Why are pictures of naked babies acceptable?

Page 3 of 3 [ 41 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Ganondox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2011
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,777
Location: USA

22 Nov 2016, 8:44 am

It's not pornography because nudity != pornography. Actual child pornography is sexualized. That being said, the reason is because babies don't have rights and no one cares what they are going to think when they are older.


_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes

Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html


Kuraudo777
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Posts: 14,743
Location: Seventh Heaven

22 Nov 2016, 10:18 am

I'm perfectly fine with nudity, so what does that make me? Unique and accepting or weird and creepy?


_________________
Quote:
A memory is something that has to be consciously recalled, right? That's why sometimes it can be mistaken and a different thing. But it's different from a memory locked deep within your heart. Words aren't the only way to tell someone how you feel.” Tifa Lockheart, Final Fantasy VII


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

22 Nov 2016, 2:26 pm

The_Dark_Citadel wrote:
eric76 wrote:
The_Dark_Citadel wrote:
I don't think it's acceptable. It's disturbing that someone has a desire to photograph naked children/ babies. Sick.


I find it rather disturbing that someone thinks it is sick. Sure, there are some who get a sexual thrill out of it and they are sick. But for the vast majority of people, there is nothing sick about it.

It's disturbing that you think it's fine to photograph someone nude without consent.


That's the first time I ever heard of anyone thinking parents should get consent before taking a completely innocent picture of their own children.



glider18
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,062
Location: USA

23 Nov 2016, 9:12 pm

I was in a store and was browsing through the greeting cards this past weekend. And there was a card showing a standing toddler, back side showing, wearing a cowboy hat and dressed in only a belt with holsters, entire back and butt showing. And then I saw this thread and thought, naked babies must be more prevalent than I thought when it comes to stuff like this. Now I don't think they would've dared shown the toddler from the front.


_________________
"My journey has just begun."


nick007
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,711
Location: was Louisiana but now Vermont in capitalistic military dictatorship called USA

23 Nov 2016, 9:32 pm

glider18 wrote:
I was in a store and was browsing through the greeting cards this past weekend. And there was a card showing a standing toddler, back side showing, wearing a cowboy hat and dressed in only a belt with holsters, entire back and butt showing. And then I saw this thread and thought, naked babies must be more prevalent than I thought when it comes to stuff like this. Now I don't think they would've dared shown the toddler from the front.
I think I would of found that card funny :lol:


_________________
"I don't have an anger problem, I have an idiot problem!"
~King Of The Hill


"Hear all, trust nothing"
~Ferengi Rule Of Acquisition #190
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Ru ... cquisition


League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,280
Location: Pacific Northwest

25 Nov 2016, 1:14 am

Grammar Geek wrote:
My mom has multiple pictures of me naked as a baby, and she said that wasn't considered child pornography. I don't understand why, though. Why are naked baby pictures considered all right but not pictures of those a few years older? What's the minimum age for it to be considered pornography?



Child pornography isn't images of naked children, it's sexual images of naked children and them doing sexual things and have sex with the adult or with each other. Very disturbing stuff. That is why everyone says it's harmful for minors and anyone who would want to look at that stuff is beyond me unless you are a sick person. Only time it doesn't make you a sick person is if you accidentally found it on someone's computer or stick or a disc, if a virus downloaded it on your computer, you were trick into clicking a link and it brought you to that site, you are a police officer or detective and investigating because someone reported child porn, you are working a professional job and you are required to look at those images so you can learn about the signs of abuse. None of these people enjoy seeing them.


I think the question you're asking is when does it become inappropriate to take naked pictures of your children. Looking in my family albums, I would say one or two. That is when families start to have them clothed or when they have a diaper on or when their private parts are not shown when they take pictures. My parents never went out of their way to just snap a photo of my brothers while naked but there is a picture of my brother on his potty chair when he is two but you don't really see anything. But dad has taken movies of me naked when I was two because I was running around the house after my bath. So three is when it becomes unacceptable to take movies of your kids naked. But wait there is a picture of me in the bath tub when I was three and me being naked getting ready for my bath and there is a naked video of me when i was six when I was having my bath with my brothers and I stand up and I am naked. But after that no more movies of me naked so six is the last year of taking videos of your kids naked. Three is the last year for naked photos showing your private parts.


_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed and ASD lv 1.

Daughter: NT, no diagnoses. Possibly OCD. Is very private about herself.


glider18
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,062
Location: USA

26 Nov 2016, 9:50 pm

glider18 wrote:
I was in a store and was browsing through the greeting cards this past weekend. And there was a card showing a standing toddler, back side showing, wearing a cowboy hat and dressed in only a belt with holsters, entire back and butt showing. And then I saw this thread and thought, naked babies must be more prevalent than I thought when it comes to stuff like this. Now I don't think they would've dared shown the toddler from the front.


I was shopping in that store again and passed that card. Though not a big deal, I did kind of describe it wrong. The toddler wasn't wearing a holster, but was wearing boots. I looked at other cards in their humor section and noted all kinds of nearly exposed people, mostly the elderly. Though never showing full frontal nudity, there were plenty of butts showing and private parts covered with small objects.


_________________
"My journey has just begun."


CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 117,261
Location: In my little Olympic World of peace and love

26 Nov 2016, 10:34 pm

I think the reason is that babies are supposed to be innocent.


_________________
The Family Enigma


The_Dark_Citadel
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 20 Jul 2016
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 339

28 Nov 2016, 11:58 am

eric76 wrote:
The_Dark_Citadel wrote:
eric76 wrote:
The_Dark_Citadel wrote:
I don't think it's acceptable. It's disturbing that someone has a desire to photograph naked children/ babies. Sick.


I find it rather disturbing that someone thinks it is sick. Sure, there are some who get a sexual thrill out of it and they are sick. But for the vast majority of people, there is nothing sick about it.

It's disturbing that you think it's fine to photograph someone nude without consent.


That's the first time I ever heard of anyone thinking parents should get consent before taking a completely innocent picture of their own children.

Children are people, not property.


_________________
If I were a knight, my name would be Sir Stimsalot.