A photo, taken by his parent, of a toddler in a bubble bath with his backside exposed is considered adorable and is accepted by society as innocent. Flip that toddler on his back, now with his groin area exposed, and it is considered disgraceful, unlawful, perverse, abhorrent, illegal and is classified as an act of detestable moral turpitude.
A nude selfie of a 17-year-old teenage boy, a day before his 18th birthday, is deemed as underage pornography and the recipient of his selfie is as risk of being charged with possession of child pornography. If that boy had waited 24-hours to take that same selfie and send it out, it would be classified as legal and acceptable by sociological standards.
A National Geographic monthly issue has an article about oppression in Africa that shows photos of nude families, locked in a prison camp, and clutching onto each other as armed guards patrol the area. The photos and article are considered news. An issue of a family nudist colony, with images of unclothed children, is considered child pornography and viewed as immoral and abusive.
So my question is this: why the contradiction? And who are the people who set the guidelines of what’s considered lewd and lascivious and what’s considered innocent?
Part 2 of the cute freckled family. I will include a download link to the images that exceeded max upload size at the very end. Hope you enjoy.
These are mostly pix of two brothers, there might be cousins and friends mixed in there, I honestly don’t remember. All I I know is that they are ridiculously cute and freckled, and that is what counts 🙂
Due to the amount of images I am going to split these into two posts. Please enjoy ! 🙂
Can you spot the fakers?
PilotCustom, here are some boys in white socks, but not all are without shoes I’m afraid.