| Author |
 Topic  |
|
KM
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 02/12/2010 : 8:51:42 PM
|
Well, at least we have someone here who admits that this is a problem! But seriously, BareBill, thanks for writing. The thing is, at official nude beaches at least, there are already park rangers and such patrolling the beach, looking for "improper" behavior -- you know what I mean. It's not like it would require some kind of "camera task force." You just add that to the list of things they're looking for. And, by the way, if they could impose a fine on this kind of action, it would even be a source of revenue for them -- something they never like to pass up!
But putting that aside, if it's the PUBLICATION of the images that were to be banned, then you just go after the websites -- no one on the beach has to be involved. Or you make it clear that any site publishing such images can be sued by the victim. Just like sites that publish other kinds of illegal material. Shouldn't be very hard. By the way, as I understand it, in several European countries, it's illegal to publish pictures of people (even public figures) without their consent taken ANYWHERE (not just nude beaches!), unless they can demonstrate that it serves the public interest. How do they do it? Well, whatever it is, same way.
|
Edited by - KM on 02/12/2010 8:52:51 PM |
|
Country:
| Posts: 43 |
 |
|
|
FireProf
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/12/2010 : 10:18:07 PM
|
Okay.....ya know man....you're really spouting off about others and now it's time for someone to spout off about you.
NO ONE here said it wasn't a problem. One person said it wasn't an issue...his opinion. The rest of those, including me, have stated that this issue is going to continue with or without laws.
YOU are the one being unreasonable and unwilling to at least understand what anyone else is stating. You want to spout off your opinion and feel it's right and anyone else that disagrees is wrong..well...You are wrong and your just being arguementative.
Hope everyone else follows suit and checks outta this discussion cuz...I got better things to do than argue!
Cya!
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3175 |
|
|
|
KM
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/12/2010 : 10:38:40 PM
|
Oh, yes, I'm so sorry for standing up for people's rights, especially women and young people. And I'm so sorry for speaking out strongly against those who want to defend this type of thing. Or, at least, do nothing about it -- way to take a stand there. I guess if someone was defending racism or homophobia or whatever (or at least said that it's "not an issue"), and someone spoke out against it, you'd have a problem with that too. Instead, some of you are just defending a form of sexual harassment. Like that's SO much better.
You basically have a group that hasn't gone beyond "fringe" status in this country, and apparently has no interest in trying to figure out why. As for you, FireProf, since you never answered otherwise, I guess you would even have a problem with targeting the adult websites themselves. Hmmmm.
PS. Of course this is not directed at ALL naturists. There are some who are doing very good work and I recognize that.
PPS. Also, I'm sorry I brought up the subject of people being exploited on nude beaches. I know that's not as important to the cause as shaving habits or other popular topics. God forbid we discuss something serious once in a while.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 43 |
|
|
|
HomeNudist
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 12:44:40 AM
|
Whoa!
Dude.
Fireprof has 1200+ posts. You have like 7. Dig a buck outta your pocket and buy a clue. You will not win folks to your side with 7 preachy posts in 2 days.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 182 |
|
|
|
KM
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 12:53:03 AM
|
HomeNudist,
How about judging my arguments on their merits, not on how many posts I've made to nudist-resorts.org.
|
Edited by - KM on 02/13/2010 12:53:36 AM |
|
Country:
| Posts: 43 |
|
|
|
McNigel
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 04:41:08 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by KM
quote:
Originally posted by McNigel
I'm a fanatic, who's uncaring and out of touch with Europe?
Yes, yes, and yes. Unabashedly so.
Actually, McNigel, please believe that there are many others things I would LIKE to call you, but don't think that this forum is an appropriate place for that. Furthermore, there are several things that I SUSPECT you are, if you know what I mean, and I'll leave it at that.
That is appallingly rude and I request that you withdraw those statements.
For a start I live in Spain for a good portion of the year, so I think I'm well in touch with Europe.
Secondly I have no idea what you actually want be to answer.
It's just a personal opinion that I think nudists do themselves no favours by adopting a vigilante style approach to people taking photographs.
Maybe I'm just a bit of an old hippy liberal.
Actually the laws in most of Europe say that any photograph taken in a public place is legal. The line is drawn when the photographer is on public property, but the subject on private.
If I was photographed wearing a swimsuit on a public beach and that was used in a brochure, is that fair enough?
