4 ms·

My parents had childhood pictures of me, developed through the local grocery store, completely naked aside from a few layers of mud and a huge grin on my face.

by logic 16y ago

My parents had childhood pictures of me, developed through the local grocery store, completely naked aside from a few layers of mud and a huge grin on my face. My teenage self might not have appreciated the opportunity to grandstand in such a manner quite as much. (I honestly thought I'd found and destroyed all of the copies. My parents were much sneakier than I gave them credit for.) My adult self thinks it's all rather funny. Almost every other child I grew up with had "nekkid pictures" of them, taken by their parents: bathing, having done something foolish or amusing, or just generally running around the house like kids do. Your post paints you as a reasonable person, and that actually terrifies me: a reasonable person shouldn't see an error in judgement here. These were parents doing what parents do, taking pictures of their kids doing what kids do. Proud parents, possibly thinking, "we'll embarrass the hell out of them when they're 16". (I may be projecting a bit of my father here.) We're shaping a society that's cynical and distrustful, and it starts with reasonable people associating behavior like this with phrases like "they should have known better".

mkramlich 16y ago
I didn't say we want to live in a world like this. I'm saying this is the world we live in. A reasonable, non-naive person would think twice about taking pictures of a kid naked, if they had any knowledge of the current state of society & laws in the US. This position should not terrify you. If there's no upside to it, but a pretty significant downside, then don't do it. Exercise willpower. To put it another way, it's like running across a highway at rush hour. Why do it? Upside is a brief thrill (if you survive). Downside is you die horribly. Conclusion: don't do it.
- Groxx 16y ago
  The position of the laws being used in this way should be terrifying to you, however. This was waiting in line at an ice cream station, it's been made into a highway at rush hour with automated turrets and trigger-happy assault-rifle-wielding idiots patrolling.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- caf 16y ago
  It is deeply terrifying that we should not just self-censor completely innocent acts, but that you think it should be second nature to any "reasonable, non-naive person". Avoiding completely normal behaviour because of a fear of constant surveillance and being turned in by those around you? This does not strike you as completely f*cked up?
  - mkramlich 16y ago
    What is "normal" is subjective and varies by person and society. Would you agree with that? Some people don't think it's normal to want to photograph children naked. Others do. Some may not think it's abnormal, but on the other hand think it is not wise. Clearly, you think it's okay to do. Or you just think it is not unwise, or should not be banned. Those are each distinct nuanced states of mind on the matter. That's fine. I don't see where all this "being terrified" angle is coming from actually. I guess I have a different understanding of the word terror and terrifying. Having an awareness of the state of one's society is a useful thing. To be aware of possibilities, and make choices accordingly I'd argue is a smart thing. It's not being fucked up, it's being wise and pragmatic. As was shown in the OA, in theory everybody is innocent until proven guilty. But in practice, especially regarding this particular issue, it's effectively the opposite. Clearly we want to change that. But the world is not like that at the moment. Should we try to make it better? Yes. Can we make it better? Possibly not. Should we do the wisest thing in the meantime? You'll probably have a happier life if you do, but it is up to you whether the tradeoff is worth it. From my perspective, there's almost no upside and therefore no tradeoff to consider. YMMV. But do not be "terrified" of my position. Be terrified of a giant flying shark in the night or something. But not something like this. :P
    - caf 16y ago
      I'll try and explain. "As was shown in the OA, in theory everybody is innocent until proven guilty. But in practice, especially regarding this particular issue, it's effectively the opposite." This state of affairs is merely scary. It is your blasé acceptance of this state of affairs that is terrifying.
thwarted 16y ago
We're shaping a society that's cynical and distrustful, and it starts with reasonable people associating behavior like this with phrases like "they should have known better". The problem is that the cynicism and distrustfulness is directed toward the wrong things. There should be more cynicism toward the busybodies and the wolf-criers. We need more innocent until proven guilty, which means not hassling people just to find something, anything to support a case against them.
hartror 16y ago
There are photos of my parents, sister and I when we were little on a beach in the middle of nowhere all in our Birthday suits. Living in a desert environment for the first half of my childhood meant my sibling and I viewed clothing as very much optional. Nudity isn't inherently sexual, culturally we have made it so.
sliverstorm 16y ago
I don't agree that they made zero mistakes. Not exactly that I would call it a 'mistake'- that implies they were hiding from something from the start- but why, why were there photos of children drinking beer? Especially considering their children are 3 and 8 yo? Even in cultures much much more loose about alcohol, most don't give it to children in the single-digit age range. Hell, even if there were no laws and regulations on the stuff, I'd be extremely uneasy giving a child that young alcohol, unless it was just a taste. At 135lbs, half a beer can make me woozy if I haven't eaten. Small children are 1/2 to 1/3 of my weight.
- ErrantX 16y ago
  but why, why were there photos of children drinking beer? According to the article there was not - it was one of the children carrying a broken beer bottle.
  - sliverstorm 16y ago
    Aha! That makes more sense. Yes, I confess, I did skim the middle/end a little bit.

