Laws on naked pictures of girls?

arknor said:
i never mentioned anything about anyone under the age of 16 stop trying to twist my words by suggesting i have pictures of naked kids in the name of art.

i clearly said
unless its of a pornographic nature 16+ is good enough i think
Click to expand...

Yes and that's why I said I missread your post ;)

It even says that in the one you quoted of me :p

Looks like I'm not the only one who can't read correctly today :cool:
 
I believe there have been a number of cases in the states were parties have been charged with child abuse laws for cybering (when both parties have been under 16).
Click to expand...
correct numerous people in america have been slapped with pedo charges for taking pictures of themselfs naked and texting the pic to there boyfriends.

some people who put pictures of themselfs on facebook were also charged i believe
 
arknor said:
correct numerous people in america have been slapped with pedo charges for taking pictures of themselfs naked and texting the pic to there boyfriends.

some people who put pictures of themselfs on facebook were also charged i believe
Click to expand...

Thought I remembered reading stuff about this a while ago.

Bloody stupid though, you would hope laws would be applied with common sense. People who do this should be shamed not prosecuted.
 
.....Her parents gave their consent for their daughter to pose topless, and on Tuesday, 22 February 1983, Fox's first Page Three photograph was published under the headline "Sam, 16, Quits A-Levels for Ooh-Levels."
.......

link


So it's been like that for a while
 
Last edited:
nikebee said:
Playing devils advocate here a little, but why would it feel uncomfortable?

If you were in the same room watching them that would be legal.

If they made a home movie, or you downloaded it on the net... you'd be breaking the law by watching it.
Click to expand...

But might you not feel slightly uncomfortable being in the same room as them anyway, irrespective of the age?

nikebee said:
I do however think it's quite stupid that you can have sex at 16 in this country, whilst your not legally allowed to watch a porn movie at that age.

Personally I think the ages for sex/porn should be the same regardless of what's going on or whether it's being documented.
Click to expand...

I'd agree with you, it seems a shade incongruous to have this distinction in the ages but there you go. You can also be charged for pseudo-paedophilic images, even if the performer is over 18 but they are made to look as if they are younger that can be a problem.
 
I do find it mildly amusing about the whole UK Legal Age vs US Legal Age malarky (16 vs 18).

Was talking to some guys on vent a month or so back about this, and the guys from the States thought a few of us were pretty odd for having sex with 16 year old girls.

They didn't realise our legal age was 2 years before theirs. We'd be considered paedophiles over there...
 
semi-pro waster said:
But might you not feel slightly uncomfortable being in the same room as them anyway, irrespective of the age?
Click to expand...
Personally I probably would yes, there's a distinct difference between watching some people go at it in a video and standing there watching them. Though I know this is how some people get their kicks, so each to their own.

semi-pro waster said:
I'd agree with you, it seems a shade incongruous to have this distinction in the ages but there you go. You can also be charged for pseudo-paedophilic images, even if the performer is over 18 but they are made to look as if they are younger that can be a problem.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I genuinely wasn't aware of that. So pictures or a movie of a 20 year old girl that is made to look 16~ is considered illegal?

How do you define what is "looking" under-age though? If the actor in the film looks 15 in real life, despite their actual age being 20... that would make it illegal unless they made her "look" 20?

Tough line to draw.

I do think the legal age system needs revamping I know plenty of people who had sex under 16 but were perfectly ready for anything that would have happened - on the flip side I know plenty of people the wrong side of 20+ that weren't.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
I think that's the crux of the matter. And I don't see any issue with pictures of naked kids as long as there are no sexual connotations and it's all innocent stuff.
Click to expand...

Exactly, why shold it be illegal to take pictures of your kids running round naked on the beach for example? There is a fine line in the UK though between "art"/non sexual and sexual images sometimes. We in the UK as a whole need to "grow up" when it comes to nudity and realise being naked is actually natural, problem is it appears to be going the other way aat the moment.

nikebee said:
I do find it mildly amusing about the whole UK Legal Age vs US Legal Age malarky (16 vs 18).

Was talking to some guys on vent a month or so back about this, and the guys from the States thought a few of us were pretty odd for having sex with 16 year old girls.

They didn't realise our legal age was 2 years before theirs. We'd be considered paedophiles over there...
Click to expand...

Isn't the age of consent in the US dependent on the state you are in, i'm sure one of them even has an age of 15?
 
Amp34 said:
Isn't the age of consent in the US dependent on the state you are in, i'm sure one of them even has an age of 15?
Click to expand...

Just looked some of this up, and some States in the US have 14 as a legal age, but what they do is quite clever (and perhaps something we could step towards?). The legal age changes depending on the age difference between the two parties.

A 20 year old couldn't have sex with a 14 year old, but a 16 year old could.

http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm
 
Pedo_bear.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom