Under 18 clothed models... is this legal? - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

CDSmith · 09-28-2002, 12:03 PM

People, it's all about how a site is doing their marketing. For example, there are a lot of mainstream modelling sites that have a teen model section. There is nothing in the lawbooks that says a teen can't be a model. It's the sites that promote the teens as sex objects, and have a member's area that hints of maybe seeing the girls nude that crosses the line.

There are lots of good-looking teens out there that want to start a legit modelling career online, and there's nothing wrong whatsoever with them doing so. Teens are in rather *sexy* commercials on tv all the time, in tight jeans, bikinis, tiny tank tops etc etc, so having an online modelling portfolio with such clothed pictures is illegal? I highly doubt it.

Fletch XXX · 09-28-2002, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CDSmith
Teens are in rather *sexy* commercials on tv all the time, in tight jeans, bikinis, tiny tank tops etc etc, so having an online modelling portfolio with such clothed pictures is illegal? I highly doubt it.

Ummm, <i>she</i> said she was using non nude teens to upsell to porn.

Bottom line.

Thats not cool

Theo · 09-28-2002, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Soul_Rebel
im doing good with non nude matures

dude you crack me up!

Theo · 09-28-2002, 12:07 PM

thanks bro

Martin · 09-28-2002, 12:12 PM

Feeling okay there Soul_Rebel?

Fletch XXX · 09-28-2002, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Martin
Feeling okay there Soul_Rebel?

You feel fine though.

*rubs Martin*

Theo · 09-28-2002, 12:17 PM

excellent, im doing the self esteem exercises my doctor told me.

andrew1009 · 09-28-2002, 12:25 PM

I actually am interested in producing this type of content. I am not an old dirty sicko, I am in fact still in high school, so I do have easy access to potential models. Many girls I know as young as 15 pose in tight clothing (ie. jeans, shirts) ads/ catalogues, etc. So I think if the whole site is designed in a non-sexual matter, maybe even targeted to a mainstream market as a model portfolio site, there should be no problems at all and I have a feeling it will do quite well.

ldinternet · 09-28-2002, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pornopete

YO?? WTF. You are telling me to wake up and smell 2002 when you are using catch phrases from 1992??

YO = years old.

Fletch XXX · 09-28-2002, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by andrew1009
I actually am interested in producing this type of content. I am not an old dirty sicko, I am in fact still in high school, so I do have easy access to potential models. Many girls I know as young as 15 pose in tight clothing (ie. jeans, shirts) ads/ catalogues, etc. So I think if the whole site is designed in a non-sexual matter, maybe even targeted to a mainstream market as a model portfolio site, there should be no problems at all and I have a feeling it will do quite well.

This is what happens when kids make porn.

Shouldnt you be studying instead of thinking of ways to exploit the youngest girls legally?

You are in highschool?

How old are you?

andrew1009 · 09-28-2002, 12:30 PM

I'm 19, probably the youngest here

Theo · 09-28-2002, 12:31 PM

new sasush!

Theo · 09-28-2002, 12:32 PM

oh,ok sasush is 18 now

Fletch XXX · 09-28-2002, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by andrew1009
I'm 19, probably the youngest here

What is a 19 year old doing in highschool?

I was in college at your age.

andrew1009 · 09-28-2002, 12:34 PM

sasush?

andrew1009 · 09-28-2002, 12:38 PM

I'm one of the last classes here in Canada doing OAC, which is the 5th year of high school. The new ciriculum only goes up to grade 12 now, so there will be twice as many people graduating, which pretty much makes it twice as hard to get into college/university. I'm thinking of taking an extra semester or two 'til things kinda cool off. In Queens, where I currently have hopes of attending there are 30,000 students applying for 2,000 spots!

Dopy · 09-28-2002, 12:39 PM

NN in action

http://www.teensuncovered.com/

Hawkeye · 09-28-2002, 12:45 PM

Get yourself a copy of the Los Angeles Times on Sunday and take a look at all the pictures of 7 year old girls wearing bikinis and underwear.

If this is legal, then any non-nude website should also be legal, regardless of how it is marketed.

The US government should not be prosecuting thought crimes.

