# In reguards to my last Post



## NoelNTexas

#1. The girls spent all day on a blowup waterslide we rented for their birthday party / sleepover. 
#2. The mother was here
#3. My fiance and a couple of the mothers helped them play with hair and makeup
#4. It wasnt just a shoot they wanted, I am also a magazine designer and the shoot was because they wanted to make their own little pretend fashion magazine.
#5. The fact that I have to explain to grown adults why a young person was wearing something something most wear to public swimming areas and I just added a few lights and now it becomes inappropriate is absolutely ridiculous. 

Unfortunately I was unable to post before the thread was closed, but the mods have decided that there is NOTHING wrong with the image and said I may repost if I wished. I do not wish to hear your feedback and am not posting this in an apologetic manor. The fact that you can not view a younger person in swimming attire without thinking it inspires "impure" thoughts and flagging it as inappropriate makes me question your own judgement and thoughts. My advice to you is close your account on facebook and instagram, stay out of clothing and department stores/magazines and do not visit any public swimming areas if this "bothers" you.


----------



## DanOstergren

NoelNTexas said:


> #1. The girls spent all day on a blowup waterslide we rented for their birthday party / sleepover.
> #2. The mother was here
> #3. My fiance and a couple of the mothers helped them play with hair and makeup
> #4. It wasnt just a shoot they wanted, I am also a magazine designer and the shoot was because they wanted to make their own little pretend fashion magazine.
> *#5. The fact that I have to explain to grown adults why a young person was wearing something something most wear to public swimming areas and I just added a few lights and now it becomes inappropriate is absolutely ridiculous. *
> 
> Unfortunately I was unable to post before the thread was closed, but the mods have decided that there is NOTHING wrong with the image and said I may repost if I wished. I do not wish to hear your feedback and am not posting this in an apologetic manor. The fact that you can not view a younger person in swimming attire without thinking it inspires "impure" thoughts and flagging it as inappropriate makes me question your own judgement and thoughts. My advice to you is close your account on facebook and instagram, stay out of clothing and department stores/magazines and do not visit any public swimming areas if this "bothers" you.


----------



## flow

I missed the excitement but, you got flagged over kids in swimsuits? 
That's .... odd.


----------



## amolitor

There was a discussion about the propriety of photographing younger women in swimsuits, what role context plays, and how we feel about this as a society.

Then it got a little heated, because some people can't keep a lid on their emotions.

Then it got locked.


----------



## yioties

*It was a case of people over reacting as always on this forum!*


----------



## Superfitz

flow said:
			
		

> I missed the excitement but, you got flagged over kids in swimsuits?
> That's .... odd.



You missed a glorious thread. It ended up being 7 pages of comedic gold. I thought about jumping in in and trolling, but the sheer amount of absurd comments would just make my trolling seem like white noise. Check the thread out if you get a chance. It is well worth the read. I would post a link to it, but I have no idea how to from my phone.


----------



## kathyt

That is fine, but I would have kept it off the Internet. From a mothers point of view.


----------



## jwbryson1

kathythorson said:


> That is fine, but I would have kept it off the Internet. From a mothers point of view.



Boo hiss.


----------



## kathyt

jwbryson1 said:


> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is fine, but I would have kept it off the Internet. From a mothers point of view.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boo hiss.
Click to expand...

Zip it Jdubs.


----------



## Buckster

kathythorson said:


> That is fine, but I would have kept it off the Internet. From a mothers point of view.


I still don't understand why.  From a father's point of view.  
My daughter doesn't understand why either.  From a mother's point of view.

We've been trying hard to figure out what the actual harm is.  From any point of view.


----------



## jwbryson1

kathythorson said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is fine, but I would have kept it off the Internet. From a mothers point of view.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boo hiss.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Zip it Jdubs.
Click to expand...


:chatty:    :mrgreen:


----------



## kathyt

Buckster said:


> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is fine, but I would have kept it off the Internet. From a mothers point of view.
> 
> 
> 
> I still don't understand why.  From a father's point of view.
> My daughter doesn't understand why either.  From a mother's point of view.
> 
> We've been trying hard to figure out what the actual harm is.  From any point of view.
Click to expand...

We can just agree to disagree on this one. We were all raised differently and I am sure some of us are just more sensitive to this then others. No big deal.


