I dunno about most people, but I do not define "bare back side" as nudity. Bare front side, yes, especially if genitals are showing. But back side? Phhht.
I define nudity as without clothes, but I find it beyond ridiculous that people are so quick to equate ALL nudity to sexuality.
I guess my grandmother should have been arrested for having that naked baby picture of me in a tupperware container taking a bath in plain view in the living room! That's practically running a child porn ring!!
I'm a home nudist, only wear clothes at home when we have company over. Well, company that cares about me being covered up. If it's someone I can be nude around, I don't bother with clothes.
I want to go to one of the nudist beaches nearby someday. *Sigh*
That's retarded, for lack of a better word. People are such pussies now. It's an ass, for Christ's sake. I'd love to walk in there and ask for a Goatse cake.
In the UK and AustraliabrockulfsenJuly 14 2008, 01:37:01 UTC
It is traditional to embarrass the birthday boy/girl at an 18th/21st by bringing out baby photos, awful school photos from when they had braces etc. Printing their 18 month old ass on the cake is about midrange on this.
Newspaper birthday columns used to be full of such photos.
But the [shrill voice] "Think of the children"[/shrill voice] crowd have been trying to put a stop to such fun because they can clearly see the deeply sexualized nature of a photo of a 1yo baby dropping sponge cake into their nekkid lap. As you can well imagine, they reason that if it turns them on, the pedophiles will be queuing to drool at the photo so it must be banned (and no doubt all our eyes burnt out just in case).
Re: In the UK and AustraliafayanoraJuly 14 2008, 07:39:27 UTC
Aye, more harm has been done to "protect" children than has been done by the so-called enemy. The news puts stories of sexual abuse out there even more than stories of murder, making it sound like it happens all the time, when in fact it is rather rare.
Re: In the UK and AustraliabrockulfsenJuly 14 2008, 07:53:30 UTC
In Oz "pedophilia" has joined "terrorism" as a trump card. As soon as someine says the magic word rational debate is forbidden. There's been a huge blowup here recently about an art gallery showing photos that feature a naked young girl, like thousands that photographer has published, printed, sold, won competitions with, placed in major galleries etc for the last 20 years.
The "Think of the children!" mouth piece of choice went on a rant, our new Prime Minister, The Rudbot1.0 (Kevin Rudd) jumped on the bandwagon declaring the pics he'd never seen "disgusting"...
Comments 18
Reply
Reply
I guess my grandmother should have been arrested for having that naked baby picture of me in a tupperware container taking a bath in plain view in the living room! That's practically running a child porn ring!!
Reply
I'm a home nudist, only wear clothes at home when we have company over. Well, company that cares about me being covered up. If it's someone I can be nude around, I don't bother with clothes.
I want to go to one of the nudist beaches nearby someday. *Sigh*
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Newspaper birthday columns used to be full of such photos.
But the [shrill voice] "Think of the children"[/shrill voice] crowd have been trying to put a stop to such fun because they can clearly see the deeply sexualized nature of a photo of a 1yo baby dropping sponge cake into their nekkid lap. As you can well imagine, they reason that if it turns them on, the pedophiles will be queuing to drool at the photo so it must be banned (and no doubt all our eyes burnt out just in case).
Reply
Reply
The "Think of the children!" mouth piece of choice went on a rant, our new Prime Minister, The Rudbot1.0 (Kevin Rudd) jumped on the bandwagon declaring the pics he'd never seen "disgusting"...
Government by tabloid.
Reply
Leave a comment