Fletch XXX · 09-28-2002, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hawkeye
Get yourself a copy of the Los Angeles Times on Sunday and take a look at all the pictures of 7 year old girls wearing bikinis and underwear.

If this is legal, then any non-nude website should also be legal, regardless of how it is marketed.

The US government should not be prosecuting thought crimes.

Ridiculous.

Do you share classes with the kid above?

Take 20 pics cut out of the same newspaper of 7 year old girls and make a gallery and submit it to the hun. Despite ? laws, so you dont lose way, this is only hypothetical.

It becomes porn, and child porn at that.

So your comment on regardless of how it is marketed is absolutely ridicilous and incorrect.

At least you admit its a "crime."

andrew1009 · 09-28-2002, 01:04 PM

If I were to get into this I would be targeting mainstream modeling markets. I guess it would be more of a little modeling agency where small companies can view models they would like to promote their products. It's just an idea though, I'm not even sure if I wanna get into this. It would be a lot of work now, especially with school there.

Mr.Fiction · 09-28-2002, 01:24 PM

I think Dopy is saying "16 year olds" like Americans say "18 year olds". Maybe a minor where she lives is anyone under 16?

If that's the case, then she has a valid point. If you use people who are not minors, then you can't get into trouble.

I could be wrong about the age of consent where she lives, but maybe?

Fletch XXX · 09-28-2002, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Fiction

I could be wrong about the age of consent where she lives, but maybe?

Doesnt matter what the age of consent is, using minors to sell to porn sites is wrong.

What am I missing?

You take pics of 16 year old girls, put them on page.

Get traffic, dump all traffic to Tawnee Stone.

hmmm.

I have nothing against making money legally with *teens,* I do it myself.

FATPad · 09-28-2002, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hawkeye
Get yourself a copy of the Los Angeles Times on Sunday and take a look at all the pictures of 7 year old girls wearing bikinis and underwear.

If this is legal, then any non-nude website should also be legal, regardless of how it is marketed.

The US government should not be prosecuting thought crimes.

HAHA

Same stupid argument always used.

Please explain to me how selling underwear in the sears catalog is the same as using minors to sell porn on porn sites?

Are you really unable to see a difference between selling underwear and selling porn using minors?

Why do people always bring underwear sales into a discussion about porn and using minors to sell porn?

Hawkeye · 09-28-2002, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FATPad

HAHA

Same stupid argument always used.

Please explain to me how selling underwear in the sears catalog is the same as using minors to sell porn on porn sites?

Are you really unable to see a difference between selling underwear and selling porn using minors?

Why do people always bring underwear sales into a discussion about porn and using minors to sell porn?

The original message in this thread talked about non-nude pictures, not "porn", so your argument is silly.

When the LA Times publishes pictures of little girls in their underwear, it's not considered pornography - and rightfully so.

Likewise, if a website publishes pictures of girls in underwear, bikinis, short shorts etc, it is also not pornography.

The fact that people may download these pictures and masturbate doesn't change the fact that they are just harmless shots of CLOTHED girls.

The arguments about the context of the pictures (department store ads vs "porn" sites) is ridiculous, since it attempts to criminalize the thoughts and motivations of a person, rather than the actions.

Mr.Fiction · 09-28-2002, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fletch XXX

Doesnt matter what the age of consent is, using minors to sell to porn sites is wrong.

What am I missing?

You take pics of 16 year old girls, put them on page.

Get traffic, dump all traffic to Tawnee Stone.

hmmm.

I have nothing against making money legally with *teens,* I do it myself.

I think you missed my point.

The definition of "minor" depends on where you live. If you live in the U.S. then a "minor" is someone under 18. If you live in the Netherlands, then a "minor" is someone under 16.

So, you are right, using minors is wrong. However, a minor is not defined as someone under 18. A minor is someone under the legal age of consent where you live.

Do you see what I'm saying? A 16 year old in NOT a minor in some countries.

There is no objective age at which a person is no longer a minor, it depends on the laws of the country you live in.

I do agree that people should not break the laws of the country they live in on this issue, of course.

FATPad · 09-28-2002, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hawkeye

The original message in this thread talked about non-nude pictures, not "porn", so your argument is silly.