----------



## amolitor

I will re-post my theory, which is that it's the last vestige of the "pictures steal my soul" superstition. I feel it, but I recognize the irrationality of it. Regardless of the origins, the fact is that it's deeply embedded in our society, and you gotta deal with it. It's there. Just because it's irrational, just because you don't feel it, doesn't mean it ain't there.

Society will punish you for violations of the irrational rules, if anything, more severely than for violations of the rules that make sense.

Society's a funny thing, it's full of irrational stuff. And, as a bonus, we're all soaking in it.


----------



## Dagwood56

The only thing that came to my mind when I saw the photos [I'm 57] was....gee, little girls have come a long way since I was a kid, meaning the poses and makeup were a bit mature for the age group. To make a big stink about it though and from an, I think someone in the other thread used the term, "impure thoughts" is just absurd.  Society today really needs to chill out a bit and focus on whats really important. I hate to think what this world will be like in another ten years.


----------



## pixmedic

Glad you decided to weigh in here Noel. 
it doesn't appear that you are looking to debate the subject further in this thread (correct me if i am wrong) so I think it is best if we simply leave it at what has been said already, since I do not think anyone is going to change how they feel. 
I look forward to seeing more of your shoots.


----------



## kathyt

jwbryson1 said:


> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Boo hiss.
> 
> 
> 
> Zip it Jdubs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> :chatty: :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Where is the me kicking you in the nuts and then you fall down icon?


----------



## Geaux

Not that you had to, but glad you posted on it.

I sent you a PM, but I'll say it here also.  If I said anything that offended you, I apologize and look forward to your future shots (the lighting WAS terrific on all)


Just out of curiosity, what was your lighting setup and strobes used?


----------



## yioties

Yeah, I don't think Noel is looking forward to posting any future shots Geaux. Hopefully I'm wrong (he's a great photographer), but if I was in his position I wouldn't post anything else any probably leave the forum! 
The hijacking of his topic was unprofessional, childish and outright idiotic!


----------



## kathyt

yioties said:


> Yeah, I don't think Noel is looking forward to posting any future shots Geaux. Hopefully I'm wrong (he's a great photographer), but if I was in his position I wouldn't post anything else any probably leave the forum!
> The hijacking of his topic was unprofessional, childish and outright idiotic!


I think the world will still revolve and the forum will still carry on.


----------



## cgipson1

kathythorson said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zip it Jdubs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :chatty: :mrgreen:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where is the me kicking you in the nuts and then you fall down icon?
Click to expand...


Will this do?


----------



## cgipson1

yioties said:


> Yeah, I don't think Noel is looking forward to posting any future shots Geaux. Hopefully I'm wrong (he's a great photographer), but if I was in his position I wouldn't post anything else any probably leave the forum!
> *The hijacking of his topic was unprofessional, childish and outright idiotic!*



A little dramatic, don't you think?


----------



## pixmedic

pictures were posted.
opinions were expressed. 
topic got a little heated. 
not unusual for an internet forum. 
I don't think its really any more complicated than that. 
It isn't the first time a post has caused a stir, and probably not the last. 
honestly, speaking on the thread overall, it COULD have gone a lot worse than it did.


----------



## kathyt

cgipson1 said:


> yioties said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I don't think Noel is looking forward to posting any future shots Geaux. Hopefully I'm wrong (he's a great photographer), but if I was in his position I wouldn't post anything else any probably leave the forum!
> *The hijacking of his topic was unprofessional, childish and outright idiotic!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A little dramatic, don't you think?
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. And the Oscar goes to......


----------



## yioties

The drama was in the topic not my post cgipson[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]. [/FONT]Anyway it's not worth continuing! Hope to see more images from you in the future Noel.


----------



## jwbryson1

Anybody else notice how Kat seems to end up in all the dramatic forums?  I wonder if she's the instigator?

Just watchin' 'n' observin'...


----------



## kathyt

jwbryson1 said:


> Anybody else notice how Kat seems to end up in all the dramatic forums?  I wonder if she's the instigator?
> 
> Just watchin' 'n' observin'...


Therefore I would get the Oscar.

What does it mean when you are always right behind me Jdubs?


----------



## yioties

I prefer the Golden Globes.


----------



## yioties

The Oscar goes to Kathy Thorson for A Foot is the A**!


