When I was 13....I fell in love with a classmate. He had big feet, a high pitched voice, and lots of freckles. He was always a bit of a troublemaker, and I would encourage him to steal things for me. He would tell me some stories about fucking a girl that lived around the corner.
This one time, after gym class, the boys were changing clothes, and I noticed my best friend's testicle hanging out of his white underpants. I looked...but I never developed a thing for him.
A year after that, I came across the freckled big foot boy, in the mall. He grabbed my coat collars and shook me around for a bit. I don't know what he was trying to do. I'm guessing I was just a joke to him.
I have a hard time figuring out how old people are.... based on what they look like. There was that time when I got busted checking out a 14 year old girl's ass, in tight jeans, and the guy that busted me was all like, "Dude, what are you doing? You know who you are checking out? That's yer 14 year old second cousin, man!"
I didn't know. Does that make me "bad"???
Elvis and JLL were involved with girls who were not little girls, but biologically able to have children. There's a difference.
The younger you go, the more predatory you are.
Children MUST be able to protect themselves so that they do not become easily manipulated and confused by the horny trash. You do this by recognizing that they have a sexuality of their own, and encouraging them to make choices, in regards to what they are sexually attracted to. They need help to understand their own sexuality, so that when some trashy thing comes along, these children are prepared for it.
These children are not vulnerable because they are naturally vulnerable. We make them vulnerable by trying to suppress their natural sexual tendencies...and then they just get confused.
The younger you go, the more predatory you are.
So at what age are you currently drawing the line, Bill?
Around my own age, like I always did. Mid-twenties is okay but the girl has to be really exceptional.
Your partner is supposed to be your equal, in a general sense. As you get a little older and the learning curve flattens, the acceptable range can widen a bit. So if you're thirty and want someone who is fifteen, it doesn't translate to being forty-five and wanting someone who is thirty.
So if we say Libman three times, does he appear and deliver a weird rant?
All right! now we are talking.Around my own age, like I always did. Mid-twenties is okay but the girl has to be really exceptional.
Your partner is supposed to be your equal, in a general sense. As you get a little older and the learning curve flattens, the acceptable range can widen a bit. So if you're thirty and want someone who is fifteen, it doesn't translate to being forty-five and wanting someone who is thirty.
When I was 28 I slept with a 21 year old guy. Felt like the biggest pedo on earth.
Around my own age, like I always did. Mid-twenties is okay but the girl has to be really exceptional.
Your partner is supposed to be your equal, in a general sense. As you get a little older and the learning curve flattens, the acceptable range can widen a bit. So if you're thirty and want someone who is fifteen, it doesn't translate to being forty-five and wanting someone who is thirty.
When I was 28 I slept with a 21 year old guy. Felt like the biggest pedo on earth.
The younger you go, the more predatory you are.
So at what age are you currently drawing the line, Bill?
Around my own age, like I always did. Mid-twenties is okay but the girl has to be really exceptional.
Your partner is supposed to be your equal, in a general sense. As you get a little older and the learning curve flattens, the acceptable range can widen a bit. So if you're thirty and want someone who is fifteen, it doesn't translate to being forty-five and wanting someone who is thirty.
I dated mid twenties aged guys when I was 15-17... my best friend was with a 30 year old @ 16- he ended up being married and she dumped him, but really I never saw anything wrong with the age difference.
I dated mid twenties aged guys when I was 15-17... my best friend was with a 30 year old @ 16- he ended up being married and she dumped him, but really I never saw anything wrong with the age difference.
Was it decided that these relationships be kept totally secret, or at least secret from the parents?
Well, some parents believe that they have a obligation to protect their children from older suitors. Besides it's part of the fun, nothing is better for the libido then the spine freezing fear of a angry father.I dated mid twenties aged guys when I was 15-17... my best friend was with a 30 year old @ 16- he ended up being married and she dumped him, but really I never saw anything wrong with the age difference.
Was it decided that these relationships be kept totally secret, or at least secret from the parents?
no actually my mom and dad knew everyone I dated just about... My best friend lied about the age of the 30 year old saying it was 25 or something.
The age of consent in Canada is 16, so don't worry much R3.
