On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Charlotte Webb <charlottethewebb@gmail.com
wrote:
On 12/9/08, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
Things like spread out legs, arms behind back, and pushing forward of the chest? C'mon, the pose was obviously intended to be a sexual pose.
For better or worse schools tend to consider this definition of sexual posing an acceptable way to generate school spirit. Well yes, cheerleaders are clothed, but usually at the minimum level allowed by whatever dress code regulation has been published by the school board.
On the other hand a pose which involves physical contact of private parts (actual or suggested, such as "reaching toward...") would very reasonably be "associated with sex", regardless of whether clothing is worn or whether the naughtiness is visible to the camera.
The law I was referring to included physical contact of private parts and "lewd exhibitionism" as two separate possibilities, suggesting that one does not imply the other. And this makes sense. Sure, a cheerleader might make sexual poses while fully clothed, and this isn't considered a lewd performance. But the fact that the cheerleader is fully clothed *makes a difference*.
The very title and theme of the song they were depicting is "Virgin Killer".
The image fails to be "sexy" for the sole reason that it's a prepubescent making the pose.
I doubt a title or caption accompanying an image could affect the legal status of the image.
It can certainly lend evidence of the state of mind of the photographer who abused this young girl.
While it may in theory be possible to collect legal material and arrange it in an illegal way I don't see that happening here. Sure, it's quite tasteless and not something I'd want my daughter involved with at any age, but that doesn't mean it's pornographic or otherwise worthy of censorship.
There's obviously a line to be drawn between a tasteless act and a criminal one. Apparently you are of the opinion that a criminal act requires physical contact of private parts. I strongly disagree.
I wonder, what would you say of a prepubescent girl whose parents had her work in a strip club? Is that a decision that a girl and her parents should be allowed to make, or is it a situation where the government can step in and stop? If the latter, is it reasonable to call it a sex crime?