I worked in a small photo lab in Vancouver in the early '60s. Any frontal
nudity got the whole role trashed. A discretely uncovered breast would
occasionally be allowed. If the owner of the film protested he was
threatened with a call to the police.
On the other hand photos of naked children
On Wednesday, October 19, 2005, at 10:21 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
The right to be left alone disappeared with the beginning of the Nanny
State in the late 1930's under FDR. It wasn't very intrusive at first
but that's when the camels head entered the tent. I'll be very hard
to evict now
BS In the USA the magic age is 18. Anyone under 18 is a child under the
BS law. Suddenly, on the 18th birthday some magical event occurs and the
BS person becomes an adult. Of course they still can't legally drink
BS alcohol until another magical date, their 21st birthday!
So, what happens in
On Thursday, October 20, 2005, at 06:24 AM, Frantisek wrote:
So, what happens in the US when to people under 18 have intercourse?
Nobody gets charged with breaking the law, or both?
Depends on whether the boy is a football star or not. An ordinary joe
gets charged with statutory rape. A
William Robb wrote:
I wonder how many people won't see this because of the subject line
It is pornography if the subject is in a situation or position that
may be titillating to the viewer.
In other words, pornography is defined not by the creator of it, but
by the viewer, and that
Kiddy Porn prints, though.
Regards
Jens
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 18. oktober 2005 02:29
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
I wonder how many people won't see this because
.
Regards
Jens
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 18. oktober 2005 02:29
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
I wonder how many people won't see this because of the subject
line
On Wednesday, October 19, 2005, at 03:01 PM, Jens Bladt wrote:
So, is pornography illegal???
Supposedly not, but our new Attorney General is now setting up an FBI
anti-pornography squad in DC. Seems like our government would have
some genuinely important things to expend manpower and
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: DagT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 19. oktober 2005 21:58
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
In Norway it is illegal to sell pornography (that is active
genitalia), but it may be changing soon because
DagT wrote:
In Norway it is illegal to sell pornography (that is active
genitalia),
Actually, I think someone representing Statens Filmtilsyn/Medietilsynet
(the State Media Authority) said on TV a while back that although most
people seem to believe the law mentions active genitalia, the
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
As fa as I'm concerned people can photograph pretty mucch what ever they
want. I guess labs can't legally make Kiddy Porn prints, though.
The problem isn't
Keep rejecting them, Bill. It might make a few more people realise what a
crazy world we are now living in.
John
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:03:22 +0100, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
- Original Message - From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs
The right to be left alone disappeared with the beginning of the Nanny
State in the late 1930's under FDR. It wasn't very intrusive at first
but that's when the camels head entered the tent. I'll be very hard to
evict now that it's fully ensconced on the couch smoking from the hookah.
Bob
You make me laugh, but I believe you.
Tom C.
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The right to be left alone disappeared with the beginning of the Nanny
State in the late 1930's under FDR. It wasn't very intrusive at first but
that's when the camels head entered the tent. I'll be very
Every cloud has a silver lining.
--
Cheers,
Bob
-Original Message-
From: David Mann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 October 2005 04:42
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
On Oct 18, 2005, at 1:28 PM, William
On 17/10/05, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed:
[snippage]
But if we publish it, we are in deep doodoo.
It makes us careful.
Thanks for the explanation. If Butch was under orders rather than working
off his own initiative, then I owe him an apology.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
||
On 18/10/05, Rob Studdert, discombobulated, unleashed:
So what about that weird kids glamour site link that was posted to the
list a
couple of months back (the one where they all had alien eyes and boofy
hairdoos). Where would that fall?
Comedy.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
On Monday, October 17, 2005, at 11:41 PM, David Mann wrote:
It is pornography if the subject is in a situation or position that
may be titillating to the viewer.
There goes half of the advertising industry.
There is a very specific legal definition of pornography.
Bob
On 10/18/05, Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a very specific legal definition of pornography.
what would that be?
thanks,
frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
- Original Message -
From: Cotty
Subject: Re: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
On 17/10/05, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed:
[snippage]
But if we publish it, we are in deep doodoo.
It makes us careful.
Thanks for the explanation. If Butch
- Original Message -
From: frank theriault
Subject: Re: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
On 10/18/05, Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a very specific legal definition of pornography.
what would that be?
I was wondering about that one
On Tuesday, October 18, 2005, at 08:38 AM, frank theriault wrote:
what would that be?
