OT: Is this wrong and inappropriate?

[F Murtz]

Jason James wrote:

"F Murtz"<haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b6a87ab$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Jason James wrote:
"L.A.T."<tt92@ispdr.net.au> wrote in message
news:vFman.5461$pv.3837@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

"Jason James"<ass@ass.com> wrote in message
news:4b699ef9$0$89643$c30e37c6@pit-reader.telstra.net...

"F Murtz"<haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b699193@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Jason James wrote:
"F Murtz"<haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b693e91$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Jason James wrote:
"Nomen Nescio"<nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:2ae0a372debe25b149506966dc3c2abe@dizum.com...
http://pinkwatch.tumblr.com/post/318796911

Or is it art?

Well,..have a couple of dozen temperence society types descended
down
on
you
and tried to tear you a new one?

It's photo-shop porn,......did you have to be told that?

Jason


Where does photoshop come in, it is just dress ups.

Lets face it,...its porn, now I cant see those people portrayed,
wanting to
be part of or more so, easily identified in such a thing. Someone has
used
alteration software to modify the original shot.

Jason


No they have not,that picture is not new it has been around for ages
and
from what I remember the outfits were knitted just as they are for
what
ever point the participants were making at the time.

OK,....do you have the original link or website?

tks Jason
Someone famous or powerful once famously said "I can't define
pornography
but I know it when I se it."
Me too. That's not pornography, it's adolescent stupidity. No, perhaps I
over-dignify it. It might raise a snigger in the middle grades in
primary
school.
Who on earth had the time and inclination to produce it? From her stony
expression, I don't think Mum was all that keen.

Wonder why,...maybe it's porn wrapped in cotton-wool?

Jason


Are you sexually excited by this picture?

It's starting to look like you are, having broached the subject.

the definition of porn
pornography // n.
1 the explicit description or exhibition of sexual activity in
literature, films, etc., intended to stimulate erotic rather than
aesthetic or emotional feelings.
If you are aroused by this photo may be it is, but I doubt any one else
is.

Pig's tit,...when you can direct me to a publicaly available magaizine or
similar, that would accept this picture,..come back and talk to me.

Jason


Whatever has publication in a magazine have to with the definition of

pornography.
I also doubt a publicaly available magaizine would reject the photo for
any legal reason.they may reject it other reasons depending on their
target audience.
I would also bet that it has been published in numerous publications but
I have not researched it.

 

[kreed]

On Feb 4, 5:39 pm, "Ban" <bans...@web.de> wrote:

"Sylvia Else" <syl...@not.at.this.address> schrieb im Newsbeitragnews:00161bf2$0$2284$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...



On 4/02/2010 5:09 PM, Y? wrote:
"Jason James"<a...@ass.com>  wrote in message
news:4b699ef9$0$89643$c30e37c6@pit-reader.telstra.net...

"F Murtz"<hagg...@hotmail.com>  wrote in message
news:4b699193@dnews.tpgi.com.au...

No they have not,that picture is not new it has been around for ages
and
from what I remember the outfits were knitted just as they are for what
ever point the participants were making at the time.

OK,....do you have the original link or website?

tks Jason

This image has been floating around the web for years.
Sacha Baron-Cohen wore one on Rove when he was spruiking the Bruno movie.

http://www.stretcher.org/archives/r6_a/2004_02_11_r6_archive.php

It's not new, It's not altered and it's not porn.

Except possibly in the eyes of a Task Force Argos officer.

I've submitted it to the ACMA. Perhaps they'll get it classified.

Sylvia.

THX Syl,

And I hope they show up at the door of this pervert OP!
ciao Ban

If it is considered illegal porn (and "what actually is porn" is
totally up to the personal opinion of the "investigators"), they will
also show up on the door of you, and everyone else on here who has
looked at it - pedophile or not.

This sort of police activity will probably be stepped up, and greatly
publicised in order to help justify Conroy's net filter crap.

 

[Royston Vasey]

"Starbuck" <echobaseNOSPAMau@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:BZidnUT1vqiXEPfWnZ2dnUVZ_gCdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...

who cares its nothing to do with tv

Who mentioned anything about cross dressing?

 

[Epsilon]

Royston Vasey wrote:

"Starbuck" <echobaseNOSPAMau@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:BZidnUT1vqiXEPfWnZ2dnUVZ_gCdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
who cares its nothing to do with tv



Who mentioned anything about cross dressing?

Someone observed you, and it immediately sprang to mind.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 4/02/2010 5:13 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 4/02/2010 5:09 PM, Y? wrote:
"Jason James"<ass@ass.com> wrote in message
news:4b699ef9$0$89643$c30e37c6@pit-reader.telstra.net...

"F Murtz"<haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b699193@dnews.tpgi.com.au...


No they have not,that picture is not new it has been around for ages
and
from what I remember the outfits were knitted just as they are for what
ever point the participants were making at the time.

OK,....do you have the original link or website?

tks Jason

This image has been floating around the web for years.
Sacha Baron-Cohen wore one on Rove when he was spruiking the Bruno movie.

http://www.stretcher.org/archives/r6_a/2004_02_11_r6_archive.php

It's not new, It's not altered and it's not porn.

Except possibly in the eyes of a Task Force Argos officer.

I've submitted it to the ACMA. Perhaps they'll get it classified.

Sylvia.

They've now replied. They did get it classified, and it's been
classified M. Task Force Argos should take note.

Sylvia.