Focus Fanatics Forum banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
my dad never did something like this for me..

[:(]

i bet john is waiting his kids are 16 to do that...
lol..
j/k
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,957 Posts
I fail to see how any law was broken here, and fail to see why it's anybody's business anyway. It's just good ole fashioned nekkidness, and in a private residence. Unless they solicited her for sex or gave him alcohol, how did they break the law?

America is so friggin uptight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Get a digital camera for Cripe's sake!

At any rate, the arrest is absolutely absurd. How is nudity contributing to the delinquency of a minor? By the same token, isn't breast feeding contributing as well?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,368 Posts
because it is morally wrong. A stripper compared to breast feeding? how rediculis is that? A striper is striping for the intention of arousal.. does a 16 year old need help with that? It isn't just nudity. It is far deeper than that. It is sending a bad message to the kid. It is illegal to subject a minor to a striper. Sorry if you don't agree, but it is just wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,241 Posts
Oh for heaven's sake, do you people really think it is appropriate to offer a stripper to a teenager? I'm with vanace, I think the problem is not that society is uptight but rather that people have completely lost any sense of what is right and what is wrong. It is wrong to sell salaciousness to a kid. And a 16 year old is a kid... yes a lot of 16 year olds are already having sex anyway, but for a parent to just throw up their hands and go "WTF I might as well just have a stripper since at least he can only look and not touch" is as stupid as those parents who think it's better for them to give their teenagers alcohol since "they're just going to drink anyway and this way at least they're drinking at home."

Maybe if they were a better parent and taught their kids to have a level head, they WOULDN'T be drinking, smoking, or having sex at way too early an age. This notion that kids today are "advanced" and are mini-adults is the stupidest mistake I have ever seen in parenting. You're not there to be their friend, you are there to parent them, and teenagers are still far from being done developing. They are still kids. Would you provide a stripper for your son's 13th birthday party? 13 is a pretty big deal right? Hey they're a teenager now, they'll be having sex any day now, better prepare them for what lies ahead - have the stripper give a tutorial on how the "equipment works" perhaps. [rolleyes] If I ever have kids I am going to be one hell of a hard-assed mean son of a bitch - no strippers, booze, cigarettes, or free and casual sex in my household. What a closed-minded meanie I will be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,262 Posts
My issue is "its morally wrong." Are we going to start legistlating morals? (he said, expecting the answer "yes!")

Oh, and news flash-if you start drinking before you turn 21, it doesn't mean you're going to turn out to be an alcoholic for the rest of your life. My parents let me drink at age 16, and I didn't turn out to be an alcoholic. In fact I've never really gotten totally smashed because I don't like to. I don't rob banks and knock over convenience stores to feed my "addiction" because I was brought up in a bad home, with parents who didn't give a damn what I did.

On the same token, someone exposed to a stripper or porn at an "early" age isn't going to automatically turn into some crazed, sex fiend pedophile who cruises the neighborhood shouting "Get in the van, I have candy!" at small children on the sidewalk. Maybe this was a little over the top, but does it require an arrest and jail time? Aren't there more serious crimes the police could be investigating than this? How many murders and robberies go unsolved every year, while the police tend to crack down on easy cases like this, or more likely spend most of their time shooting radar and writing tickets for too dark of tint or a stereo being too loud?

-edit-

Something else I'd like to point out is what society does tolerate as "acceptable" things to expose children to. You say its wrong to expose teenagers to sex, alcohol and drugs when they aren't old enough to handle it, but what about things like racism, homophobia/bigotry and intolerance of people who are "different?" One of the most disturbing things I've ever personally witnessed was a three or four year old child, dressed in white robes at a Klan rally in Columbus (I attended a number of rallies as a counter-demonstrator a few years ago.) That child is going to be brought up being taught to hate Blacks, Jews and non-protestant Christians and that's deemed "acceptable" because you can't interfere with things like that, yet what's more damaging; hiring a stipper for your son's 16th birthday, or teaching your son to hate someone because their skin color, ancestry or religious beliefs differ from your own? Should people who do that be arrested and charged, or is that considered a "moral" act?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
I don't have a problem with it, therefore it isn't morally wrong. The fact that this thread is split indicates that the event isn't necessarily morally wrong from a societal viewpoint either.

How does erotica contribute to the delinquency of a minor? Is the behavior deviant? Is erotica deviant? According to whom?

