I have had a lot of help from this site regarding my photography as a novice,I have now been brave enough to enter my daughters picture taken by me in a competition,for leecooper jeans,I would now like to ask if you could vote for her at their web page it is www.leecooper.com click competition click starof month Stacy is the girl wearing the white jacket I hope you all dont mind,and my thanks to anyone who votes for her . Catherine

-- catherine cochrane (catherine.jean@ic24.net), September 26, 1999

Answers

Cute kid.
She's got my vote!

Here's the pic...

Des

-- Dan Desjardins (dan.desjardins@avstarnews.com), September 26, 1999.

Please don't post links or pics of kiddy porn here please. Your daughter should keep her bra under her blouse next time.

Don't you think these competitions should be determined based on merit instead of who can get the most ballot stuffing friends to throw the competition for them? Not very fair to the others is it?

--Disgusted

-- Starsong (foo@bar.com), September 27, 1999.

STARSONG THIS WAS ONE OF MY FIRST PICTURES OF MY DAUGHTER ,as I am new to photography I got a lot of help from this site and also gained confidence,but that has suddenly went downhill,but as a photographer yourself!. I can not see how you can look at this, and see anything crude ,but you are right this was not the place to ask for the help for this subject,but I do object to the PORN!! part,and the link was kindly done for me by one of the others,I would not have been able to do this as I am also new to computers.I do hope you will still give out advice as before even after my mistake.

-- catherine (CATHERINE.JEAN@'IC24.NET), September 27, 1999.

Look out folks, here comes another guy with a soapbox: Me.

I'm going to say something here that may be politically incorrect or may be mildly upsetting to some people.[I hope so, I'm doing my level best... sometimes it's good to be upset enough that you shift the old mental transmission out of neutral for a sec or two] So to preface that possible reaction, GROW UP, find a hobby. Who elected you to be the "spokespersons of the majority", the "sponsors of moral turpitude", or (laughably) the "voices of reason"? [I wasn't "elected" either, but I don't pretend I have to have a right to express my opinions, I just do it. But, then I am careful about pointing out that what I say is but an opinion. As valued, or valueless, as the next one expressed. Caveat Emptor.]

Catherine, you were obviously proud of the results of a combination of two things that mean much to you in your life, your daughter and your growing enjoyment in photography.(Not meant to put both on the same plane) Not a crime, and wanting others to see your work is only natural. While I may agree that some people might have interpreted your appeal to other members of this forum as a call for "unfair" judgement in a contest, so what? Parents are notoriously unfair in matters concerning their offspring. I don't recall your placing a gun in anyone's ribs? To the rest, define fair to a guy who loses a high stakes pot in a poker game with 4 of a kind... Define fair to a five year old child who loses the ice cream off the top of that first cone of summer... Life is unfair, and I think it's obvious to most that Catherine's motivations were probably a bit more complex than "Vote for my Daughter!" If you object to this, tough, GROW UP! Spend some time objecting to other contests with greater importance that may seem "rigged" to you. Investigate political corruption, prevent child abuse, in short get a life.

Starsong/Benoit/Foo@bar... All I will say to you is this: If you can so easily confuse a picture of an obviously clothed young lady, taken by her mother -no less, and submitted to a contest on a public website, with pornography, then you really need more exposure to real life obscenity in order to form a fuller more balanced opinion. Probably, a lot more exposure. You remind me of those "experts" who resorted to bundling and confusing artistic expression, sexual expression, and pornography with obscenity and saying that while they could not define it, THEY knew it when THEY saw it. Fine, so do I, if I'm offended by something I look away or in extreme cases attempt to protect others from it by warning them, but I generally find the idea of not having the right to decide for myself whether or not to continue looking far more obscene. If you want obscenity to grouse about, open "Time" or "Newsweek" or tune into the news and rant about how we obscenely allow others to deprive still other members of humanity of their lives on a daily basis all over the world. BTW, before some idiot(probably unfair to the idiots, sue me) draws the inevitable(only to the politically correct) conclusion that I'm somehow in favor of "kiddie porn" let me state that while Catherine's daughter appears to be a lovely young lady, I somehow doubt she's quite that young and in any case her picture is in no way pornographic.

BTW, I think posting images from other websites is most offensive to the people that are paying for the bandwidth used to display them. I wish people who bothered to undertake the enormously difficult(I'm being facetious in the extreme) task of learning HTML coding would use their knowledge to embed codes on their own sites rather than dropping code-snippets willy-nilly across the net like five year olds trying to impress the throng. Whoops, pet peave theatre...

All that said, another tall, obviously opinionated, blowhard steps down from his soap box, tucks it under his arm and vanishes once more into the maddening crowd... Sorry for rambling in your ears.

-- Gerald Payne (gmp@francorp.francomm.com), September 28, 1999.

I spoke only for myself, ok? You feel a need to insult me in the process of disagreeing with me, whatever? You dismiss my sincere feelings as petty and high horse, it's just not true.