What on earth is so different if I'm naked?
|
Edited by - McNigel on 02/13/2010 09:13:13 AM |
|
Country: United Kingdom
| Posts: 132 |
|
|
|
KM
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 12:26:17 PM
|
The vigilante thing is actually one thing you and I agree on. Some people have proposed dealing with this by doing things like throwing cameras into oceans, and that I do NOT support. That's why I'm calling for a LEGAL solution. That is, a modification of the law so that it can be dealt within the law and by law enforcement.
McNigel, you've answered nothing I've asked you, and if you actually read my posts, you'll see that I asked you plenty of questions. Your central premise is that there's no difference between photographed nude and photographed with clothes on. Then I ask you, among many other questions, why it is that nudist resorts usually ban cameras while textile resorts don't, REGARDLESS of their ability to do so. Remember, just because they CAN ban cameras, doesn't mean that have to. Yet they do. Why? Also, I asked you if you at least make an exception for children, or if as long as they're in a public place, they too can be photographed without permission and put online. Yet you never answered, which concerns me.
It is my understanding that there are more restrictive laws in Europe regarding publishing photos of people. Possibly not taking the photos, but publishing them. One another naturist forum on which I wrote about this topic, someone from the Netherlands, who seemed to know what he was talking about, stated that you cannot publish photos of people without consent unless it serves the public interest. I have believe that there are tougher anti-paparazzi laws in several European counties as well, which apply to non-public figures as well. Here's a quote from Wikipedia (yeah, I know, not the most reliable source, but I've seen this in writing in other places as well).
"Due to the reputation of paparazzi as a nuisance, some states and countries (particularly within Europe) restrict their activities by passing laws and curfews, and by staging events in which paparazzi are specifically allowed to take photographs. In Norway, Germany and France, photographers need the permission of the people in their photographs in order for them to be released."
Also, by the way, you ask about being pictured on a public beach and it was used in a brochure. If an image is used in a brochure, then it's being used for commercial purposes, in which case the need for written permission is even greater. You should know that. Also, these pictures are not being used in brochures, so that question is really a moot point. And then you, once again, ask the "what on earth is so different if I'm naked" question. It's just incomprehensible to me that someone can not make that differentiation. If you REALLY can't see a difference, that just bolsters my comment about you being a "fanatic." Maybe "radical" is the better word. Lastly, one more thought. Maybe you can answer this one.
If there is no really difference between a nude beach and any other public place, including when it comes to photography, why is it that there is an entire industry built around taking pictures on nude beaches and putting them online? That is, you can say all you want that there is "no expectation of privacy" in ANY public place. But the reality is, when you go to most public places, let's say your local supermarket, what are the odds, realistically, that you're going to be photographed and having that image put online? Miniscule. Now if you go to a nude beach, especially if you're a young woman, what are the odds that you're going to be photographed and put online? They could easily be 50/50, if not greater. How many websites (that people pay to access, no less) do you see devoted to pictures of people in supermarkets? Or public city parks, for that matter? Or even textile beaches? What I'm getting at, of course, is that not only are nude beaches the places in which people have the most compelling reason NOT to be photographed and put online, and the places that are the most subject to abuse of photography, they're also the places in which the practice of taking pictures of strangers and putting them online is the most prevalent. Having your picture taken and put online is pretty much unique to the nude beach experience, relative to just about any other public place. I hope you see the problem with that.
The people who take these pictures obviously see a difference between the people being nude or clothed. Why can't you?
|
Edited by - KM on 02/13/2010 12:36:43 PM |
|
Country:
| Posts: 43 |
|
|
|
McNigel
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 1:21:48 PM
|
So you don't feel the need to withdraw the abuse. None the less I'll give a few concise answers.
I've no idea why clubs seem to ban cameras. I would have thought that the same etiquette that applies around any pool or on beaches, would be sufficient.
There are plenty of laws already in place that protect minors. Adults can make their own choices.
You are wrong. Photographs taken in a public place can be used for any purpose (including commercial), but the people featured must not be misrepresented.
The trade in stock photographs taken in public places is huge.
|
|
Country: United Kingdom
| Posts: 132 |
|
|
|
KM
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 2:00:27 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by McNigel
So you don't feel the need to withdraw the abuse.