One of the motivators for the reform of these laws in Canada was the case of Dale Eric Beckham. In March 2005, Beckham, then 31 years old, travelled from his home in Woodlands, Texas to Ottawa, Canada to meet with a 14-year-old boy he had met over the internet. The boy's parents, after observing him sneaking out in the middle of the night into a taxi, alerted the police who tracked the cab to a hotel. Police found Beckham and the boy in a hotel room where the two had already engaged in sexual intercourse. Police also discovered pornographic images of children on a laptop computer that Beckham had brought with him from Texas. Beckham was arrested and held without bail. In Beckham's home state of Texas, the age of consent is 17 and violators can face prison terms of up to 20 years. In Canada, sex with children as young as 14 (until May 2008) was legal as long as it was consensual and the adult is not in a position of authority or dependency....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_reform_in_Canada
In Canada, sex with children as young as 14 (until May 2008) was legal as long as it was consensual and the adult is not in a position of authority or dependency. The boy suffered from psychological problems, including social anxiety disorder and thoughts of suicide and was under the care of doctors. However, because the boy insisted that the sex with Beckham was consensual, the only crime Beckham could be prosecuted for in Canada was a relatively minor offense of possession of child pornography. In November 2005, Beckham pleaded guilty and was sentenced to the time already served. He was then ordered deported back to the United States.
I dated mid twenties aged guys when I was 15-17... my best friend was with a 30 year old @ 16- he ended up being married and she dumped him, but really I never saw anything wrong with the age difference.
Was it decided that these relationships be kept totally secret, or at least secret from the parents?
no actually my mom and dad knew everyone I dated just about... My best friend lied about the age of the 30 year old saying it was 25 or something.
There's a pic?
Someone reported this thread for that pic. I'm going to ask you to put a note in the title of the thread saying something like "controversial pictures" please, so people reading the thread can avoid the danger of possessing an image like that on their hard drive.
I want you to have the opportunity to do this yourself.
I, for one, will not click this thread again because I don't want an image that can get me into trouble on my 'puter.
For the record, I had no intention of posting all sorts of controversial pictures in this thread. It was just to be that one pic.
For the record, I had no intention of posting all sorts of controversial pictures in this thread. It was just to be that one pic.
I even understood the point you were trying to make. I didn't remove the pic, but I can understand why it was removed.
*Shrug*
I'd be more concerned about you, personally, because those federales don't mess around, you know?
Someone reported this thread for that pic. I'm going to ask you to put a note in the title of the thread saying something like "controversial pictures" please, so people reading the thread can avoid the danger of possessing an image like that on their hard drive.
I want you to have the opportunity to do this yourself.
I, for one, will not click this thread again because I don't want an image that can get me into trouble on my 'puter.
I did try to put (NSFW) in the thread, but it didn't seem to work, but I guess the pic was not safe for anything. I was originally going to throw up an image of one of Balthus' paintings who liked to paint erotic pictures of rather young girls. But then I found out about Bill Henson's photography last night, and decide to post one of his images, instead. For the record, I had no intention of posting all sorts of controversial pictures in this thread. It was just to be that one pic.
I do wonder that if I had chosen a Balthus painting, instead, whether, that would have been reported to the mod, as well, since lots of people get freaked out by his paintings, even though they are just paintings and not photographs of young girls.
I think it is good to mention that some years ago, a winemaker in Europe asked a number of popular artists to design wine labels for her company. Balthus' wine label design was not allowed, because the authorities thought that these wine labels were "kiddie porn" or something like that, and the authorities threatened the wine company with all sorts of things.
Its hosted on FTL's server. One more reason for fed games.
This is not Anon. Regardless of your opinions it jeopardizes the owner. That is not only disrespectful of his property, but his personal safety and freedom.
I won't condone or participate in the squirrelly debate about whats right and wrong. In the United States, there are specific laws about age of photography subjects, which are known as 2257 laws. The rule is eighteen. The subject is thirteen at the time of the photography.
I'm not gonna take it down or say another word - but you've all been made aware of the potential consequences.
Henson's art has been exhibited in many locations, including the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York, the Venice Biennale, the National Gallery of Victoria in Melbourne, Australia, the Art Gallery of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia and the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. His current practice involves holding one exhibition in Australia every two years, and up to three overseas exhibitions each year.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Henson
Henson's photographs reflect an interest in ambiguity and transition. The use of chiaroscuro is common throughout his works. His photographs are painterly and often presented as diptychs, triptychs and other groupings.
Henson's works often meditate on the categories of and relationships between male and female; youth and adulthood; day and night; light and dark; nature and civilisation. His images often use flattened perspective and tend towards abstraction. The faces of the subjects are often blurred or partly shadowed and do not directly face the viewer.
