Do we have the right to send nudes?

[Heathen]

The Right to Sext: Sending Nude Photos of Oneself is a Right

3/26/2009 — Another legal action over the practice of sexting has emerged. Only this time it is the alleged “sexters” who are suing state prosecutors on the grounds that criminalizing sexting infringes on their First Amendment rights.
Last month, three high school students in Wyoming County, Pennsylvania faced the threat of being charged with the possession/dissemination of child pornography when their school confiscated student cell-phones and found pictures of them in states of semi-undress.
According to press reports, the photographs at issue showed two of the girls from the waist up wearing nothing but opaque bras; another girl was photographed emerging from a shower, wearing a towel wrapped around her torso, just under her breasts.
The prosecutor offered the three women, along with approximately 20 of their classmates whose photos had also been found on confiscated cell-phones, a deal—if the girls completed a 6 to 9 month re-education class on “what it means to be a girl in today’s society” at a cost of $100 to each of the girls’ families, charges would be dropped.
The prosecutor indicated that the girls had to complete the re-education program to his satisfaction and submit to periodic drug-tests during this probationary period. Anyone who chose not to take the deal would be brought up on charges of possessing/disseminating child pornography, and if convicted would face having a felony conviction on their record, and be required to register as sex offenders for the next 10 years.
While many parents accepted the prosecutors deal—three families, with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, brought suit this week on behalf of their daughters, contending that the prosecutor’s actions constituted a violation of the teens’ right to free expression under the First Amendment.


Good for them.


What do you guys think?
To keep the bias of the OP I will spoiler my opinion.
I think that they should have that right. I agree with the 3 families who didn't take the deal.

[Cortexian]

Of ourself? Yes.

It's your decision about who you expose your body to, if you exposed it illegally then it's still your decision, you're just retarded.

[Rentafence]

Stupid. Save the children from themselves, brahhhhhh.

[Huero]

If she wants to send nudies of herself around, that's her thing (though I do think some parental discipline is in order.)

[Jean-Luc]

Yet another indication that America's moral values are completely FUXXED. I shall use this article in my next rant :D

That said, we absolutely have the right to do this. Confiscating and looking through phones is a complete violation of privacy.

[Chainsy]

Really, really shakey ground here.
I would say that a person should have the right to show other people any part of their body, as long as it is in private circumstances and both people obviously want this action to be done. Seeing as a cell phone is private property owned by you, I think it is fine. Now the problem is with discretion of trust, because if receiver sends said picture to everyone, it quickly becomes a public matter, and if person who took picture does not want it to be public... you can see the whole drama, and as it spreads, the picture of, lets say, a 16 year old gets into the hand of 20 year old who got it texted by one of his 18 year old buddies...You can see the problem in this.
In the end I say Yes, though the problem is in this, like almost any other controversy, is not just black and white, but a million shades in between.

[LinkandKvel]

Heathen we think alike. Convicting somebody from evidence acquired through illegal means......this sounds familiar....

[Mr Buckshot]

As long as you keep it to yourself and the people involved (as in don't be a dirty prick and send the photos to other people as free pr0n or something), no one's gonna have a problem with it. Unfortunately situations like these often result in the photos ending up in unintended locations.

but yeah I think it's a stupid habit.

[Amit]

I believe it is the right for somebody to expose them self willingly to another individual who agrees to the content of the image, as long as it's personal.

The law would be stupid because without "society" exposing yourself privately in the bushes to somebody else would not warrant somebody else to stop you from having the same opportunities to whatever else everyone is allowed to do.

It still seems like a stupid prospect when there is a recurring theme of this shit ending up in the wrong hands. And if you know this will happen, just save yourself and everyone else involved the drama and don't do it.

[LinkandKvel]

also wtf does drugs have to do with it?

[p0lar_bear]

Wait, so if a little girl takes a naked picture of herself (logic behind this scenario isn't the point, here), she can get slammed for possession of child pornography? What the fuck?

If the images are of themselves, I fail to see the logic behind this. If it was, say, a sibling or some random kid, then that would be a bit different...