When the LA Times publishes pictures of little girls in their underwear, it's not considered pornography - and rightfully so.

Likewise, if a website publishes pictures of girls in underwear, bikinis, short shorts etc, it is also not pornography.

The fact that people may download these pictures and masturbate doesn't change the fact that they are just harmless shots of CLOTHED girls.

The arguments about the context of the pictures (department store ads vs "porn" sites) is ridiculous, since it attempts to criminalize the thoughts and motivations of a person, rather than the actions.

Well, I'm convinced. I'm off to scan pics of 7 year olds in the Sears catalog to use on the next gallery I submit to The Hun.

I certainly hope if the feds come knocking on my door, you'll be my lawyer and save me.

Hawkeye · 09-28-2002, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FATPad

Well, I'm convinced. I'm off to scan pics of 7 year olds in the Sears catalog to use on the next gallery I submit to The Hun.

I certainly hope if the feds come knocking on my door, you'll be my lawyer and save me.

You're really stretching here.

I never said it's legal - I'm saying it SHOULD be legal.

A picture of a non-nude girl is NOT pornography, no matter how the idiot prosecutors try to spin it.

Fletch XXX · 09-28-2002, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Fiction

I think you missed my point.

The definition of "minor" depends on where you live. If you live in the U.S. then a "minor" is someone under 18. If you live in the Netherlands, then a "minor" is someone under 16.

So, you are right, using minors is wrong. However, a minor is not defined as someone under 18. A minor is someone under the legal age of consent where you live.

Do you see what I'm saying? A 16 year old in NOT a minor in some countries.

There is no objective age at which a person is no longer a minor, it depends on the laws of the country you live in.

I do agree that people should not break the laws of the country they live in on this issue, of course.

You obviously missed the part where I said lets use "minor" for lack of a better term for "underage" undivided by location.

FATPad · 09-28-2002, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hawkeye

You're really stretching here.

I never said it's legal - I'm saying it SHOULD be legal.

A picture of a non-nude girl is NOT pornography, no matter how the idiot prosecutors try to spin it.

So you think I should be able to make a gallery of 8 year olds dressed in nothing but undies and use it to promote my new site CUM SOAKED TEENIE GANGBANGS?

the bulldog · 09-28-2002, 06:34 PM

WHAT??....... you fat fucking pervert!!

Mr.Fiction · 09-28-2002, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fletch XXX

You obviously missed the part where I said lets use "minor" for lack of a better term for "underage" undivided by location.

I think you missed the part where I said: I win goddamn it!

Fletch XXX · 09-28-2002, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Fiction

I think you missed the part where I said: I win goddamn it!

Wars not make one great.

eroswebmaster · 09-28-2002, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pornopete

You are the one who wrote a page on how you are against this. I simply posted a line.

Are you implying you have something to hide?

Read my post again...I defend these sites on a constitutionality basis...but I made my MORAL position clear because there are those here like yourself the first thing they do is start screaming "pedophile" "sicko" etc because they have no valid LEGAL argument.

me thinks you protest too much pornopete

Paul Markham · 09-29-2002, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by playa
just remember the Police takes your property first, ie computers and all your equipment, freezes you bank account, then puts you in Jail,

then just tell your story to the judge, and explain your reasoning..

Ilegal? It depends on the context of the content, what is implied, and where you live.

But it seems there is a knee jerk reaction here.

The US goverment drew a line in the sand at 18 and some of you guys are going on and on that 16/17 year olds being children and prey for pedophiles.

The last thing a pedophile is going to chase is a western 16/17 year old girl. Brought up on a diet of Spice Girls to Britney Spears she is likely to be confident and appear to be sexaully knowing.

A pedo is looking for someone he can dominate. How many 16/17 do you know like that? Immoral, can someone explain that one to me, cos in my reckoning the girls has been physically sexually mature for a couple of years and in some countries and societies would be considered old enough to be married (including the US) if not already married.

What it is, is manipulative and unfair of an older man to seduce a younger girl because she is a younger girl. Also a bloody waste of time, they hardly know what they are doing at 19/20 let alone younger. When I want sex, it's with an equal who knows what it's for. Just in case any of you are wondering.