According to Crawford, Henson presents "adolescents in their states of despair, intoxication and immature ribaldry". He has said that these "moments of transition and metamorphosis are important in everyone's lives".[1]
Henson's intention is to use photography for creative expression. He states that he is not interested in a political or sociological agenda, although the viewer cannot help but relate his works to their own stance on these issues. Henson, however, is not intending his photographs to be authoritative evidence but rather to suggest endless possibilities and cause people to wonder.
Henson studied at the Phillip Institute of Technology (later the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology) and the Victorian College of the Arts in Melbourne.
Images seizedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Henson
On 22 May 2008, the opening night of Bill Henson's 2007-2008 exhibition at the Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery in Paddington, Sydney, was cancelled after eight individual complaints were made to Police voicing concerns about an email invitation from the Gallery to a "Private View" that depicted photographs of a nude 13-year old girl. Hetty Johnston, a child protection advocate (Bravehearts), also lodged a complaint with the New South Wales police.[2][3]. On the same day, Sydney Morning Herald columnist, Miranda Devine, had also written a scathing article in response to viewing the email invitation[4], which precipitated heated talk-back and media discussion throughout the day. In the process of removing the images from the Gallery, Police found more photographs of naked children on exhibition among various large format photographs of nonfigurative subjects, which they later sought to examine for the purposes of determining their legal status under the NSW Crimes Act and child protection legislation.[5] Following discussions with the Gallery and a decision by Henson, the Gallery cancelled the opening and postponed the show[6].
It was announced on 23 May that a number of the images in the exhibition had been seized by police local Area Commander Alan Sicard, with the intention of charging Bill Henson and/or the Gallery with "publishing an indecent article" under the Crimes Act.[7] The seized images were also removed from the Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery website, where the remainder of the series can now be viewed online.[8]
The situation provoked a national debate on censorship. In a televised interview, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd stated that he found the images "absolutely revolting"[9][10][11] and that they had "no artistic merit".[12] These views swiftly drew censure from members of the 'creative stream' who attended the recent 2020 Summit convened by Rudd, led by actor Cate Blanchett.[13]
On 5 June 2008, the former director of the National Gallery of Australia Betty Churcher said it was "not surprising" that the New South Wales Department of Public Prosecutions (DPP) would announce its official recommendation that no charges be laid regarding the Sydney Roslyn Oxley9 gallery's collection of photographs by artist Bill Henson.
Ms Churcher says it would have been ridiculous to drag the case through the courts:[14][15]
I'm very pleased that the public prosecutor has decided that it's likely to end the debacle because they always do, as soon as you take art into court it never works ... The court is not the place to decide matters of art.
On 6 June 2008 it was reported in The Age that police would not prosecute Bill Henson over his photographs of naked teenagers, after they were declared "mild and justified" and given a PG rating[16] by the Australian Classification Board, suggesting viewing by children under the age of 16 is suitable with parental guidance.[17]
Someone reported this thread for that pic. I'm going to ask you to put a note in the title of the thread saying something like "controversial pictures" please, so people reading the thread can avoid the danger of possessing an image like that on their hard drive.
I want you to have the opportunity to do this yourself.
I, for one, will not click this thread again because I don't want an image that can get me into trouble on my 'puter.
I did try to put (NSFW) in the thread, but it didn't seem to work, but I guess the pic was not safe for anything. I was originally going to throw up an image of one of Balthus' paintings who liked to paint erotic pictures of rather young girls. But then I found out about Bill Henson's photography last night, and decide to post one of his images, instead. For the record, I had no intention of posting all sorts of controversial pictures in this thread. It was just to be that one pic.
I do wonder that if I had chosen a Balthus painting, instead, whether, that would have been reported to the mod, as well, since lots of people get freaked out by his paintings, even though they are just paintings and not photographs of young girls.
I think it is good to mention that some years ago, a winemaker in Europe asked a number of popular artists to design wine labels for her company. Balthus' wine label design was not allowed, because the authorities thought that these wine labels were "kiddie porn" or something like that, and the authorities threatened the wine company with all sorts of things.
Really? So the commentary of the image was a reasonable artistic critique?
Someone reported this thread for that pic. I'm going to ask you to put a note in the title of the thread saying something like "controversial pictures" please, so people reading the thread can avoid the danger of possessing an image like that on their hard drive.
I want you to have the opportunity to do this yourself.