On the other hand, I'm not totally against the logic behind this. Jilted lovers/not-best-anymore-friends LOVE to send those embarassing nudies over the internet when they start hating their guts, which would be enabling pedophiles.

And on the back of that other hand, "sext messaging," wtf? Whores.

[LunawolfGirl]

If a person wants to take nude pictures of themselves, who gives a fuck? If they want to share 'em, also why not?

When they're underage, it's different. But if they're keeping the pictures to themselves, it's no biggie. I mean, the girl's phones were confiscated from them, they didn't show the pictures to anyone. Who cares?

[SnaFuBAR]

whoever voted no is a slimy fake.

[Cortexian]

And on the back of that other hand, "sext messaging," wtf? Whores.
I'll sext you, one sec.

[Heathen]

Wait, so if I little girl takes a naked picture of herself (logic behind this scenario isn't the point, here), she can get slammed for possession of child pornography? What the fuck?

If the images are of themselves, I fail to see the logic behind this. If it was, say, a sibling or some random kid, then that would be a bit different...

On the other hand, I'm not totally against the logic behind this. Jilted lovers/not-best-anymore-friends LOVE to send those embarassing nudies over the internet when they start hating their guts, which would be enabling pedophiles.

And on the back of that other hand, "sext messaging," wtf? Whores.
Well thats the thing polar, they had pictures of each other.

[ICEE]

I think we should have the right to do what we want with our bodies. I am very liberal about that. As long as it doesnt hurt another person, I should be able to do anything I want with my body, from taking nude pictures to destroying my internal systems with alcohol and prescription medication that is not prescribed to me.

[p0lar_bear]

Well thats the thing polar, they had pictures of each other.

At least it's clear as day in this case... I can imagine some pedo trying to use this argument when he gets busted.

[n00b1n8R]

If you're over 18, then yeah you have that right (though I'm p. sure it'd still be illegal to send the pics to minors), but if you're under 18 then it's CP, and CP is CP nomatter who made it for whatever reason.

I think the conviction is pretty heavy handed, but he is justified to give them something.

Besides, sending nudes to your boyfriend is generally a baaaad idea, anyone who passes through /b/ even once a month will agree with me here.

[Bodzilla]

anything at all can be seen as a bad thing if you over-analyse it enough.

and i do mean anything.
All this "But then this could, which would lead to this, which = this and then pedophiles" shit is not exactly a concrete base for them to ban it.

These scenarios are stupid, people will always fuck up, it's how most people learn and they have every right in the world to do it.

it dont float my boat but why shouldnt they have the right to do it.
The government needs to get the fuck out of the family home.

[rossmum]

The chick who was in Romeo & Juliet wasn't allowed to the first screening of the movie because it had nudity and she was underage, even though it was about a half-second flash of her own tits. Go figure.

As for this? I got to the bit about the class. I read the title and wanted to seriously just go stand in front of a train. Humans are turning into fucking pussies and every time anyone does anything even slightly politically incorrect they get lynched by these morons who think that a perfect society is one where nobody can describe anything for fear of being racist, sexist, or otherwise discriminatory, and nobody can send out pictures of themselves naked because it's degrading to their gender (I love how that shit only applies to women in much the same way women can belt men around all they fucking like but the moment a hand is raised in self-defence it becomes a mortal sin). Forgive the run-on sentence but this kind of bullshit seriously rages the fuck out of me.

The world is going to shit, woohoo.

[sdavis117]

I misread the title as "Do we have the right to send Nukes" and I voted no before reading any posts, but after re-reading the title and reading through the thread, I would have to change my answer to yes.

[LlamaMaster]

whoever voted no is a slimy fake.
The poll asked "do we have the right," not "should we have the right." I can't believe that I'm the only who misinterpreted that. Of course we should have the right to send nudes of ourself; it's our body, our fault. If they land in the hands of a "pedophile" so be it. Anything over puberty is biologically correct anyway, and a "pedophile" is somebody who likes "children" under that age. A 15 year old girl may be stupid, but she isn't an ignorant child which needs protection.

