids do not belong on this forum, we all agree to that. But for you to villify and make illegal or perverse simple pictures of girls in bikinis or swimsuits is ridiculous.
What's next? Make pictures of girls in dresses or skirts illegal? Why don't you just cover them from head to toe in a potato sack?
LOL
"""""I wouldnt put a huge drape around the beach, lacuck, i'd just protect my daugheter from perverts like you by endowing them with the self respect not to have to dress like a trashy whore."""""
See how insulting you are? You call me a pervert for no reason at all. You have some sort of sickness that causes you to think that every man is a pervert simply for thinking that non erotic pictures of girls in bikinis shouldn't be outlawed.
LOL
":"""" You live around the beach, you must realize how many of you're nehbors have telephoto lenses and telescopes.""""
What? I'm not aware of any of my neighbors peeking at girls on the beach. But I do see that some people have telescopes on their balconeys, they use them to look at far away ships and barges. From what I've seen, most the people using these are kids themselves. Haven't you ever seen the quarter telescopes at the beach? You put a quarter into it and see? Are you going to outlaw those, now?
Man, you are really out there. I think you let the rape of your friend cloud your thinking and cause you to become paranoid that there are perverts and rapists lurking all over the place. While I agree that they exist and that one must take precautions, you take it way too far.
""""You are all filthy, disgusting, and unable to admit a most basic truth that coveting minors is immoral.""""
No one ever said that on here, not me or James Riske. Where do you get that from? I feel that coveting minors is immoral. I feel that child porn is disgusing and those viewing it or keeping it belong in jail. But I also feel that non erotic pictures of girls in bikinis should not be made illegal and that the police need not go door to door along the beach to confiscate telescopes. It's just going too far.
You are way over reacting. It's people like you who make ridiculous laws and whip people into hysterics.
|
lacuck
Member
238
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 18:25:47
Reply
""""common sense people. theres no other reason to have pictures of woman you dont know other than sexual reasons."""""'
Wow! You are WAY out there!
Are you saying that every man with a picture of a woman that he doesn't know uses it solely for sexual reasons?
LOL
WOW !
|
efizzz
Member
10
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 18:41:20
Reply
yes. if you have a picture of betty page, marlyin monroe, ect., there is a sexual aspect to it in most cases
if you have a picture of a non-celeberaty underage girl who doesnt even sing/act and the pictures wernt willingly published without the subjects permission and you dont know said girl, than yes there is a sexual aspect.
artist's get the permission of the subject. auertuers can differentiate between art and unpublished voyerism. I am indeed saying there is no reason to have pictures of underage, noncelebriaty women in you're possion. this is creepy and rude and most people wouldnt have these pictures because its so implicating even if there was a legitiamte reason.
seriously, am I wrong? what examples do you have of underage, unpublished women you dont know being on a computer or in a desk drawer where its okay? Yes, ill give you a couple family photo's because someone was in the shot or their holding up some specifically memorable conch or something, but outside of a few exception within a much larger album I cannot imagine a situation wherein this would be okay. can you? I'm seriuosly curious.
|
efizzz
Member
10
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 18:55:48
Reply
first of all, look at abercrombie and GAP. both companies have gotten in trouble for using minors in unacceptable ways to advertise. Sears hasn't because its famous for being frumpy and as having more traditonal consumers. but the precedant set acknowledges that some catalogs take it too far.
and dont change the point. As i've said half a dozen times, minors posted on a sex site like this are very differant than models selling oshkosh because there is no legitimate context for them within the confines of a sex site.
If you ask any education specialist or psychologist, they'll probably tell you that it is the very objectification of little girls in the first place that leasds to things like myspace (Fox) and GAP pandering to their underdeveloped sense of self which relies upon sexual validation in innappropriate ways in the first place. You can go on telling little women that their body is an acceptible power leverage and prehapse the only one they have, I however try hard not to. Increased prevalance and occurance of Anorexia depression the paris hilton phenominon are all indicatiors experts point to when that even legitmate catalogs contribute to the sexual exploitation of the young feminie form in america.
I may be too busy to spellcheck, but I'm a published author and I write well as validated by my peers and teachers. Like the average person avoiding reading the Bible or Capitol, maybe its you the reader and not the writer thats struggling. If you 'cant read my ramblings' or whatever, maybe you shouldn't be commenting on what you cannot understand
If you can't read my ramblings than
|
efizzz
Member
10
|
# Posted: 9 Jan 2007 18:58:23
Reply
have any of you been to collage in the last generation? because Every time I referance published and generally acknowledged information about psychology, photography, or ethics it seems to be above your heads. I'm just wondering if im wasting my time here...
|
jamesriske
Member
1291
|
# Posted: 10 Jan 2007 01:14:02
Reply
Quoting: efizzz have any of you been to collage in the last generation? because Every time I referance published and generally acknowledged information about psychology, photography, or ethics it seems to be above your heads. I'm just wondering if im wasting my time here...
I went to collage! hahahaha!
Maybe it's your sentence structure and spelling that is over my head. Is it new-age or something?
|
babbionz
Member
705
|
# Posted: 10 Jan 2007 14:53:09
Reply
People,
I read some interesting points of view in this thread but as it is titled "abusive & SPAM content reports" why don't you start a new one so this one can be used to report abuses and spam.
Chiama quando vuoi...
|
MrBigCuckold
Admin
3496
Pictures: 3
|
# Posted: 10 Jan 2007 16:15:25
Reply
Quoting: babbionz why don't you start a new one so this one can be used to report abuses and spam.
|