I, for one, will not click this thread again because I don't want an image that can get me into trouble on my 'puter.
I did try to put (NSFW) in the thread, but it didn't seem to work, but I guess the pic was not safe for anything. I was originally going to throw up an image of one of Balthus' paintings who liked to paint erotic pictures of rather young girls. But then I found out about Bill Henson's photography last night, and decide to post one of his images, instead. For the record, I had no intention of posting all sorts of controversial pictures in this thread. It was just to be that one pic.
I do wonder that if I had chosen a Balthus painting, instead, whether, that would have been reported to the mod, as well, since lots of people get freaked out by his paintings, even though they are just paintings and not photographs of young girls.
I think it is good to mention that some years ago, a winemaker in Europe asked a number of popular artists to design wine labels for her company. Balthus' wine label design was not allowed, because the authorities thought that these wine labels were "kiddie porn" or something like that, and the authorities threatened the wine company with all sorts of things.
Really? So the commentary of the image was a reasonable artistic critique?
My critique of the image was crap, but I'm not an art critic.
Here is a photo by Australian Artist Bill Henson:
[image removed]
This photo created quite a bit of controversy along with some other of his work that was exhibited. The Cops raided the show, and a whole shitstorm broke out, and you can read about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Henson
The model in this photo is 13 years old. Some supporters say that the photo was not "sexualized"....but I guess it didn't have to be.
She is 13, and so what is she thinking? Beyond the photo, beyond what the artist was trying to do, this chick wants to fuck. She wants to have her pussy destroyed.
And then, everybody wants to jump in, including the photographer, to say this or that...and to make all sorts of commentaries about her naked body?
Is it art? Is it porn? Is it "Child Porn"? Unless there is something wrong with this girl, then I have to conclude that she wants to fuck.
And we want to bring some politics into this? You want to tell her who to fuck ...and who not to fuck? You want to make some "laws", and attempt to direct her?
Someone reported this thread for that pic. I'm going to ask you to put a note in the title of the thread saying something like "controversial pictures" please, so people reading the thread can avoid the danger of possessing an image like that on their hard drive.
I want you to have the opportunity to do this yourself.
I, for one, will not click this thread again because I don't want an image that can get me into trouble on my 'puter.
I did try to put (NSFW) in the thread, but it didn't seem to work, but I guess the pic was not safe for anything. I was originally going to throw up an image of one of Balthus' paintings who liked to paint erotic pictures of rather young girls. But then I found out about Bill Henson's photography last night, and decide to post one of his images, instead. For the record, I had no intention of posting all sorts of controversial pictures in this thread. It was just to be that one pic.
I do wonder that if I had chosen a Balthus painting, instead, whether, that would have been reported to the mod, as well, since lots of people get freaked out by his paintings, even though they are just paintings and not photographs of young girls.
I think it is good to mention that some years ago, a winemaker in Europe asked a number of popular artists to design wine labels for her company. Balthus' wine label design was not allowed, because the authorities thought that these wine labels were "kiddie porn" or something like that, and the authorities threatened the wine company with all sorts of things.
Really? So the commentary of the image was a reasonable artistic critique?
My critique of the image was crap, but I'm not an art critic.
Replying to two different comments:
I didn't take it down.
And yes, your critique of the image was crap. Because it wasn't a critique.
Heres your statement. Its not gone, nothing here is ever gone.Quote from: Princess PubellaHere is a photo by Australian Artist Bill Henson:
[image removed]
This photo created quite a bit of controversy along with some other of his work that was exhibited. The Cops raided the show, and a whole shitstorm broke out, and you can read about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Henson
The model in this photo is 13 years old. Some supporters say that the photo was not "sexualized"....but I guess it didn't have to be.
She is 13, and so what is she thinking? Beyond the photo, beyond what the artist was trying to do, this chick wants to fuck. She wants to have her pussy destroyed.
And then, everybody wants to jump in, including the photographer, to say this or that...and to make all sorts of commentaries about her naked body?
Is it art? Is it porn? Is it "Child Porn"? Unless there is something wrong with this girl, then I have to conclude that she wants to fuck.
And we want to bring some politics into this? You want to tell her who to fuck ...and who not to fuck? You want to make some "laws", and attempt to direct her?
Emphasis mine. Super classy art critic.
So if we say Libman three times, does he appear and deliver a weird rant?
Buttf***er ...
Buttf***er ...
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/e55bf2e63c/buttfer-from-drama-34