[cheezdue]

Ive always wondered why people would take nude pictures of themselves.

[LunawolfGirl]

Ive always wondered why people would take nude pictures of themselves.
I wonder the same thing.
I think it's got a bit to do with conceit.
Or maybe they take pictures of them selves in poses that make them look better than they actually do so they can look at them and feel better about themselves.

Maybe it's for attention. I dunno.

[Heathen]

Well okay, but there is alot of "but if's" flying around this thread.

To be sure, you all know the circumstances correct?

They were underage, had pictures of each other also, and got their phones taken away because they aren't allowed at school. The teacher looked through it and saw those and made the "deal."

[Heathen]

The poll asked "do we have the right," not "should we have the right." I can't believe that I'm the only who misinterpreted that. Of course we should have the right to send nudes of ourself; it's our body, our fault. If they land in the hands of a "pedophile" so be it. Anything over puberty is biologically correct anyway, and a "pedophile" is somebody who likes "children" under that age. A 15 year old girl may be stupid, but she isn't an ignorant child which needs protection.

Thing is we DO have the right.

First amendment protects freedom of expression.

[LlamaMaster]

Thing is we DO have the right.

First amendment protects freedom of expression.
I want to express myself by raping somebody, so that's cool right? Laws override the vague 1st amendment.

[blind]

I wonder the same thing.
I think it's got a bit to do with conceit.
Or maybe they take pictures of them selves in poses that make them look better than they actually do so they can look at them and feel better about themselves.

Maybe it's for attention. I dunno.
I've sent pictures of my dick to girls before.
lololol
Its for sexual arousal of whoever is receiving the images, gosh.
I LOVE SEXTING

[Heathen]

srs, I have pics of my mandingo and I share them with close personal friends. A couple of them.

[ICEE]

srs, I have pics of my mandingo and I share them with close personal friends. A couple of them.

Thats why no one wants to be your close personal friend. Seriously, sexting is for whores. If your in a sexual relationship with someone anyways, why do you need to have pics of them naked on your phone? you can see them naked anyways. I almost wish we were a society that didn't wear clothes. This would be a complete nonissue, because seeing someone naked would be so commonplace that it wouldn't even be arousing, or thought of as vulgar at all.

[blind]

Thats why no one wants to be your close personal friend. Seriously, sexting is for whores. If your in a sexual relationship with someone anyways, why do you need to have pics of them naked on your phone? you can see them naked anyways. I almost wish we were a society that didn't wear clothes. This would be a complete nonissue, because seeing someone naked would be so commonplace that it wouldn't even be arousing, or thought of as vulgar at all.
You clearly have not been in a sexual relationship before.

[Syuusuke]

Move closer to the equator, ICEE.

[Heathen]

Thats why no one wants to be your close personal friend. Seriously, sexting is for whores. If your in a sexual relationship with someone anyways, why do you need to have pics of them naked on your phone? you can see them naked anyways. I almost wish we were a society that didn't wear clothes. This would be a complete nonissue, because seeing someone naked would be so commonplace that it wouldn't even be arousing, or thought of as vulgar at all.
No, I lied for the sake of argument. My point was, its my own business and I would do it because I enjoy it. I don't have or send nudes because I don't feel the need to. I don't like basing friendships out of lust or sexual tension but I know others do. I do agree with you though.

In the same way I support marijuana legalization, gay marriage, and abortion, I support this.

I dont do it, I wont do it, but I think you have every right to do it.

Goddamn Ic I love you.

[Phopojijo]

The law is messed up because it's confused to its purpose.

-- You cannot pick up a prostitute... however you're allowed to pay a prostitute to star in a pornographic film.

-- You're allowed to have sex with someone (of similar enough age of course subject to state/federal statutory rape law) before you're allowed to view it.

I could go on for a bit but I gotta eat supper.

Half of this is just political and the other half is diverting attention from more important issues.

[Heathen]

You are right about that.

[ThePlague]

Yeah, we do have the right.

[blind]

I just took shirtless pics of me for this girl.
Who wants em?