----------



## kathyt

yioties said:


> The Oscar goes to Kathy Thorson for A Foot is the A**!


Good one&#8203;.


----------



## jwbryson1

kathythorson said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anybody else notice how Kat seems to end up in all the dramatic forums?  I wonder if she's the instigator?
> 
> Just watchin' 'n' observin'...
> 
> 
> 
> Therefore I would get the Oscar.
> 
> What does it mean when you are always right behind me Jdubs?
Click to expand...


One word:  _*STALKER  *_


----------



## yioties

Once i get the drama out of me, I can actually be funny!


----------



## mishele




----------



## NoelNTexas

If I tucked my tail and ran away every time someone didn't like my photos I would have gone out of business years ago. I will stick around and post more on this forum of course. There are some great people here, and then some i would trip if they were blind, but thats everywhere in life.


----------



## kathyt

NoelNTexas said:


> If I tucked my tail and ran away every time someone didn't like my photos I would have gone out of business years ago. I will stick around and post more on this forum of course. There are some great people here, and then some i would trip if they were blind, but thats everywhere in life.


Tripping blind people? Now that's the spirit!


----------



## kundalini

Thanks for NOT apologizing.  

I think the people that bent over so far with their single-mindedness, that their heads went squarely up their backsides, are the ones that need to reconsider.  Just my opinion.


----------



## DanOstergren

kundalini said:


> Thanks for NOT apologizing.
> 
> I think the people that bent over so far with their single-mindedness, that their heads went squarely up their backsides, are the ones that need to reconsider.  Just my opinion.


Right there with you. It would stand to reason though to at least take a moment to try and understand the perspective of the other side regardless of which side you're on. Doing so has put me at peace with many homophobic, uptight and religious nuts in my past.


----------



## vintagesnaps

I think there can be a concern where a photo gets posted particularly when the subject is underage. There's a difference between a young woman being on a beach in a bikini, and being photographed wearing it and where that photo might end up. For commercial use such as ads in magazines, releases would typically be signed for usage for that purpose. 

We wouldn't know the first 4 points mentioned by the OP just by viewing the photo, although people that know the OP might expect that's the case (that the photo was done with parents' permission etc.). I don't know with boudoir shots etc. if clients have signed releases and realize where photos of them are being displayed or if that's covered in the release; I suspect that some clients may be fine with it and others would object or may have signed a release not realizing where the photos of them might be posted online. I think professional photographers typically make sure there is permission for applicable situations so they're covered and that their clients' images are protected. 

This article gives a couple of examples (where it says why releases are taken seriously) which to me are something to think about when posting photos online and what could potentially happen later on. Property and Model Releases | American Society of Media Photographers 
Using a photo for yourself or to share with family and friends I think is different than making it available in a way that can be viewed or accessed publicly.


----------



## e.rose

jwbryson1 said:


> Anybody else notice how Kat seems to end up in all the dramatic forums?  I wonder if she's the instigator?
> 
> Just watchin' 'n' observin'...



Well now I'm pissed.

That used to be what people would accuse ME of.

CLEARLY... I'm not hanging around enough.

I need to reclaim my title. :lmao:


----------



## jwbryson1

e.rose said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anybody else notice how Kat seems to end up in all the dramatic forums?  I wonder if she's the instigator?
> 
> Just watchin' 'n' observin'...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well now I'm pissed.
> 
> That used to be what people would accuse ME of.
> 
> CLEARLY... I'm not hanging around enough.
> 
> I need to reclaim my title. :lmao:
Click to expand...


Always the _*drama *_with E.Rose!  :hug::


----------



## mishele

God!! EMILY is back! That sucks.


----------



## tirediron

Someone a'splain this to me, because clearly I'm not as bright as I thought I was.  If the model in question had been a few years younger, the OP could have posted a shot of her with _*NO*_ clothing on and people would have responded with, "Awww... isn't that cute".  If she'd been a few years old people would have responded with, "WOW!".  If she'd been on a beach, that would have been fine, but IN A STUDIO isn't????? What????  It's not like this was a creeper shot taken from inside an ice-cream van with a 400mm lens, it was well executed STUDIO SHOT!!!  WHAT on earth is the problem?


----------



## amolitor

Now the moderators are getting sucked into the vortex.

