login info join!
This thread was locked on 2012-12-31 13:39:33. Reason: O.P. Please use CAM to notify the moderation team who sent this message.
Forums > Model Colloquy > WARNING! Kiddie Porn Seekers on MM!!!! Search   Reply
Model
Shelbiee Savage
Posts: 126
Gainesville, Florida, US


I was recently approached by a photog on MM that did teen lingerie shoots. TEENS BEWARE!
Dec 31 12 12:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
ontherocks
Posts: 22,262
Salem, Oregon, US


that may not be technically against the rules. if you have concerns, contact a moderator (look under help up top on the upper right).

-    Members under 18 are not allowed to display photos which need to be marked "M" - these include: "implied" nudity, depictions of blood/violence/gore, bondage, or any image that is overtly sexual in nature.
Dec 31 12 12:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Paige Morgan
Posts: 4,058
New York, New York, US


Shelbiee Savage wrote:
I was recently approached by a photog on MM that did teen lingerie shoots. TEENS BEWARE!

I don't know the content of the messages, but it is something that violates site rules, you should contact a mod:


http://www.ripoffreport.com

Dec 31 12 01:00 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 35,007
San Francisco, California, US


Lingerie may be inappriate, but it isn't necessarily "kiddie porn."  It would really depend on specifically what you were asked to do.

That having been said, I generally won't shoot lingerie with models under 18.  Most other photographers here will not as well.  If you were asked to do something you felt inappropriate, you absolutely did the right thing by turning it down.

I am just hesitant to call it "kiddie porn."  For the record though, you are in Florida.  A few years ago, they tightened up their rules because of sites like trueteenbabes.com, which is partially shot in Florida.  It is hard to say what they do and do not consider to be kiddie porn down there.
Dec 31 12 01:01 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
ontherocks
Posts: 22,262
Salem, Oregon, US


not according to my reading of the rules (if the image isn't 18+). maybe a moderator can help clarify.

Paige Morgan wrote:
I don't know the content of the messages, but it is something that violates site rules, you should contact a mod:

Dec 31 12 01:01 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tropical Photography
Posts: 35,287
Sarasota, Florida, US


Actually depending on the content there's nothing illegal about this.. True Teen Babes has been through the courts and is still active. In Florida, it's fairly subjective as to what is legal and illegal.. And the legislature has attempted to more tightly define things..

I mean, you are aware that there are teens posing in bra and panties for places like Sears, Kmart, Target, etc, right??  Again, it's not illegal, but context is important.. Though admittedly, it may give one a bad rep..
Dec 31 12 01:01 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Shelbiee Savage
Posts: 126
Gainesville, Florida, US


No, I mean REAL lingerie. Not like regular target/sears bras and panties, I'm talking Fredricks of Hollywood
Dec 31 12 01:03 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 35,007
San Francisco, California, US


Tropical Photography wrote:
Actually depending on the content there's nothing illegal about this.. True Teen Babes has been through the courts and is still active. In Florida, it's fairly subjective as to what is legal and illegal.. And the legislature has attempted to more tightly define things..

I mean, you are aware that there are teens posing in bra and panties for places like Sears, Kmart, Target, etc, right??  Again, it's not illegal, but context is important.. Though admittedly, it may give one a bad rep..

They were actually prosecuted in Colorado, not Florida.  Florida responded by changing their laws to specifically target them.  I know they list a Florida address.  I think they are doing most of their production in Colorado now to avoid the new Florida statutes.

Dec 31 12 01:03 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Aaron Lewis Photography
Posts: 5,082
Catskill, New York, US


Shelbiee Savage wrote:
No, I mean REAL lingerie. Not like regular target/sears bras and panties, I'm talking Fredricks of Hollywood

And your point is? That's not porn by any stretch of the imagination nor is it illegal in most places. Please, before you go crazy spreading rumors, get your facts straight.

Going around yelling kiddie porn on MM doesn't help anyone. You're young and you obviously have a LOT to learn. TEENS BEWARE? Really

Calm down, you didn't discover anything new

Dec 31 12 01:05 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,116
Tampa, Florida, US


Shelbiee Savage wrote:
I was recently approached by a photog on MM that did teen lingerie shoots. TEENS BEWARE!

Shooting a teen in lingerie isn't Kiddie Porn. I know you're 16 but are you effin' serious?

Please consult with your parents before ever posting again.

Dec 31 12 01:06 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 35,007
San Francisco, California, US


Shelbiee Savage wrote:
No, I mean REAL lingerie. Not like regular target/sears bras and panties, I'm talking Fredricks of Hollywood
Aaron Lewis Photography wrote:
And your point is? That's not porn by any stretch of the imagination nor is it illegal in most places. Please, before you go crazy spreading rumors, get your facts straight.

Calm down, you didn't discover anything new

Umm, that would depend on the lingerie and the specific poses.  There has been one case where a non-nude image was found to violate 18 USC 2256.  It is certainly possible for a lingerie shot with a minor to be illegal.  It is also possible for it to be perfectly legal.  It depends on a lot of things.

Dec 31 12 01:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ben Hinman
Posts: 596
Westwood, California, US


Everybody run for your life! Teen angst and a bunch of ridiculous drama about perverts! OH NO, ITS THE END OF THE WORLD!!!!


