On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Charlotte Webb <charlottethewebb(a)gmail.com
> On 12/9/08, Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org
> > Things like spread out legs, arms behind back, and pushing forward
> > 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
The very title and theme of the song they were
depicting is "Virgin
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
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?