Huh??? Withdrawing the abuse ("withdraw" isn't even the right word there, but I'll assume you mean it in the same sense as "curtail" or "prevent") is exactly what I'm fighting for. You're the one who doesn't seem to want to "withdraw" it.
quote:
Originally posted by McNigel
I've no idea why clubs seem to ban cameras.
That's the point. You don't get what just about everyone else gets. I've no idea how someone can have no idea why clubs seem to ban cameras. Really, this just proves that it's not that you're out of touch with Europe. You're out of touch with reality.
quote:
Originally posted by McNigel
There are plenty of laws already in place that protect minors. Adults can make their own choices.
You're like a politician. That doesn't answer the question.
quote:
Originally posted by McNigel
Photographs taken in a public place can be used for any purpose (including commercial)
I'm pretty sure you're wrong, but this is a naturist forum and I'm not going to argue with you over copyright law and such. Although, by representing people on what's NOT supposed to be an adult activity on an adult website (and they ARE adult websites), you COULD, in fact, look at that as a form of misrepresentation. It is certainly using naturism in a way for which it is not intended.
By the way, while not a response to any of your comments, I've looked at the profiles of the people responding to this thread. Here's what I've found:
McNigel: male, 55 years old
FireProf: male, no age, but says he has grandchildren
HomeNudist: male, 52 years old
Wow, look at all the middle-aged males bravely defending the right to take pictures of others on nude beaches, or at least now wanting to do anything to stop it. What heroism!
As if any of you are the target.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 43 |
|
|
|
HomeNudist
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 3:46:56 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by KM
Wow, look at all the middle-aged males bravely defending the right to take pictures of others on nude beaches, or at least now wanting to do anything to stop it. What heroism!
As if any of you are the target.
Now you have gone too far troll. I have NEVER taken pictures on a nude beach. And I HAVE NEVER DEFENDED THE RIGHT TO TAKE PICTURES ON A NUDE BEACH!
Was that clear enough? Do not EVER speak for me. You are not me. You do not represent me. Not now. Not EVER!
The ONLY thing I defended was a long time poster that has earned the right to say whatever he wants due to a long posting history. You have been here 3 or 4 days and the only thing you have done is rant on and browbeat all others into silence.
I smell the strong stench of troll.
If you don't like nude pictures, don't take 'em. If you don't like to look at nude pictures, don't look at 'em. If you see someone breaking the law, report it to the authorities. If you see something that you don't like that is legal, piss off.
|
Edited by - HomeNudist on 02/13/2010 9:18:46 PM |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 182 |
|
|
|
KM
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 6:14:59 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HomeNudist
The ONLY thing I defended was a long time poster that has earned the right to say whatever he wants due to a long posting history.
I absolutely NEVER said that anyone doesn't have the right to speak. All I did was counter their points, exactly as a lawyer does when arguing a case in court. Although, yes, I have been critical of some of my "opponents," and don't take any of it back. By any fair definition, taking pictures of strangers and submitting them to adult websites is perverted behavior. Naturism touts itself as being wholesome and anti-pervert. If you're going to defend perversion OR say that nothing should be done to stop this perversion from taking place, yes, I'm going to criticize that person for it. But in no way is that the same thing as saying that someone doesn't have the right to speak.
quote:
Originally posted by HomeNudist
I smell the strong stench of troll.
I don't know how you define a troll. Are you implying that I'm against naturism or something like that? If so, then I guess someone like Michael Moore is anti-America too. Which many people think he is, but I don't (not that I always agree with him either, but that's a different story). Or, on the other side of the aisle, since someone like Sean Hannity frequently criticizes Republicans for straying from certain principles, he must be anti-Republican. The point is, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH CALLING OUT PROBLEMS IN SOMETHING YOU CARE ABOUT. I do care about naturism, and hate seeing some of its people being treated this way, and, as I said in the beginning, hate seeing this deterrent to other people trying it. If that makes me a troll in your eyes, so be it.
quote:
Originally posted by HomeNudist
If you don't like nude pictures, don't take 'em. If you don't like to look at nude pictures, don't look at 'em.
Agree 100%. But what we're talking about here is people being in nude photos on the Internet WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. In other words, they're in nude photos against their will. If people want to model nude, more power to them. And what people want to look at or not look at is their choice too. But again, that's not the point here.
quote:
Originally posted by HomeNudist
And I HAVE NEVER DEFENDED THE RIGHT TO TAKE PICTURES ON A NUDE BEACH!
and
quote:
Originally posted by HomeNudist
If you see something that you don't like that is legal, piss off.