...come back when you're older, kid.
Dec 31 12 01:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Images by MR
Posts: 7,523
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


Michael Pandolfo wrote:

Shooting a teen in lingerie isn't Kiddie Porn. I know you're 16 but are you effin' serious?

Please consult with your parents before ever posting again.

+1

Dec 31 12 01:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Blue Cube Imaging
Posts: 11,168
Ashland, Oregon, US


Moderator Warning!
If you cannot be helpful to the O.P. please move on without rude or condescending comments.
Dec 31 12 01:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Paige Morgan
Posts: 4,058
New York, New York, US


twoharts wrote:
not according to my reading of the rules (if the image isn't 18+). maybe a moderator can help clarify.


The rules are open to interpretation, and we have no idea what the messages actually said. In any case, contacting a mod would give the OP the correct answer as to the messages being inappropriate or not.

Dec 31 12 01:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 19,016
Chicago, Illinois, US


Shelbiee Savage wrote:
No, I mean REAL lingerie. Not like regular target/sears bras and panties, I'm talking Fredricks of Hollywood

That isn't illegal.   Maybe a bit distasteful but not illegal.   Many fashion models who do sexy lingerie and clothing for editorials and ads are under 18.  Fredrick's and VS are more adult in nature but neither are pornographic.

Dec 31 12 01:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Blue Cube Imaging
Posts: 11,168
Ashland, Oregon, US


Moderator Note!
Shelbiee,

Please use the Contact A Mod feature to contact us regarding this.

http://www.ripoffreport.com
Dec 31 12 01:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Aaron Lewis Photography
Posts: 5,082
Catskill, New York, US


ei Total Productions wrote:

Shelbiee Savage wrote:
No, I mean REAL lingerie. Not like regular target/sears bras and panties, I'm talking Fredricks of Hollywood

Umm, that would depend on the lingerie and the specific poses.  There has been one case where a non-nude image was found to violate 18 USC 2256.  It is certainly possible for a lingerie shot with a minor to be illegal.  It is also possible for it to be perfectly legal.  It depends on a lot of things.

Understood but there's still a pretty major overreaction here, wouldn't you agree?

Dec 31 12 01:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Blue Cube Imaging
Posts: 11,168
Ashland, Oregon, US


Aaron Lewis Photography wrote:

Understood but there's still a pretty major overreaction here, wouldn't you agree?

The O.P has a valid question. There have been cases where images were not within the guidelines of what we allow.

Dec 31 12 01:14 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,116
Tampa, Florida, US


Blue Cube Imaging wrote:
The O.P has a valid question. There have been cases where images were not within the guidelines of what we allow.

The OP didn't pose a question. Nor did she pose a valid concern. The OP made an accusation based on ignorance.

She didn't come in and ASK if it was appropriate. She came in screaming Fire!!! throwing around a very sensitive and dangerous term which she clearly is not qualified to define.

Outside MM guidelines and "WARNING KIDDIE PORN SEEKERS ON MM!!!" are very different issues.

Dec 31 12 01:16 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Keith92883
Posts: 137
Corona, California, US


Beware of what? A complete overreaction. Please don't go out in public or to the beach as you may be shocked by the attire of teens these days.
Dec 31 12 01:18 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Blue Cube Imaging
Posts: 11,168
Ashland, Oregon, US


Then instruct her to use CAM so that we can help her.
Dec 31 12 01:18 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
DarcieK
Posts: 10,873
Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada


OP, you need to CAM the profile you are referring to.

That way it can be dealt with accordingly.
Dec 31 12 01:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Paige Morgan
Posts: 4,058
New York, New York, US


Blue Cube Imaging wrote:
Then instruct her to use CAM so that we can help her.

I did. Even gave her the link.

Hopefully she uses it so a mod can explain the situation to her/for her.

Also perhaps a mercy lock/hide?

Dec 31 12 01:22 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Aaron Lewis Photography
Posts: 5,082
Catskill, New York, US


Michael Pandolfo wrote:
The OP didn't pose a question. Nor did she pose a valid concern. The OP made an accusation based on ignorance.

She didn't come in and ASK if it was appropriate. She came in screaming Fire!!! throwing around a very sensitive and dangerous term which she clearly is not qualified to define.

Outside MM guidelines and "WARNING KIDDIE PORN SEEKERS ON MM!!!" are very different issues.

Thank you. What "we" allow and yelling and screaming kiddie porn related to MM in a public forum while making false accusations is pretty harsh.

Those are some pretty strong words that bear a LOT of weight in today's society

Dec 31 12 01:28 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Vector One Photography
Posts: 2,654
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, US


The definition of child pornography was meant to be precise but like anything else in the law isn't. It is illegal to show a juvenile in a sexual context. The problem with that is what is a sexual context to one isn't to another. 

Our concept of sexual depends on education, religion, and upbringing.  If she finds it objectionable then she shouldn't do it.  But, on the other hand, she shouldn't force her beliefs or paranoia on others. She may have thought she was doing right but like so many others thinking they are doing right, made the mistake of thinking that her way of thinking is the right way for everyone.  Some call that extremists, some call it immature, some call right wing religious fanaticism. Regardless what you call it, it really does not belong in such a place as a MM forum.
Dec 31 12 01:38 pm  Link  Quote 
  Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers