is this really considered as pedophilic?

[ianmdrennan 2]

Ok, I posted this here as I'm sure it'll get controversial.

Recently there was a post in the bonfire that contained IMO an innocent picture of a naked little boy (maybe less than a year old?) holding a remote control. The picture and context was not sexual in any way, yet the post was removed because of pedophila rules. Now let me be clear it is NOT MY INTENT TO QUESTION SANGIRO'S RULES, but rather our interpretation of what does/doesn't constitute pedophilia.

IMO it's a truely sad day, when we are able to vilify an innocent picture. To me, it says something of the minds that even think that the picture is in any way sexually objectifying a child.

Whatever happened to innocence?

My parents have pictures from when I was a child in the bath, running around, etc. Just being a kid. They were taken with love , capturing memories and are totally innocent (who doesn't have embarressing child pictures?). What distinguishes those pictures from the one I described? To me nothing, but maybe I'm missing something?

Please, this isn't about the evil of pedophilia (we all know it's vile and disgusting), this is more about how we as adults are able to strip total innocence out of something and make it more than it was ever intended to be.

Quote

Main Entry: pe·do·phil·ia
Pronunciation: "pE-d&-'fi-lE-&
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin
: sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object
- pe·do·phil·i·ac /-'fi-lE-"ak/ or pe·do·phil·ic /-'fi-lik/ adjective

Blues,
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[freethefly 6]

I have read of parents being arrested after walmart employees turned them in for having baby pics developed that showed the baby's butt

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[tunaplanet 0]

Quote

I have read of parents being arrested after walmart employees turned them in for having baby pics developed that showed the baby's butt

Link? Or is this a made up story?

Forty-two

[tunaplanet 0]

Quote

IMO it's a truely sad day, when we are able to vilify an innocent picture.

It's not that people care. It's because people like to stir the pot and cause controversy at every corner.

Forty-two

[slug 1]

Hi

Pedophilla sp? is zero tolerence in a lot of country's. I think everyone knows what it is but defining it can be a problem depending on who gets to decide where to draw the line, and know what a persons motives are.

Rather than have to defend ourselves in court because someone thinks that a innocent picture of a little child is obscene, sick etc. It's just safer not to go there. No argueing, lawyers courts juries etc.

Times have changed we went from ignoring the problem to going overboard in the opposite direction.
To bad so sad

R.I.P.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

Rather than have to defend ourselves in court because someone thinks that a innocent picture of a little child is obscene, sick etc. It's just safer not to go there. No argueing, lawyers courts juries etc.

Yeah, I understand the need for it. I'm just disappointed that it's become "necessary".

See, that's what I get for thinking about humanity on a day I think the world sucks anyway
Blues,
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[D22369 0]

Whatever happened to innocence?
***

its long gone....

just a week ago one of my co-workers came to my house, and saw the pics of my son on the wall, and in the corner of one is a black and white photo showing him naked (he thought), he looked and said in a serious tone, you know ... you could get in trouble with the authorities with this one.... I started laughing and then had to explain it was a pic of me at my sons age, and I am pretty sure I cant get in trouble for showing a pic of me naked ....
or can I?...

Roy

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[Nightingale 0]

I don't have a problem with parents taking pictures of their kids in an innocent way.

Posting those pictures on the internet where any wacko could get a hold of them is probably not a good idea, though. If I were a parent, I wouldn't want some wacko wanking off to a pic of my kid in the bathtub that I'd posted innocently.

[TomAiello 25]

That pic has been posted and removed many times.

I don't think the pedophilia rule is so much about pedophilia. It's about expressing that there are just some things that are totally beyond the pale. By drawing a bright line on one issue, Sangiro expresses that there is a limit to acceptable discussions on these forums, and sets a tone for the entire set of discussions. Since it's purpose is to serve as a bright line indicator, it ought to be applied in an overly strict sense. That's the whole point in setting a rock bottom community standard.