So which is it? First you say that you've never defended anyone's right to take pictures of others on a nude beach, but if someone wants to make what they do illegal, they should "piss off." So you're saying that people don't have the right to do it but it should be kept legal? That doesn't make any sense. And, by the way, so you never think the law should be changed? Then I guess you also think that there shouldn't be any new nude beaches in this country. Because remember, anytime a new nude beach opens up, it requires a change in the law. For another example, I guess you also think that if abusive practices take place on Wall Street that cost other people money, the law shouldn't be changed so that abusive LEGAL practices become illegal? For the record, I'm not saying you don't have the right to speak (in fact I encourage you to respond) -- I'm just challenging your logic. So try not to flip out, okay?
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 43 |
|
|
|
Admin
Forum Admin
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 8:27:00 PM
|
KM, you are doing more than challenging people's logic. Your are challenging the person.
If you find you have the word "you" used throughout your diatribes, there is a good reason to consider rewriting your comments. In this case, one is attacking the messenger, and not addressing the message.
You have some good points, but when it is framed in "you this" and "you that", it will not be well received.
Endless aggressive argument with diminishing respect to the other viewpoints is considered trollish behavior in this forum. We've had plenty of trolls here, and we've had to handle it with removal, or sometimes a warning is all that is needed.
Trolls are commonly defined as someone that enters a forum with the purpose of disrupting the camaraderie by choosing a controversial topic and beating it into the ground until a fire starts. Here we have a pretty good example of that. We don't allow destruction of camaraderie here, no matter how valid the poster's viewpoints might be. The end result is people get pissed off, as is evident here.
In the paragraph at the very bottom of each page are links to some of our posting rules, including descriptions of trollish behavior.
If you want to remain, lay off the "you" accusations, and present your issues with the intent of bringing people voluntarily into agreement with you. THAT makes a good argument.
A reminder to everyone: THINK TWICE before hitting submit. If you've said something that shouldn't be said, use the Edit button to correct it before it becomes part of the discussion.
Carry on.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1888 |
|
|
|
HomeNudist
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 10:36:37 PM
|
This will most likely be my last post on this topic.
After 3 days of rambling missives the best I can surmise is you wish to change the law to prevent the posting of nude photos without proof of signed consent. My best guess is that you directly or someone you know and care about has had this happen to them. Fine. However you did not think it through. How do you intend to do this?
- Change local law?
After all, the beaches are only possible if allowed by local law. It will never work. If you pass a law to ban cameras from Haulover, there will still be cameras at Wreck, or Blacks, or any other beach. It is impossible to pass identical local laws at every single nudist destination. It ain't gonna happen. Or do you want to post a sign at all beaches that says each nude picture will cost you a kick in the nuts? Might work. Then again it might only create a new definition for “The Sopranos”.
- Change Federal laws?
How? Ban cameras from all beaches? Or, just ban them from nudist destinations? By the way, is that just Nudist destinations or do we include topless destinations too? If Congress can't pass Obama's Healthcare agenda, why would they even consider a national nudist beach bill? Then what do we do about pictures from Spain, or Australia, or France, or any other Nation?
Or were you thinking of banning the pictures from Internet servers? That won't work either. All a web-master needs to do is post them to a server offshore. Then US law has no effect. And would the law focus on the server that has a web site that displays nude pictures, or the server that hosts the pictures themselves?
- That leaves the UN
Face it, you are more likely to get the UN to pass World Peace before they pass an International Nudity bill.
Fireprof was right when he said the best option is to be aware of your surroundings at all times. Identify the perverts and either turn them in or confront them with a group. Both will convince them to delete photos and leave.
Bottom line:
Yes, there is a problem. And No, society throughout the world has not found a solution. Not in 6000 years of recorded history. Nude photos go back to when cameras were invented. Before that there were nude drawings, paintings statues, mosaics, etc..
Now before you attack me again, think about it. Can you identify a solution that would work? You can't just discuss a problem. At some point you must pose a solution. Remember, it has to work throughout the world. Not just at your local beach. If the UN can't stop nuclear proliferation, they won't stop nudist pictures. Porn is a multi-billion dollar industry. There is way too much money made for it to be shut down. Human greed will not allow that to happen.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 182 |
|
|
|
Diger
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/13/2010 : 10:37:52 PM
|
Admin,
This guy has the same pattern that another trouble maker had. Do you remember Digital Cowboy? He would pick apart everyones post with qoutes line by line. Is there anyway to see if he's back under the KM name?