RUUUUUUUN


----------



## tirediron

jwbryson1 said:


> ...Always the _*drama *_with E.Rose! :hug::


And don't forget, supporting memberships will increase by $5 because of all the overtime we have to pay the squirrels powering the emoticon server!


----------



## e.rose

mishele said:


> God!! EMILY is back! That sucks.



YOU suck.



tirediron said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...Always the _*drama *_with E.Rose! :hug::
> 
> 
> 
> And don't forget, supporting memberships will increase by $5 because of all the overtime we have to pay the squirrels powering the emoticon server!
Click to expand...


WAIT A MINUTE...

SHE'S TAKING MY EMOTICON TITLE TOO?!

OOOOOOOOOOOH man squirrels... you and I are fighting now.  

THIS IS WAR. layball:


----------



## squirrels

e.rose said:


> OOOOOOOOOOOH man squirrels... you and I are fighting now.
> 
> THIS IS WAR. layball:


----------



## e.rose

squirrels said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> OOOOOOOOOOOH man squirrels... you and I are fighting now.
> 
> THIS IS WAR. layball:
Click to expand...

MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH :greendev:


----------



## cgipson1

e.rose said:


> squirrels said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> OOOOOOOOOOOH man squirrels... you and I are fighting now.
> 
> THIS IS WAR. layball:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH :greendev:
Click to expand...


You wenches.. COOL IT! Trying to sleep over here...


----------



## e.rose

cgipson1 said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> squirrels said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH :greendev:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You wenches.. COOL IT! Trying to sleep over here...
Click to expand...


ldman:


----------



## cgipson1

e.rose said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH :greendev:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You wenches.. COOL IT! Trying to sleep over here...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ldman:
Click to expand...


Back at'cha!


----------



## jowensphoto

So I'm guessing many are for the banning of JC Penny, Kohls and Target ads that have preteens modeling preteen swim wear?


----------



## tirediron

cgipson1 said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You wenches.. COOL IT! Trying to sleep over here...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ldman:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Back at'cha!
Click to expand...

Gack!!!  BLEACH, Stat!  I need to scrub my eyeballs!!!!


----------



## e.rose

jowensphoto said:


> So I'm guessing many are for the banning of JC Penny, Kohls and Target ads that have preteens modeling preteen swim wear?



Right?  That's what I was thinking.  I'm bummed I didn't see the original.  I'm sure it was fine.


----------



## amolitor

Simply asserting loudly that YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW ANYONE COULD FEEL THIS WAY IT IS RIDICULOUS isn't going to make anyone stop feeling that way.

This is a thing, and it's got to be dealt with. It doesn't matter if it doesn't make sense to you. The other guy's religion, the other guy's political party, the other guy's ideas about sexuality, they're all incomprehensible to us, but that incomprehensibility does not:

1) make the other guy automatically wrong or stupid
2) make me automatically right or clever
3) make the fact that this disagreement exists go away
4) make it unnecessary to compromise and deal with the fact that not everyone in the world is a carbon copy of ourselves

There's stuff you gotta deal with out there that doesn't make any sense to you. Rather than yelling about it and hinting that the other people are stupid, wrong, or pedophiles, I suggest that you:

1) take your Internet Hat Of Fury off
2) find your I Am Not A Provincial Narrow-Minded Yokel pants
3) put those pants on, after first removing any pants or shorts you may currently be wearing


----------



## cgipson1

Looks like I had a post deleted???? May I ask why? I was trying to make a point....


----------



## amolitor

I am pretty sure that the database behind TPF is a bit flaky. I have had posts vanish for which there was non reason on earth I could see to delete them, and I certainly wasn't given any sort of talking to by anyone. So, I assume they vanished due to Technical Issues not because I am a wild-eyed anarchist.


----------



## jowensphoto

My question was legitimate - no troll here! I'm curious, if people have such an issue with an amateur model's photos being displayed in a photography forum, how do they feel about those that go on to national/international campaigns? Should it not be allowed?

I don't care about what the morals of others are, whether or not I'd consider it ridiculous for myself to feel that way. It's just interesting that, on an ART forum, people are so against something that has provided inspiration to artists for years: the human body. At birth, 10 years old, 20, 50 and even death - the human body is an amazing thing.


----------



## e.rose

derp.


----------



## amolitor

I think opinions vary on the catalog pictures, but as a general rule they are seen as "Ok" (else the stores would catch a bunch of flak from the offended people, and change their ways).