The contstant barrage of violence and the glorification of violence that we are exposed to in every form of media is far more damaging than a dancing naked chick. You can't tell me there's something wrong about being able to see a woman get shot in the head on primetime TV (NCIS season finale). This is more 'morally appropriate'?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,241 Posts
You guys are too much... I never said anything about ANY of the other issues you brought up. DO you seriously think that I am okay with racism, bigotry, violence, etc?? Please don't put words or ideas into my mouth. I fail to find any sentences where I contradicted myself and said sex was bad but violence was okay. So don't assume on my behalf that I must be one of those hypocrites who finds one thing bad but another okay. It's one issue at a time, and I believe one of those issues is not beginning the slippery slope with "harmless" things like a stripper. You may view it as harmless, I view those types of things as a "gateway" to further lowering your morality. Maybe you can view strippers or drink at 16 and turn out okay, but that doesn't mean it is the case for everyone else. I know someone whose parents treated him pretty much the same way, and you know what? He wastes his life away drinking, smoking pot, doing cocaine, and who knows what other drugs, has a massive porn collection and a projector screen in his garage so he can view porn and masturbate in privacy, and can't think about much other than sex and drugs and views women as nothing other than a sex object.

Frogman283, I didn't see what city/town this happened in, but how much do you want to bet it was a small town? You're always railing against the cops for not doing their jobs, and wasting their time on "stupid" stuff. But in small towns there simply is NOT an abundance of more serious crimes to deal with. My city is less than 40,000 people, and in the last years I was able to find info for (2001 + 2002) there was 1 murder. Do you want them to leave and go to the nearest city where there IS a murder or something? Perhaps you should view it from the other way around - if bigger cities didn't have such a problem with violence and theft the cops would be free to deal with other issues as well. But when your resources are limited and you have an abundance of issues requiring police presence, the "little" things are left behind because they have to prioritize.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Speaking of putting words into people's mouths...

I don't remember ever siting you specifically. Don't assume every post that follows yours is directed to you.

Please stop taking a differing opinion as a personal attack. I can accept the fact that your opinion differs from mine. Can you?

Now I will quote you.

Maybe you can view strippers or drink at 16 and turn out okay, but that doesn't mean it is the case for everyone else.
I highly doubt someone will not turn out 'okay' because they were allowed to drink at and see strippers at 16. If you are referring to a lack of parenting fundamentals, that's fair enough. However, being a good parent is not limited to these things. But let's stick to the quote. Let's say for the sake of argument, that someone doesn't turn out okay because their parents let them drink and see strippers at 16. Does that mean everyone will? No, of course not.

Now, you could say that by allowing your children to see and do these things at an early age is indicative of poor parenting. For that I would have to disagree. There are far too many factors involved to make a sweeping statement like that.
 

·
BAD EGG
Joined
·
7,418 Posts
^ ^ About time [;)]

IMO this isn't all that bad. Who determines morals anyway? On one side you have parts of society that think you will go straight to hell for something like this and then you have another that thinks nothing of it not to mention everything in beween. I have no problem with it in fact think they must be some pretty cool parents. Would I do it for my own child, nope!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,291 Posts
It is a moral issue, not a legal one. Kids can go to a nudeist camp and the parents aren't arrested. The guy who developed the film should not have not gotten into someone else's business.

It was pretty dumb for them to get them developed at an hr place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,241 Posts
FocuzdZX5 said:
The guy who developed the film should not have not gotten into someone else's business.
Actually it is the film developer's responsibility, they aren't supposed to just overlook things like that. I believe they are required to report anything that appears suspicious. Maybe Frogman283 can enlighten us on that since he works for Fujifilm. Most places (and we're talking consumer-type film developers, not professional services where an artist might be developing "art nudes") will tell you right up front that printing pictures of nudity is not allowed.

Now if these idiots had simply bought a digital camera and printed the pictures themselves the whole issue could have been avoided. [:D]

One last thing... can a 16 year old get into a strip club? Why no, they can't can they? Why is that? Oh, it's because society has deemed it inappropriate for a young person to view such things, isn't it? While there may be a lot of stupid, misguided and careless parents, there is still a majority who have enough of a head on their shoulders to have determined what is not appropriate. If the majority of people felt that 16 year olds should be viewing fully naked women I do believe a course of action would have been undertaken to repeal the laws saying it is not appropriate. So why does it suddenly become appropriate when it's your parents who provided the stripper and it's in your own house?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,262 Posts
Most retail photo locations have a policy where an employee can object to the content of a roll of film (or digitial images), and pretty much all that limits them to is telling a manager "I object and I don't want to run this roll." Then its up to the manager to decide if the content is "legal" or not, and if he/she feels a law has been broken they contact the authorities. If someone outside of management contacts the authorities without going through the management bad things happen...I was speaking with a district photo manager for Walgreens, and he told me they got sued when a lab employee turned a customer into the police for taking pictures of their young children in the bathtub, which she equated with child pornography.

As far as "nudity" goes, most places will print them. At worse you'll get a little slip in your envelope that says "we could not print some of your pictures because of our content policy."
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top