Diger
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1385 |
|
|
|
KM
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/14/2010 : 12:23:44 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Admin
KM, you are doing more than challenging people's logic. Your are challenging the person.
Yes and no. I don't know any of these people. But when someone says that taking pictures of people and posting them to porn sites is no big deal (or "not an issue," whatever), I'm sorry, but that does tell me something about the person. Just like if someone defended racism, yeah, I wouldn't just attack racism, I might convey criticism of the person. I don't see what's unusual about that. Really, nothing I've said here goes beyond what you would find in most political debates. Republicans have said much worse about Barack Obama and Democrats have said much worse about George W. Bush (or Sarah Palin, whoever) than anything I've said about anyone here, INCLUDING the questioning of people's motives. By the way, I guess it's okay for HomeNudist to call me an a**hole? That is far more severe language than I used on anyone. Although I can't find that word anymore, so maybe you had him delete it -- I don't know.
quote:
Originally posted by Admin
Trolls are commonly defined as someone that enters a forum with the purpose of disrupting the camaraderie by choosing a controversial topic and beating it into the ground until a fire starts.
Admin, believe me, I am SHOCKED (stunned, flabbergasted, floored, whatever) that this is causing so much controversy here. How do you know what my intent was? Remember, my original proposal was a law that would put "nude beach photography" in the category of "improper photography" such as PUBLIC restroom/locker room photography and upskirt photography. To quote myself, before any of this back-and-forth took place, "Such a law would not be at all broad (in fact it would be very narrow considering how few public places there are in which nudity is legal), and would protect all legitimate press rights, street photography/photojournalism, etc. Please explain to me what could possibly be controversial about that?" And I had no reason to think that PROTECTING naturists from abusive photography WOULD be so controversial on a naturist forum. It started off well, as expected, with youbetcha saying "Well I agree with your assessment of the problem and your suggested solution." Then things took a strange turn with FireProf and especially McNigel and his "it's not an issue" attitude. Yes, I hate apologists. Well, not that I hate them as people, but I hate their apologism.
quote:
Originally posted by Admin
We don't allow destruction of camaraderie here, no matter how valid the poster's viewpoints might be.
So is your goal to maintain camaraderie on this board, or is your goal to further the cause of naturism? Because they may not always go together. Do you really think that this issue isn't a deterrent to bringing naturism to wider audience, especially with the demographics it struggles with this most? Do you not think that removing a deterrent would have a beneficial effect?
By the way, if you want to avoid controversial topics, I don't know why you administer a naturist forum in the first place. Naturism is, almost by definition, controversial.
quote:
Originally posted by HomeNudist
After 3 days of rambling missives the best I can surmise is you wish to change the law to prevent the posting of nude photos without proof of signed consent.
Yes, that's EXACTLY what I said in my first post. There shouldn't be a need to surmise it. Again, is taking pictures of people in public restrooms (also public places in which nudity is legal) legal? No. Just basically broaden that law to include ALL public places in which nudity is legal. As for the healthcare comparison, nationalized healthcare is controversial and involves billions of dollars. Stopping perverts is not. Anytime something like this comes up (such as banning upskirt photography, for example), it usually passes almost unanimously, with complete bipartisan support. America doesn't like perverts. Therefore, this should be much easier to pass than healthcare. Someone just has to take the initiative. By the way, if this problem is so unpreventable, how does Burning Man do it? In no way am I a Burning Man person, but I do respect them for managing to forbid these sites from publishing images taken of their participants.
quote:
Originally posted by Diger
Do you remember Digital Cowboy? He would pick apart everyones post with qoutes line by line. Is there anyway to see if he's back under the KM name?
From looking at some old posts here on similar topics, "Digital Cowboy" was very pro-camera. So that would be quite ironic. No, Diger, I am not Digital Cowboy. As for picking apart quotes line by line, I don't respond to any comment unless it gives me something to work with. Believe me, it would cost me less time if there was less to respond to. But if someone gives me a low hanging curve ball, I'm going to try to hit it.
|
Edited by - KM on 02/14/2010 12:43:15 AM |
|
Country:
| Posts: 43 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
|
|
|
Photography Abuse on Nude Beaches