It is totally offensive to me to see someone publically displaying pictures of their obviously UNDER 18 daughter dressed like a prostitute! OK if others don't mind fine I won't impose my view on anyone else but I WILL speak out anytime I see UNDERAGE GIRLS in their UNDERWEAR shoved in my face! You think it is ridiculous to call this porn? I think it is ridiculous to pretend this UNDERAGE pic has no sexual overtones. I don't feel any better about this pic because mom took it, maybe worse. I admit I probably wouldn't have been upset had the girl not looked so young, ok?

It's a very beautiful daughter, can't you show her beauty without her gazing into the camera taking her clothes off?

--upset

-- Starsong (foo@bar.com), September 28, 1999.

For the record my daughter is nearly 24 years old and also a mother herself.

-- Catherine (catherine.jean@ic24.net), September 28, 1999.

Starsong, I just want to know what planet you came from. Because here in our planet, "pornography" and "underage" mean differently than how you apparently understand them.

Anyway, the model is extremely beautiful and I, as a teenage girl myself, is not a bit offended in seeing her photo. And, Starsong, where have you been? That's not "underwear" she's using? That kind of a get-up is already an accepted part of fashion! If you know what I mean. If your offended by that kind of an attire, then don't go out on the streets, don't watch television, and just keep your eyes shut. Girls on the beach wear much less!!!!! Do you consider that pornography in your planet too? Because girls, even my age (i don't have the body for that kind of an attire and I wish I had so I can wear something like that), wear that stuff!

Anyway, I pity poor Catherine who got some flak from you.

One more thing, try to have an optometrist check your eyes. She doesn't look even remotely underaged.

Just because we're defending Catherine doesn't mean we have lose morals. I just don't see where all the fuss about porn and being underage comes from.

Cutey

"Come mothers and fathers, throughout the land. Don't criticize what you don't understand. -- Bob Dylan"

-- Cutey (piecutey@hotmail.com), September 28, 1999.

Benoit/Starsong/Foo@bar.com,

I question the sincerity of anyone who responds to a public forum with a pseudonymic email address suggestive of a military term indicating how messed up a situation is and only supplies a one word name, or occasionally only an alias, to identify themselves. If you don't know the conventional expression associated with the acronym FUBAR upon which your email address seems to be based, email me and I'll explain it for you in graphic detail, providing, of course, you can submit proof that you are in fact of an age I consider prepared to hear those words.

Perhaps you misunderstood my objection to your posting. What I objected to was your deciding that what you saw was underage pornography and condemning someone for displaying it without any reasonable proof. I fully agree that anything having to do with the production, distribution, or display of kiddie porn is despicable, beneath comtempt and probably the highest crime I can imagine one human being inflicting on another. Frankly, I found fault with your ability to judge a model's age(did you even look at the larger image on the Lee site?), with your judgement of what constitutes pornography, and most of all with the fact that while you claim sensitivity and to be an upright citizen who is disturbed by inappropriate expression, you have no compunctions about condemning a societally acceptable picture of a model without a shred of evidence to support your accusations.

In short, your actions represented the classic example of the knee-jerk reflexive type of lazy-thinking reactionary mind. A reasonable individual would not have jumped to the conclusion that a model is underage based only on highly questionable appearances and further would hopefully have had enough intelligence to realize how unlikely it would be that a mother would submit a "pornographic" image to a public contest and then appeal to others to vote for it. What I'm saying is that you would benefit from learning to allow your mind to come fully up to speed before you attempt to engage the mouth(or fingers) and subsequently stall your ability to experience life and consider it a bit before reacting to it so fervently. If I'm offending your "sensitivities" I apologize, but anyone claiming such sensitivity to criticism should be more circumspect regarding making unfounded accusations and the distress their lack of thought in doing so causes.

Catherine has stated that her daughter is over the age of consent, and further that she is also a mother. I would think in retrospect you will realize that a picture of a clothed woman above the age of consent, even if suggestive(?), hardly constitutes "Kiddie porn". In light of the above, and your claimed sensitivity I think you should consider the feelings of both Catherine and her daughter and do them the proper honor of apologizing for your unproven and unfounded accusations like the gentleman you purport to be.

In turn I offer my own apologies to you, in the fervent hope that you will consider what I've said rather than merely reacting to it.

-- Gerald Payne (gmp@francorp.francomm.com), September 28, 1999.

WAY TO GO GERALD !!! That was some profoundly intelligent speech !

-- Jeff (jeff_ngsh@hotmail.com), September 29, 1999.

I would like to address my response to the teenage girl who doesn't equate this kind of picture with loose morals. If you feel this way, you'll probably also be a mother at the young age of 24 and post this kind of picture to the internet. When your daughter grows up, perhaps you too will shamelessly broadcast lurid half dressed pictures of your daughter on the internet.

All I ask is that when you do, if you are half as cute as the girl in this picture, would you please make sure to post them here so we don't miss it? Man, she is hot! This is what digicams and the internet are for! We love it!

-- Starsong's Husband (foo@bar.com), September 29, 1999.

You Starsong people must be grandparents or something. Just ask yourselves one question: would I have cared if I were in my youth? Just because your bodies grow old doesn't mean your minds have to as well. By the way, I'm only 68 years young.

-- Dan (DM@jet.com), October 07, 1999.