mantispid Photography wrote:
We're currently in the midst of a witch hunt, you know.  It's probably best not to do anything that will make people think of witches.  They're hungry to burn people at the stake.

It may be best to do such shoots in Canada or other countries that aren't currently in the witch hunt mentality.  Even if it's legal, people are so agitated by it that it's best to do in an environment where it's accepted.

It's sort of like carrying a gun openly.  It's legal in most jurisdictions in the USA, but the cops will still hassle you and people will freak out.

Great anology.  The fact is, most places and authorities will screw with you if they have personal views against what your doing, and they can.  But that doesnt nec make what your doing illegal.  I've been in a few situations I was called "sexual predator, pervert, or rapist" just for being a photographer taking pictures of women in a sexy way.

SLE Photography wrote:
Wow, this was dredged back up from the dead.

So was the pictures of feet forum, and some things are just WRONG!

CarolineVictoria wrote:

I don't have any children but I COMPLETELY agree with you!

yup, me too. What is an innocent photo to some is fuel for someone other person's problem

ei Total Productions wrote:

It is an annoying law.  Normally, nobody bothers with bathtub kids.  But about 2 years ago, we had a story all over the six o'clock news.  A woman photographer shot a 13 year old girl topless with her mother (also topless).  It was a cutsey, totally non-sexual mother/daughter photo.  They lived a somewhat open lifestyle.

Topless photo??  *scratches head*

Dario Western wrote:

you just dumped a old thread

John Jebbia wrote:
AWESOME!

LOL, I was going to go to bed.....was.

DARE Photography wrote:
::STUPID THREAD WITH NO HOPE OF RESOLUTION OR EVEN MEANINGFUL INTELLECTUAL EXPANSION::

Thats because it all revolves around and reverts back to our societies repressive and jealous views on recreational sexuality.

Dario Western wrote:
I think that as a society we really underestimate kids.  There is no such thing as 'innocence', as much as we might like there to be.  Kids can be sexually aware and active at any stage in their lives in spite of what the laws might say.  Even young boys and baby boys are capable of getting erections. 

However, that's slightly veering away from the original poster's point.

I have been to many nudist events and gatherings where there have been children present, and some of them do get photographed either by their folks or by the editors of local magazines and the nudist press.  I have no problem with any of this, and if I had kids of my own I wouldn't have any problem with them being photographed dressed or undressed either.

When it comes to 'nude child photography' many people all too often rush to the conclusion that it automatically means 'kiddie porn' - even those who are normally quite well educated and well sussed in other areas of life.

However, it does take various forms - whether it be mum and dad photographing their kids in the bath or lazing around on a bearskin rug in front of the fire, or used in medical journals or books on human anatomy, as well as for use in films such as the Blue Lagoon and films featuring native people nude for the likes of the Discovery Channel and National Geographic.  None of them are in the least illegal or immoral.  Added to that, films like The Blue Lagoon and anti-paedophile films like Lolita and one that featured the late Dana Hill as a child model who was seduced into child porn by an unscrupulous photographer are still available for sale and for hire.

I have photographed a few female models under 18 topless before, but it was in a nonchalant and non-sexual manner.  Added to that I also had a parent and other adults around me at the time and the shoots went down smoothly.

It should be stressed though that nudity re. minors in the modelling industry is not always captured on film or photo.  You don't get photographers snapping away at them whilst they are in the dressing room, the nudity is only momentary.

Do ya realize the OP posted this 4 friggin years ago?!?!?!?

CGI Images wrote:

LOL, I was going to go to bed.....was.

I think it's good and dead now.... we're commenting about the comments about previous comments which had nothing to do with the original post which itself was a twice resuscitated thread. How do you spell resuscitated???

John Jebbia wrote:
I used to drink a lot.

No more?

DARE Photography wrote:

I think it's good and dead now.... we're commenting about the comments about previous comments which had nothing to do with the original post which itself was a twice resuscitated thread. How do you spell resuscitated???

Its safer then mentioning the subject of this thread, you know the subject of which we do not speak its name.

Ray Holyer wrote:
Presumably the minors who were being talked about at the beginning of this tread are now adults anyway...

Good one.

Ray Holyer wrote:
Presumably the minors who were being talked about at the beginning of this tread are now adults anyway...

We hope.