by logic 16y ago

mkramlich 16y ago

I didn't say we want to live in a world like this. I'm saying this is the world we live in. A reasonable, non-naive person would think twice about taking pictures of a kid naked, if they had any knowledge of the current state of society & laws in the US. This position should not terrify you. If there's no upside to it, but a pretty significant downside, then don't do it. Exercise willpower. To put it another way, it's like running across a highway at rush hour. Why do it? Upside is a brief thrill (if you survive). Downside is you die horribly. Conclusion: don't do it.

Groxx 16y ago
The position of the laws being used in this way should be terrifying to you, however. This was waiting in line at an ice cream station, it's been made into a highway at rush hour with automated turrets and trigger-happy assault-rifle-wielding idiots patrolling.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
caf 16y ago
It is deeply terrifying that we should not just self-censor completely innocent acts, but that you think it should be second nature to any "reasonable, non-naive person". Avoiding completely normal behaviour because of a fear of constant surveillance and being turned in by those around you? This does not strike you as completely f*cked up?
- mkramlich 16y ago
  What is "normal" is subjective and varies by person and society. Would you agree with that? Some people don't think it's normal to want to photograph children naked. Others do. Some may not think it's abnormal, but on the other hand think it is not wise. Clearly, you think it's okay to do. Or you just think it is not unwise, or should not be banned. Those are each distinct nuanced states of mind on the matter. That's fine. I don't see where all this "being terrified" angle is coming from actually. I guess I have a different understanding of the word terror and terrifying. Having an awareness of the state of one's society is a useful thing. To be aware of possibilities, and make choices accordingly I'd argue is a smart thing. It's not being fucked up, it's being wise and pragmatic. As was shown in the OA, in theory everybody is innocent until proven guilty. But in practice, especially regarding this particular issue, it's effectively the opposite. Clearly we want to change that. But the world is not like that at the moment. Should we try to make it better? Yes. Can we make it better? Possibly not. Should we do the wisest thing in the meantime? You'll probably have a happier life if you do, but it is up to you whether the tradeoff is worth it. From my perspective, there's almost no upside and therefore no tradeoff to consider. YMMV. But do not be "terrified" of my position. Be terrified of a giant flying shark in the night or something. But not something like this. :P
  - caf 16y ago
    I'll try and explain. "As was shown in the OA, in theory everybody is innocent until proven guilty. But in practice, especially regarding this particular issue, it's effectively the opposite." This state of affairs is merely scary. It is your blasé acceptance of this state of affairs that is terrifying.

thwarted 16y ago

We're shaping a society that's cynical and distrustful, and it starts with reasonable people associating behavior like this with phrases like "they should have known better". The problem is that the cynicism and distrustfulness is directed toward the wrong things. There should be more cynicism toward the busybodies and the wolf-criers. We need more innocent until proven guilty, which means not hassling people just to find something, anything to support a case against them.

hartror 16y ago

There are photos of my parents, sister and I when we were little on a beach in the middle of nowhere all in our Birthday suits. Living in a desert environment for the first half of my childhood meant my sibling and I viewed clothing as very much optional. Nudity isn't inherently sexual, culturally we have made it so.

sliverstorm 16y ago

I don't agree that they made zero mistakes. Not exactly that I would call it a 'mistake'- that implies they were hiding from something from the start- but why, why were there photos of children drinking beer? Especially considering their children are 3 and 8 yo? Even in cultures much much more loose about alcohol, most don't give it to children in the single-digit age range. Hell, even if there were no laws and regulations on the stuff, I'd be extremely uneasy giving a child that young alcohol, unless it was just a taste. At 135lbs, half a beer can make me woozy if I haven't eaten. Small children are 1/2 to 1/3 of my weight.

ErrantX 16y ago
but why, why were there photos of children drinking beer? According to the article there was not - it was one of the children carrying a broken beer bottle.
- sliverstorm 16y ago
  Aha! That makes more sense. Yes, I confess, I did skim the middle/end a little bit.