If you recall that the photo is almost invariably called something like "two hands" and that the little boy is grabbing his crotch with the other hand, it might make you reconsider your statement that it was not sexual "in any way."

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[SpeedRacer 1]

weird. now that you described it, I think I remember the pic. but it never even crossed my mind that someone would think it was pedophilia.
I just thought it was funny.

If I had been the moderator here, I would most probably have never picked up on that.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Since the net, child porn is a buzzword and everything is considered suspect. Before the net it was cute and no one thought of seeing a pic of a child naked-within reason of course............Read what Night wrote as an example of how the net has changed how people view this. And too, check out some of the record covers from the 60's...........it was not uncommon to see naked children on them. Blind Faith and LZ are examples. This topic is an example of how American society overdoes most everything.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[EBSB52 0]

Quote

Whatever happened to innocence?
***

its long gone....

just a week ago one of my co-workers came to my house, and saw the pics of my son on the wall, and in the corner of one is a black and white photo showing him naked (he thought), he looked and said in a serious tone, you know ... you could get in trouble with the authorities with this one.... I started laughing and then had to explain it was a pic of me at my sons age, and I am pretty sure I cant get in trouble for showing a pic of me naked ....
or can I?...

Roy

You shoulda said, "No, but you can be arrested for looking at naked pics of me when I was a young child."

[D22369 0]

You shoulda said, "No, but you can be arrested for looking at naked pics of me when I was a young child."
***

LOL

I am gonna hit him with that one tomorrow!!!

Roy

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[freethefly 6]

I read of it some years back in a newspaper, Tuna. I am sure others have heard similar stories. It seems that some folks are to fast to assume the worst. Case in point: My brother inlaw was taken in for burning his daughter with a cigarette. Of course he did not actually burn her, she came running around a corner and ran into the cigarette. Her teacher asked her how she got the burn on her face (forehead). She said her daddy did it (she was 6 or 7 y/o at the time). The police went to his work and took him to the station for questioning. after a lengthy investigation he was cleared of child abuse. I am positive that in some cases this would have been the right move but for those who are innocent of any wrong doing it can be a nightmare.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Some of it might be a cultural issue to.

Growing up in Holland it was very common to see young children playing naked on the beach. It was especially uncommon to see young, young girls with a bikini top. To this day it amazes me when I go to a beach in North America and see all these 2 year old girls with bikini tops and bathing suits.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Hi Tom,

Quote

That's the whole point in setting a rock bottom community standard.

I definately understand the "why" rules for the forum. That's why I wanted to make it clear I wasn't trying to draw those into question. My comments were spawned from the picture removal but they were thoughts on how society is able to strip innocence from most things and pervert them.

Quote

If you recall that the photo is almost invariably called something like "two hands" and that the little boy is grabbing his crotch with the other hand, it might make you reconsider your statement that it was not sexual "in any way."

I didn't stare at the picture long enough to notice that. All I remember seeing was the little boy holding the remote. I'm sure the picture is as you described, but I didn't even notice the crotch grab.

I think Skydekker is close to the money on this one. I believe that it's largely a cultural issue. It's no secret that the US is generally prudish when it comes to nudity of any kind.

Blues,
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[DZJ 0]

Quote

I think Skydekker is close to the money on this one. I believe that it's largely a cultural issue. It's no secret that the US is generally prudish when it comes to nudity of any kind.

Blues,
Ian

The Janet Jackson breast incident springs to mind.

[champu 1]

Quote

I started laughing and then had to explain it was a pic of me at my sons age, and I am pretty sure I cant get in trouble for showing a pic of me naked ....
or can I?...

That's a really interesting question. Suppose you were, say, 15, and took pornographic photos of yourself. Then kept them away until you were 25, then posted them on the internet...

...could you possibly face consequences for doing this?

[DZJ 0]

I'm pretty sure you'd still get done by the law for publishing pornographic material of an underage person. Perhaps not for taking them or possessing them, but publishing them would probably have consequences.