Amazing Images wrote:
So, if it's legal it must automatically be morally OK then?

No. But if it's legal, it must automatically be legal.

DanielWSmithPhotography wrote:
You are in the US why would you even have to think about it. All it would take is one person and well just ask R. Kelly how much it cost him. But seriously this is a no brainer

ummmm... R Kelly WAS breaking the law.

CGI Images wrote:

ummmm... R Kelly WAS breaking the law.

I would say an SG style shoot with a 17 year old is probably breaking the law. 

Pictures like this; 18+ (ironically) probably not, in most of the USA.  And, the model is well over 18, the picture is to illustrate a style.

MikeRobisonPhotos wrote:
I would say an SG style shoot with a 17 year old is probably breaking the law. 

Pictures like this; 18+ (ironically) probably not, in most of the USA.  And, the model is well over 18, the picture is to illustrate a style.

Well like was pointed out many times before, its a matter of "pornographic", I've see LOTS of pinup, suicide girl "tattoo" type images of younger than 18, that were no where near porn, so it all comes down to exact content/context of the images.

I've seen "beauty pagent" swimsuit competition images for teens that were way more sexual than some "suicide girl" looking images, perfectly legal.

And I'm not lawyer, I dont even play one on tv, but I'd be fairly secure in saying the image you linked would NOT be illegal for any age.

Porn mostly has been upheld to be blatently sexually, like the image depicts some sexual act, toys or situation OR the primary focus and point of the image is on the genitalia.

MikeRobisonPhotos wrote:
I would say an SG style shoot with a 17 year old is probably breaking the law. 

Pictures like this; 18+ (ironically) probably not, in most of the USA.  And, the model is well over 18, the picture is to illustrate a style.

You honestly think "suicide girls" images like these of a 17yr old would be illegal. 


http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/gu … egirls.png
http://fc56.deviantart.com/fs27/f/2008/ … R3AP3R.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w101 … _Girls.jpg

I guess when I think of "suicide girl" look, I think more "goth".

CGI Images wrote:

You honestly think "suicide girls" images like these of a 17yr old would be illegal. 


http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/gu … egirls.png
http://fc56.deviantart.com/fs27/f/2008/ … R3AP3R.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w101 … _Girls.jpg

I guess when I think of "suicide girl" look, I think more "goth".

Um....do you know that Suicide Girls are ALT. PORN??

Atomic Box Studios wrote:
What do you do. Or how do you handle a client who is not 18, but will be in a few months and wants to do a suicidegirl style shot. My first thought is NO. What are some suggestions, advice...Just straight answers

My avatar was from a 17 year old, and her and a friend did a little cute lingerie thing just before it - not a big deal, didn't do anything really sexual, and the pictures were really cute.

I'd go for it if it was a SG style shoot, nothing wrong, just don't go overly sexual with it.

CGI Images wrote:
I guess when I think of "suicide girl" look, I think more "goth".

Agree, it's more of a style than anything really. Like all that anime crap coming out of Japan right now, or monka (or whatever it is), it's a style that can be really sexual and gross or really fun and flirty and cute, just depends on the direction someone wants to take it.

Jade Noir wrote:
Um....do you know that Suicide Girls are ALT. PORN??

I do, I was talking about the "look" in general, not actually shooting for the suicide girls organization. 

I was saying to me, when someone comes to me and says "I want a suicide girl type look" I immediately think "goth" not "porn".

And the images I linked have "that look" to me, and I'd bet to say none would be "illegal" for a 17yr old.

CGI Images wrote:
You honestly think "suicide girls" images like these of a 17yr old would be illegal. 


http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/gu … egirls.png
http://fc56.deviantart.com/fs27/f/2008/ … R3AP3R.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w101 … _Girls.jpg

I guess when I think of "suicide girl" look, I think more "goth".

Have you ever seen a whole SG shoot?

I don't think of it as porn, but they range from playboy nudes to penthouse nudes.  With a "strip tease" theme.  I think it's safe to say that's sexualized.

CGI Images wrote:

I do, I was talking about the "look" in general, not actually shooting for the suicide girls organization. 

I was saying to me, when someone comes to me and says "I want a suicide girl type look" I immediately think "goth" not "porn".

And the images I linked have "that look" to me, and I'd bet to say none would be "illegal" for a 17yr old.

I just don't understand how someone UNDERAGE would ask for a SG look.   If anything, they should just say they want a goth look.  That can be very misleading.

Jessalyn wrote:

if that was your first thought, then go with it.

Can't always go by one's first thoughts in life.

CGI Images wrote:

You honestly think "suicide girls" images like these of a 17yr old would be illegal. 


http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/gu … egirls.png
http://fc56.deviantart.com/fs27/f/2008/ … R3AP3R.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w101 … _Girls.jpg

I guess when I think of "suicide girl" look, I think more "goth".

SG is not the same as goth.

DJantz wrote:

SG is not the same as goth.

You know me well enought to know I dont know shit Doug...   To me it sounds "goth"... lol.   but then again I still have poison in my cd player from the 80's.