As for putting up a content, there are so many sets of girls 18-20 which would fool the average surfer of how old she is.

Guess this one's age?

And this one.

An over 19?.

Why take the risk?

And a mother!!!
To finish it off.

Plus you get all the 2257 so you can sleep at night.

09-28-2002, 12:03 PM	#51
CDSmith Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: My network is hosted at TECHIEMEDIA.net ...Wait, you meant where am I located at? Oh... okay, I'm in Winnipeg, Canada. Oops. :) Posts: 51,460	People, it's all about how a site is doing their marketing. For example, there are a lot of mainstream modelling sites that have a teen model section. There is nothing in the lawbooks that says a teen can't be a model. It's the sites that promote the teens as sex objects, and have a member's area that hints of maybe seeing the girls nude that crosses the line. There are lots of good-looking teens out there that want to start a legit modelling career online, and there's nothing wrong whatsoever with them doing so. Teens are in rather sexy commercials on tv all the time, in tight jeans, bikinis, tiny tank tops etc etc, so having an online modelling portfolio with such clothed pictures is illegal? I highly doubt it. __________________ *Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!* ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!! Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634

09-28-2002, 06:34 PM	#80
the bulldog Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Land of Chocolate!! Posts: 519	WHAT??....... you fat fucking pervert!! __________________ promote ME or suck my cock u bitch !!!

09-28-2002, 12:07 PM	#54
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	thanks bro

09-28-2002, 12:12 PM	#55
Martin "Assassins" Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: At home Posts: 17,277	Feeling okay there Soul_Rebel?

09-28-2002, 12:17 PM	#57
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	excellent, im doing the self esteem exercises my doctor told me.

09-28-2002, 12:25 PM	#58
andrew1009 Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 801	I actually am interested in producing this type of content. I am not an old dirty sicko, I am in fact still in high school, so I do have easy access to potential models. Many girls I know as young as 15 pose in tight clothing (ie. jeans, shirts) ads/ catalogues, etc. So I think if the whole site is designed in a non-sexual matter, maybe even targeted to a mainstream market as a model portfolio site, there should be no problems at all and I have a feeling it will do quite well.

09-28-2002, 12:30 PM	#61
andrew1009 Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 801	I'm 19, probably the youngest here

09-28-2002, 12:31 PM	#62
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	new sasush!

09-28-2002, 12:32 PM	#63
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	oh,ok sasush is 18 now

09-28-2002, 12:34 PM	#65
andrew1009 Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 801	sasush?

09-28-2002, 12:38 PM	#66
andrew1009 Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 801	I'm one of the last classes here in Canada doing OAC, which is the 5th year of high school. The new ciriculum only goes up to grade 12 now, so there will be twice as many people graduating, which pretty much makes it twice as hard to get into college/university. I'm thinking of taking an extra semester or two 'til things kinda cool off. In Queens, where I currently have hopes of attending there are 30,000 students applying for 2,000 spots!

09-28-2002, 12:39 PM	#67
Dopy Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Puerto Del Carmen, Lanzarote, Canary Islands Posts: 1,572	NN in action http://www.teensuncovered.com/

09-28-2002, 12:45 PM	#68
Hawkeye Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,291	Get yourself a copy of the Los Angeles Times on Sunday and take a look at all the pictures of 7 year old girls wearing bikinis and underwear. If this is legal, then any non-nude website should also be legal, regardless of how it is marketed. The US government should not be prosecuting thought crimes.

09-28-2002, 01:04 PM	#70
andrew1009 Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 801	If I were to get into this I would be targeting mainstream modeling markets. I guess it would be more of a little modeling agency where small companies can view models they would like to promote their products. It's just an idea though, I'm not even sure if I wanna get into this. It would be a lot of work now, especially with school there.

09-28-2002, 01:24 PM	#71
Mr.Fiction Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Free Speech Land Posts: 9,484	I think Dopy is saying "16 year olds" like Americans say "18 year olds". Maybe a minor where she lives is anyone under 16? If that's the case, then she has a valid point. If you use people who are not minors, then you can't get into trouble. I could be wrong about the age of consent where she lives, but maybe?