My sense is that there's some pretty serious effort made to de-sexualize kids in catalogs. Kid's swimwear is frequently shown on kids in a beach setting with a lot of emphasis on "look at all the fun we are having with our brightly colored ball!" and so forth. Makeup is present, obviously, but tries to avoid hitting the sexuality tropes (no heavy eye makeup, no bright red lips, etc). If I had to guess, there's conscious effort made in these shoots and in the editing afterwards to avoid any risky territory, to avoid a backlash. That's just speculation, but if *I* were making a catalog of kids clothes for Kohl, I would make it someone's job to watch out for just that and to err on the conservative side.

Nobody needs a bunch of excited people calling your 800 number to yell about the catalog, after all. Except, I guess, A&F? They seem to kind of dig it.

ANYWAYS. Whatever the reasons, the original picture apparently hit some buttons. Those buttons aren't gonna unpress themselves, and arguing about it ain't gonna unpress them. It's an emotional response, one that's ingrained in our society.


----------



## kathyt

jowensphoto said:


> My question was legitimate - no troll here! I'm curious, if people have such an issue with an amateur model's photos being displayed in a photography forum, how do they feel about those that go on to national/international campaigns? Should it not be allowed?
> 
> I don't care about what the morals of others are, whether or not I'd consider it ridiculous for myself to feel that way. It's just interesting that, on an ART forum, people are so against something that has provided inspiration to artists for years: the human body. At birth, 10 years old, 20, 50 and even death - the human body is an amazing thing.


I am just going to shut my mouth before I really get kicked off the forum, but just curious are you volunteering your daughter to be used for his next model exactly the way it was done in his original image?

For the sake of art?


----------



## e.rose

I want to see it.


----------



## Buckster

kathythorson said:


> jowensphoto said:
> 
> 
> 
> My question was legitimate - no troll here! I'm curious, if people have such an issue with an amateur model's photos being displayed in a photography forum, how do they feel about those that go on to national/international campaigns? Should it not be allowed?
> 
> I don't care about what the morals of others are, whether or not I'd consider it ridiculous for myself to feel that way. It's just interesting that, on an ART forum, people are so against something that has provided inspiration to artists for years: the human body. At birth, 10 years old, 20, 50 and even death - the human body is an amazing thing.
> 
> 
> 
> I am just going to shut my mouth before I really get kicked off the forum, but just curious are you volunteering your daughter to used for his next model exactly the way it was done in his original image?
> 
> For the sake of art?
Click to expand...

I definitely would.  He did an excellent job on the photos.  Still can't see how it harms anyone either.


----------



## cgipson1

e.rose said:


> I want to see it.



It was removed from the original post... but the other shots are still there... http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/people-photography/332486-few-more-shots-recent.html#post2996384

It was not that big of a deal... really! But it is a very sensitive topic... with extremes on both sides.


----------



## jowensphoto

e.rose said:


> I want to see it.



Me too.


----------



## jowensphoto

If it stood up to those other photos, I don't see why not. A two year old in a swimsuit with some lights is hardly sexual. IMO, at least.


----------



## e.rose

cgipson1 said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want to see it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was removed from the original post... but the other shots are still there... http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/people-photography/332486-few-more-shots-recent.html#post2996384
> 
> It was not that big of a deal... really! But it is a very sensitive topic... with extremes on both sides.
Click to expand...


Yeah I saw the original thread... hence why I'm saying I want to see it... cause I still haven't seen it. 



amolitor said:


> The photo that people got excited about was pretty bad.



That is subjective.  Seeing as how your and my opinion tend to vary quite often, and based off the fact that I tend to like the OP's work from what I've seen, I'm gonna go ahead and say.............. I still want to see it.


----------



## cgipson1

jowensphoto said:


> If it stood up to those other photos, I don't see why not. A two year old in a swimsuit with some lights is hardly sexual. IMO, at least.


two year old? uh.. more like TWELVE year old... 

And I agree.. not really sexual..


----------



## Tailgunner

tirediron said:


> Someone a'splain this to me, because clearly I'm not as bright as I thought I was.  If the model in question had been a few years younger, the OP could have posted a shot of her with _*NO*_ clothing on and people would have responded with, "Awww... isn't that cute".  If she'd been a few years old people would have responded with, "WOW!".  If she'd been on a beach, that would have been fine, but IN A STUDIO isn't????? What????  It's not like this was a creeper shot taken from inside an ice-cream van with a 400mm lens, it was well executed STUDIO SHOT!!!  WHAT on earth is the problem?