The visual depiction of actual or simulated sexual activity.
Bob
On 18 Oct 2005 at 8:49, Bob Shell wrote:
On Tuesday, October 18, 2005, at 08:38 AM, frank theriault wrote:
what would that be?
The visual depiction of actual or simulated sexual activity.
That's still vague, unless all the bits that shouldn't be depicted are listed
and which
On 10/18/05, Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday, October 18, 2005, at 08:38 AM, frank theriault wrote:
The visual depiction of actual or simulated sexual activity.
wow! that's scary! is kissing sexual? necking or petting?
on the other hand nudity with no activity seems not
don't know what it would be, but this subject line is awakening spam
filters all over the world.
frank theriault wrote:
On 10/18/05, Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a very specific legal definition of pornography.
what would that be?
thanks,
frank
--
Sharpness is a
On Tuesday, October 18, 2005, at 09:39 AM, Rob Studdert wrote:
That's still vague, unless all the bits that shouldn't be depicted are
listed
and which particular combinations these bits are deemed to constitute
sexual
activity simulated or otherwise then it's just someones opinion at the
Bob Shell wrote:
I'll quote myself, as I said in one of my books:
Pornography is in the eye (and mind) of the beholder. The photograph
acts only as a mirror.
That reminds me of the old joke about the guy taking the ink blot test.
Everytime the psychologist asked the guy what he saw in the
On Tuesday, October 18, 2005, at 11:03 AM, Tom Reese wrote:
That reminds me of the old joke about the guy taking the ink blot test.
Everytime the psychologist asked the guy what he saw in the inkblot
the guy
replied I see an orgy. After 15 inkblots and 15 orgies the
psychiatrist
said you
Tom Reese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That reminds me of the old joke about the guy taking the ink blot test.
Everytime the psychologist asked the guy what he saw in the inkblot the guy
replied I see an orgy. After 15 inkblots and 15 orgies the psychiatrist
said you seem to be obsessed by sex.
The
Bob Shell wrote:
On Monday, October 17, 2005, at 11:41 PM, David Mann wrote:
It is pornography if the subject is in a situation or position that
may be titillating to the viewer.
There goes half of the advertising industry.
There is a very specific legal definition of pornography.
This fits that definition:
http://www.whatsthatbug.com/images/dragonflies_mating_netherla.jpg
Bob Shell wrote:
On Tuesday, October 18, 2005, at 08:38 AM, frank theriault wrote:
what would that be?
The visual depiction of actual or simulated sexual activity.
Bob
--
When you're
Just in case you want more, and kinkier...
http://www.whatsthatbug.com/love_among_bugs_2.html
P. J. Alling wrote:
This fits that definition:
http://www.whatsthatbug.com/images/dragonflies_mating_netherla.jpg
Bob Shell wrote:
On Tuesday, October 18, 2005, at 08:38 AM, frank theriault
, October 18, 2005 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
On Tuesday, October 18, 2005, at 08:38 AM, frank theriault wrote:
what would that be?
The visual depiction of actual or simulated sexual activity.
Bob
At 6:57 PM -0600 10/17/05, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: Rob Studdert
Subject: Re: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
It makes us careful.
So what about that weird kids glamour site link that was posted to the list a
couple of months back
- Original Message -
From: Doug Brewer
Subject: Re: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
don't know what it would be, but this subject line is awakening spam
filters all over the world.
Yer welcome.
William Robb
I wonder how many people won't see this because of the subject line
- Original Message -
From: Cotty
Subject: Re: More Texas Photo Issues
By any chance did you refuse to print any that were of poor composition?
Or perhaps poor exposure? Or maybe you just didn't like the the
On 17 Oct 2005 at 18:28, William Robb wrote:
Apparently, according to Janet Reno, no nudity is required to hit the child
pornography definition.
But if we publish it, we are in deep doodoo.
It makes us careful.
So what about that weird kids glamour site link that was posted to the list a
- Original Message -
From: Rob Studdert
Subject: Re: Pornography Issues in Photo Labs. Was: Texas Photo Issues
It makes us careful.
So what about that weird kids glamour site link that was posted to the
list a
couple of months back (the one where they all had alien eyes
On Oct 18, 2005, at 1:28 PM, William Robb wrote:
It is pornography if the subject is in a situation or position that
may be titillating to the viewer.
There goes half of the advertising industry.
- Dave
39 matches
Mail list logo