[Mr Buckshot]

I just took shirtless pics of me for this girl.
Who wants em?

which reminds me, it's really strange how in most societies today, a man can walk down the public streets without his shirt on and it's acceptable, yeah he can't enter a restaurant, but he can walk outside shirtless and it's considered acceptable as long he has pants on. But if a woman did the same, she could get booked/arrested for "public nudity" even if she has pants on.

[blind]

which reminds me, it's really strange how in most societies today, a man can walk down the public streets without his shirt on and it's acceptable, yeah he can't enter a restaurant, but he can walk outside shirtless and it's considered acceptable as long he has pants on. But if a woman did the same, she could get booked/arrested for "public nudity" even if she has pants on.
because titties are glorious.

[Mr Buckshot]

I'm only attracted to certain cup sizes, everything else (the majority) doesn't turn me on. So a woman with "everything else" walking down the street without anything on top would not get any stares from me. LOL.

[Bodzilla]

you asians really are a special breed.

:/

[rossmum]

What, you're desperate enough to not have standards or something?

[Bodzilla]

well yeah. lol

But it sounds like they've got to be 1 specific size.
bit shallow is all i'm saying.

[mech]

Buckshot likes Mosquito bite girls ~~:rolleyes:

[FRain]

I like medium-sized. Too big breasts are just WTF and too little are just eh....

[blind]

I like girls for their PERSONALITY
you guys are shallow!

[StankBacon]

I like girls for their PERSONALITY
you guys are shallow!

<3

[Phopojijo]

Yeah... pretty much the only thing I look at physically (pretty much...) is hygiene...

[LlamaMaster]

I could care less about boob size as long as they aren't too big.

[Jean-Luc]

Yeah... pretty much the only thing I look at physically (pretty much...) is hygiene...

Any straight male who says they haven't gone even slightly out of their way to look at a hot chick's assets is lying through their teeth. :pervert:

Yes, I know you said pretty much. Just saying

[FreedomFighter7]

I don't think these kids should be in trouble for possessing child pornography if they were sent the pics. The transfer is completely one sided, they had no choice. There's no way around that. I also think the kids' privacy was invaded when the school peeps checked their phones and found the stuff. Fuckin retards (the school staff).

[SnaFuBAR]

Any straight male who says they haven't gone even slightly out of their way to look at a hot chick's assets is lying through their teeth. :pervert:

Yes, I know you said pretty much. Just saying
i like a sexy female but if her personality sucks she's outta here.

[=sw=warlord]

I don't think these kids should be in trouble for possessing child pornography if they were sent the pics. The transfer is completely one sided, they had no choice. There's no way around that.
Thats a outright lie.
It's called pressing no to file transfer instead of yes.

[PlasbianX]

Thats a outright lie.
It's called pressing no to file transfer instead of yes.

My phone automatically accepts picture messages.

[ThePlague]

Shouldn't it not be CP if you're underage also? Just wondering...

[mech]

No it's not CP if you're under age and you're in the possession of underage pornography.

Wait that doesn't make any sense :ugh:

[ThePlague]

No it's not CP if you're under age and you're in the possession of underage pornography.

Wait that doesn't make any sense :ugh:
Exactly :/

[Heathen]

I could care less about boob size as long as they aren't too big.
a-b for me

[Heathen]

Sup rob.

And he is right.

[Syuusuke]

Child Pornography is when our lovely underage kids get into sexual acts and as far as I know, nudity is not a sexual act (despite the fact that it raises most of our tents).

But I digress, sending nudes of themselves, go right ahead, but it seems that the baby boomers are trying to "fix us up". So...sending nudes of yourselves, go ahead, just don't let us know about it.

[rossmum]

i like a sexy female but if her personality sucks she's outta here.
this


Shouldn't it not be CP if you're underage also? Just wondering...
that's what you'd assume, yes


:frogout2:
this. you said you were leaving, so fucking leave.


Child Pornography is when our lovely underage kids get into sexual acts and as far as I know, nudity is not a sexual act (despite the fact that it raises most of our tents).