We live in a time where people illegally exploit underage teenage children and looking is more than enough to incriminate a person. This isn't personal but I don't know the OP, I don't know the Child or her family. All I have is someone posting pictures of an underage child on the internet claiming to have legal parental consent to photograph said child. Does Thephotoforum.com do background checks to verify said information? How do you know what is being said is fact? If people will buy everything posted on the Internet as fact & true, I got some pristine Ocean Front Property in West Texas I'll sell you for cheap.


----------



## yioties

We live in a time that everything is exploited Tailgunner not just children! I still agree with Buckster and saw nothing wrong with the photo.


----------



## tirediron

Tailgunner said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Someone a'splain this to me, because clearly I'm not as bright as I thought I was. If the model in question had been a few years younger, the OP could have posted a shot of her with NO clothing on and people would have responded with, "Awww... isn't that cute". If she'd been a few years old people would have responded with, "WOW!". If she'd been on a beach, that would have been fine, but IN A STUDIO isn't????? What???? It's not like this was a creeper shot taken from inside an ice-cream van with a 400mm lens, it was well executed STUDIO SHOT!!! WHAT on earth is the problem?
> 
> 
> 
> We live in a time where people illegally exploit underage teenage children and looking is more than enough to incriminate a person. This isn't personal but I don't know the OP, I don't know the Child or her family. All I have is someone posting pictures of an underage child on the internet claiming to have legal parental consent to photograph said child. Does Thephotoforum.com do background checks to verify said information? How do you know what is being said is fact? If people will buy everything posted on the Internet as fact & true, I got some pristine Ocean Front Property in West Texas I'll sell you for cheap.
Click to expand...

I don't mean to make light of your concern in the matter, but to rebutt:  people have been exploiting other people of ALL age groups, genders and ethnicities for as long as their have been people; to liken the image in question to this sort exploitation with no supporting evidence is, IMO, grossly inappropriate.  With the exception of the OP, I don't imagine any of us here know the OP, and while you are absolutely correct, we have only his assurance that permission has been obtained, I see no reason why that should not suffice.  No, as I'm sure you're well aware, TPF doe not do any background checking on members, but rather trusts its membership (until given grounds to do otherwise).  Completely aside from that, do you really think that any intelligent person would post something that wasn't appropriate in a public forum?

As has been mentioned, the child was wearing a bathing suit which in today's climate I would classify as conservative.  I'm sure going to any local beach, lake-front, or public pool on a summer day would allow you to see many children of similar age in similar and/or less modest attire.  Leave us not forget also that children of this age, and especially, IMO, females, like to play "grown up" and probably enjoyed the heck out of this.


----------



## DanielLewis76

tirediron said:


> Leave us not forget also that children of this age, and especially, IMO, females, like to play "grown up" and probably enjoyed the heck out of this.



Oh dear  

I think maybe its just down to people own experiences on life and their thoughts that are based on them. My views are probably skewed some what by growing up with a family where most of the women has worked in child protection and rape centres dealing with the fall out of girls who are allowed to 'play grow up' only to be subjected to all manner of things because there are certain people out there who cannot recognise the difference between a child playing grown up and a child who wants to 'experience' being grown up. Along with a friend who works as a computer forensic scientist this all leads to my views being slightly on the side of caution when semi naked pics of underage girls are posted publicly on the internet. 

I really do envy the people who cannot see any issues with it and akin it to seeing underage girls in bikini's on beaches as they must have a lovely life where everything is innocent but unfortunately not everyone sees it their way.

Again just my view based on my experiences.


----------



## Buckster

DanielLewis76 said:


> ...this all leads to my views being slightly on the side of caution when semi naked pics of underage girls are posted publicly on the internet.


A girl in a bikini is now described as "semi-naked"???  And the talk now that she's being "exploited"???  

Unbelievable...  Simply, ridiculously unbelievable...

What next?  Cover women with burkas?  Bring back chastity belts?


----------



## tirediron

DanielLewis76 said:


> ...Again just my view based on my experiences.


