Threaded index     Date index     FAQ


Pink isn't that a girl colour?

Posted by Behind Bars on 2011-April-19 11:30:29, Tuesday
In reply to Some rosy pinks might be nice posted by Long Brown Cloud on 2011-April-19 08:27:08, Tuesday

[quote] You say it was not bad of your parents to hold images of you naked because in doing so their “intentions” were “innocent”.
I don’t know what you mean by this statement. [/quote]


OK perhaps you could give me some legitimate reasons why someone would want to collect naked pictures of children?
Yes I do make assumptions, but they are more about actions and less about thoughts and wishes. It is very often far more reasonable to make assumptions about actions as you presented with far more information about the persons intent.
Surely I don't need to explain what's different about a Parent intent taking photos of their own children and complete strangers replicating and storing those images do I?
I'll start however, Parents take pictures of their children because it's a recollection of happy times, notable life events, to look back on nostalgically in old age, it's socially allowable and even encouraged (although in latter times even parents are discouraged from taking naturist pictures of their children, but more due to the inflexibility of the laws more than anything else.) There is "consent" at all levels both of the taking of those photos and a consent to how those photos are used and what purpose those photos are going to be used for. Yes that consent is based on assumptions, but those are reasonable assumptions based on what society has been acceptable. These actions are "innocent" in that their is no ulterior motive. You might say that collecting nude pictures of children online is "innocent" based on that as the collector has "no ulterior motive" but it isn't. There is not consent (and making another assumption here because we have no other choice as a collector of naked pictures of children is hardly going to ask that child or it's parent for consent first) it would be entirely reasonable to expect that if the subject of that photo knew that the use was for a sexual purpose they would not consent. I am aware however that many make the entirely opposite assumption perhaps to give themselves "permission" to collect the photo in the first place.

[quote] You say that what makes collecting naked photos wrong is that the collector assumes that the child in the photo will never find out that their photo has been distributed over the internet, thus no harm is done or they assume that if the child did find out that they would have consented or have simply not have minded. I don’t recall seeing any evidence that collectors need to make any such assumptions. I don’t assume what collectors might assume; assuming they assume anything! [/quote]

How would you be physically able to see "any evidence that collectors need to make assumptions" ?. Beyond that we all make assumptions about a lot of things in life and usually the most common are the things we don't have any direct evidence for or for anything which we need to gain self permission for. That doesn't make making those assumptions right or indeed validate the conclusions we come to. When I make an assumption particularly about a very specific action of another I try and think of all the motivating reasons a person might have for doing that.
Again what would be a legitimate reason for large numbers of people to collect naked pictures of children for other than for sexual gratification, even if that gratification is fleeting as the image is quickly saved into some encrypted container?

[quote] Within this thread we have you saying you would have a distinctly unpleasant feeling at your nude child image being collected; yet we have Cardinal Sin saying he does not care who holds images of him and if they wanked off on them or stick voodoo pins in them; and we have Aviator also saying good luck to whomever wanks off to images him. Base on this sample of three I don’t see how any collector could make any confident assumptions or should make any assumptions. [/quote]

Now go an Poll 100 of your neighbors in your street lol. You can't seriously be suggesting that the members of BC or indeed any other BL board are "representative" of all children or all the children who have had pictures taken of then nude in the past. The quotes you make are representative of a tiny number of BC members who form a subsection of society who are attracted to boys. The mere fact that they are sexually attracted to boys brings into question the impartiality of their statements.
Indeed I would be very surprised to find any supportive posts here just based on my observations over the years of the extremely high percentage of members who have been busted, being busted for possession of the very thing people are advocating as acceptable here.

[quote] Perhaps the only real solution to all this would be for more people to be more naked more often and for images of them to be massively distributed; to the point that no one ever again need feel vulnerable again! [/quote]

Indeed that would perhaps work in theory however another observation of mine over the proceeding decades is that society generally is moving always from acceptable nudity in general. When I was a kid and even before my naturist years it was perfectably acceptable for parents to see their children naked at bath times and when changing etc, but now I have met parents who have not seen their child naked since their child was 5 or 6 years old and started school. Their children hide their bodies from their parents because they are taught in school from kindergarten that their bodies are private and to hidden away. Indeed I can reflect back to when I was at school we all had to strip off after sports and shower together, now that is a thing of the past and all these things send a very powerful message to children as they grow up so although your suggestion might work we are moving as a world society in the completely opposite direction which paradoxically imho is helping to fuel child pornography.
You see once you've been surrounded by naked children for a few days at a naturist resort, you soon stop seeing the nudity and start seeing the child. The titillation disappears and with it a lot of the sexual element. Indeed attending a naturist resort is perhaps one of the least sexually stimulating things you can do. Ironically then you start looking for boys in speedos and start finding them more sexually attractive to look at.
But that's just a reflection of human nature. If we seek to prohibit a course of action as a society, all that ever happens is the "problem" gets worse.

[quote]On that issue, do you think nudism is flourishing or dying out?[/quote]

On that note I have no idea. I do not move in those circles anymore for personal reasons, but in light of my last answer I would be surprised to hear it's flourishing. Naturist families were reasonably few back in my day with the an environment generally being out numbered by the elderly. Today I would imagine Naturist clubs (outside of hardcore European Naturism) resemble Nursing Homes.


Follow ups:

Post a response:

Nickname:

Password:

Email (optional):
Subject:


Message:


Link URL (optional):

Link Title (optional):


Add your sigpic?

Here are Seven Rules for posting on this forum.

1. Do not post erotica or overly-detailed sexual discussions.
2. Do not request, offer, or post links to illegal material, including pictures.
3. Do not engage in campaigns of harassment against other posters.
4. Do not reveal identifying details about yourself or other posters.
5. Do not advocate or counsel sex with minors.
6. Do not post admissions of, or accuse others of, potentially illegal activities.
7. Do not request meetings with posters who are under age 18.

Posts made to BoyChat are subject to inclusion in the monthly BoyChat Digest. If you do not want your posts archived in the BC Digest, or want specific posts of yours removed after inclusion, please email The BC Digest.