But I digress, sending nudes of themselves, go right ahead, but it seems that the baby boomers are trying to "fix us up". So...sending nudes of yourselves, go ahead, just don't let us know about it.
fun fact: 90% of adults over 30 are utter retards who know absolutely fuck all about how the world really works

[p0lar_bear]

CP is CP no matter how you cut it, though I think that if all parties involved in the making were underage, and that the viewers are also underage, who gives a shit? In fact, most of the reason it's such a big fucking deal is because it's usually done when Daddy told little Suzie to take off her undies and smile for the camera.

Yeah it might fall into the hands of creepy old guys who get off to that shit, though that's when you arrest them.

Regardless of what I just posted though, there really is no reason that underage people need to be taking nudes/risque photos of themselves and shooting them around. I still think the girls involved in this incident should really be taking that class. I find sluts annoying.

[Limited]

To be honest, the whole law on porn and sex is ridiclious, or at least in UK it is.
Age 16, you can legally have sex, but you cannot buy or watch porn. Wtf?


The teacher looked through it and saw those and made the "deal."Teacher should get done for having CP, if hes going to be a jerk and try and get them done for it.

Its a touchy subject though, if it was literally just, "can I have pictures of myself nude", then that should be an automatic yes, why the fuck not? You can strip off and it has the same affect.

Sending it to people, and viewing the pictures of other people is the grey area. I've heard cases when a GF and BF sent each other nude pictures, they were both the same age, but underage. The boy got done for CP, the girl got nothing. Double standards or what?

In my opinion, if some one wants to willingly take a picture of themselves, and send it to some one who is willing to view it, then there should not be a problem.

[Corndogman]

Hmm, I say you shouldn't be able to get busted for CP if your also under age and withing a year or so difference. As in, Theres no reason a 16 year old should have nudes of a 12 year old, but I think its acceptable if they have nudes of 15-17 year olds.

I'm 16, so trust me I love me some 16 year old boobies. B-C cup.

E: We should just change the poll to preferred cup size.

[Hotrod]

Hmm, I say you shouldn't be able to get busted for CP if your also under age and withing a year or so difference. As in, Theres no reason a 16 year old should have nudes of a 12 year old, but I think its acceptable if they have nudes of 15-17 year olds.
I agree with this. There's no reason why us teens shouldn't be allowed to have the same freedoms adults do with people our age.

[English Mobster]

The Child Pornography law is in place to protect children from abuse.

The Supreme Court set a precedent in a past ruling (I know where it is, too lazy to look it up right now) stating that if the pictures are to be used as an art form, CP is legal, since no one is getting hurt.
This is how things like Loli are not considered CP: they are not REAL children, and no one is getting hurt.

This "Sexting" idea is the same concept: The people who send these are, by no means, FORCED to do so. They do it to pleasure their significant other, and, as such, do not hurt themselves. Because no one is being forced into anything and no one is getting hurt, the precedent is in effect. It is illegal to punish ANYONE for "sexting".

Someone get me a lawyer and take this to the Supreme Court.

[LinkandKvel]

Someone get me a lawyer and take this to the Supreme Court.I would but unfortunately i dont know who the fuck you are.

[English Mobster]

Found where I heard about the Supreme Court thing It doesn't cite sources, but seems to be pretty trustworthy. Yes it does cite sources. Bottom right.
NSFW due to "examples" of when CP is legal.
[spoiler]
There are nudes, watch it.[spoiler]
ZOMG DONT LOOK IT CONTAINS NSFW THINGS.
ugh don't post porn here ~Timo
E: Says the man who used to have a porn gallery on the forums.

[n00b1n8R]

HE POSTED CP VAN HIM

[LinkandKvel]

I second this! VAN HIM

[Heathen]

I want the link >.>

[English Mobster]

*sigh*
http://i435.photobucket.com/albums/qq80/Mudkipz47/Legal_CP.jpg
Here's the photo, CP shopped out. Sorry 'bout that, Timo. I put it in spoilers hoping I wouldn't get an infraction for it. That worked well...

[Syuusuke]

Not just that, its any form of porn.

And thanks, I was looking for something like that. (the Equal rights thing)