paigew
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,906
- Reaction score
- 1,845
- Location
- Texas (Hill Country)
- Website
- www.paigewilks.com
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
Btw, our attitude in the US allowed me to make a few bucks with another ridiculous situation.
I had this album that someone offered me a good deal of money for. I started looking around wondering why. It turned out this particular version of the album was getting top dollars in the US because the cover had been banned there
Guess what? Everytime I was in Europe I bought every copies I could get my hands on and sold them back in the US.
This is the album:
333 images (+111): Virgin Killer (album cover), Scorpions, 1976 The...
As you will notice, you can't even see the girl's sex. Pretty poor shot for a pervert. But the cheapest copy I sold went for $300.
wow! that shot is pretty inappropriate. I wouldn't want my daughter posed that way, thats for sure. Looking at more of her photographs my opinion has changed a little. I do not think it is pornography, but yes, some photos are inappropriate.
I am all for nakedness and being natural and I wouldn't think twice if I saw a kid at a pool naked...heck, it would probably be my kid . But yes, posing them in suggestive ways seems to be 'pushing the limit'. A limit that perhaps shouldn't be pushed with children.
Is it any worse than putting small girls in evening dresses... and putting heavy makeup on them, and teaching them to walk down a stage in an adult manner? Many pervs would find this more provocative than just nudity!
Funny you should say this, as I was thinking about responding on how 'pageants' sexualize young girls far more than the photos do.