I think you will find that there is a significant amount of evidence to support the theory that clothing and attitude have virtually nothing to do with people (absolutely irrespective of age or gender) who are assaulted, exploited, etc.


----------



## JacaRanda

I don't think any of us "cannot see any issues with it".  We simply don't see how those issues apply to this particular photo.  Personally, if I did feel the way some others seem to feel; I would have reported it to the proper authorities and not given any indication to the OP.


----------



## tirediron

Buckster said:


> DanielLewis76 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...this all leads to my views being slightly on the side of caution when semi naked pics of underage girls are posted publicly on the internet.
> 
> 
> 
> A girl in a bikini is now described as "semi-naked"??? And the talk now that she's being "exploited"??? Unbelievable... Simply, ridiculously unbelievable...
Click to expand...

Well, strictly speaking, I suppose unless we're walking around fully dressed wearing gloves and bags on over heads, we're all at least semi-naked....


----------



## kundalini

DanielLewis76 said:


> ......I really do envy the people who cannot see any issues with it and akin it to seeing underage girls in bikini's on beaches as they must have a lovely life where everything is innocent but unfortunately not everyone sees it their way........



That's a twisted way of telling someone their views are decidedly wrong.  Your anecdotes do not draw a conclusion of reality.  They meerly sustain antiquated outlooks.  As been mentioned, clothing or not does not precipitate deviant behaviour.  I absolutely abhor child predation and firmly believe the actual criminals will receive their just deserts, but perpetuating the fear mongering on such an innocent photo that was posted is akin to the witch hunts at Salem, or worse.


----------



## amolitor

I think maybe if everyone just states their position one more time, we'll get someplace.


----------



## yioties

This thread will never get anywhere with things like this being written.


> Oh dear
> 
> I think maybe its just down to people own experiences on life and their thoughts that are based on them. My views are probably skewed some what by growing up with a family where most of the women has worked in child protection and rape centres dealing with the fall out of girls who are allowed to 'play grow up' only to be subjected to all manner of things because there are certain people out there who cannot recognise the difference between a child playing grown up and a child who wants to 'experience' being grown up. Along with a friend who works as a computer forensic scientist this all leads to my views being slightly on the side of caution when semi naked pics of underage girls are posted publicly on the internet.
> 
> I really do envy the people who cannot see any issues with it and akin it to seeing underage girls in bikini's on beaches as they must have a lovely life where everything is innocent but unfortunately not everyone sees it their way.
> 
> Again just my view based on my experiences.



So I'm signing off it!


----------



## kathyt

DanielLewis76 said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Leave us not forget also that children of this age, and especially, IMO, females, like to play "grown up" and probably enjoyed the heck out of this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh dear
> 
> I think maybe its just down to people own experiences on life and their thoughts that are based on them. My views are probably skewed some what by growing up with a family where most of the women has worked in child protection and rape centres dealing with the fall out of girls who are allowed to 'play grow up' only to be subjected to all manner of things because there are certain people out there who cannot recognise the difference between a child playing grown up and a child who wants to 'experience' being grown up. Along with a friend who works as a computer forensic scientist this all leads to my views being slightly on the side of caution when semi naked pics of underage girls are posted publicly on the internet.
> 
> I really do envy the people who cannot see any issues with it and akin it to seeing underage girls in bikini's on beaches as they must have a lovely life where everything is innocent but unfortunately not everyone sees it their way.
> 
> Again just my view based on my experiences.
Click to expand...

I think this is where my viewpoint comes into play as well. I have seen a lot and I have dealt with some pretty harsh realities in my profession that brings these thinks to light on a daily basis. I am a realist when it comes to this stuff. I am extremely open minded, but I don't pull the wool over my eyes either.


----------



## DanOstergren

I think this topic needs to die now.


----------



## jwbryson1

jowensphoto said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want to see it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Me too.
Click to expand...


You missed NOTHING.  It was a photo of a pre-teen girl (maybe 12?) in a bikini.  Not a teeny weeny bikini.  Not a string bikini.  Not a thong.  Plain Jane bikini.  Good lighting with a backdrop.  No "come hither" look.  Just a smile of a 12 year old kid.  You missed nothing...


----------



## o hey tyler

Brace yourselves.


The Internet is coming.


----------



## Overread

And I think we might be done here now, the OP has had a chance to clear the air about concerns raised in the other thread and we are now falling apart somewhat again.


----------

