Venting, venting, venting - DPChallenge Forums

06/10/2008 03:39:17 PM · #1

Oh this is priceless!

I was already confronted with something that totally repulsed me earlier tonight in regard to something very, very similar. For arts sake people are getting away with murder. Men are ogling teenage girls and see nothing wrong with it. Men twice almost three times their age. And society taking provocative pictures of teenage girls. Teenage girls taking them of themselves because this is what they think of themselves. Sex objects to be ogled and drooled over by sick disturbed men.

Anyone who partakes in such so called ART needs their heads examined. So when I came across this just now in a news update in my email I was even more disgusted than I was earlier, actually I am still disgusted by what I saw earlier I always will be. But this is the same thing just a different level of it. In fact the shot I saw earlier that was so called ART was in fact taking a photograph up a willing very young teenage girls skirt. While she coyly covered herself.

On this photograph there were comments of sexy by men more than old enough to be her father and on another of the same girl a man 3 times her age saying he wants her! Those that take these photos and those that drool over them should be as disgusted in themselves as I am in them! I for one teach my daughter she's brains before her beauty she's self respect before envy and she's dignified before comforming to what society says is sexy. In fact sexy is a mind that has the capacity and maturity to actually be involved in mutual healthy consentual adult sexual encounters.

Tuesday June 10, 11:14 AM

Teacher filmed up skirt of teenage girl

A 14-year-old girl looked a man in the eye as he filmed up her skirt in a suburban shopping mall, a Sydney court has heard.

Robert Ian Drummond, 41, a teacher at Cromer High School in Sydney's northern beaches, is charged with using a camera hidden in a plastic bag to film up the girl's skirt at Warringah Mall on May 1, 2007.

Drummond has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Police prosecutor Margaret Cunneen told Sydney's Downing Centre Local Court the girl complained to her mother and then to police after noticing the camera underneath her school skirt.

"The defendant was close by her at the checkout counter and she noticed that he placed an open shopping bag very close to her right foot and she perceived it was under the area covered by her school skirt," Ms Cunneen said.

"She complained to police that she had seen what looked like an upturned video camera in the bag and noticed a red light coming from the camera."

Ms Cunneen said the girl "looked him in the eye" before promptly leaving the store with her mother.

She said CCTV images of the man were published in the Manly Daily about 10 days later in a bid to seek public assistance in identifying him.

Drummond was arrested and charged on May 11, 2007.

A subsequent search of his Harbord home allegedly revealed indecent film of the 14-year-old girl and of another teenage girl believed to be 16 at the time the video was taken.

Drummond has been charged with an act of indecency, an aggravated act of indecency, and with making and possessing child pornography.

The hearing before magistrate Julie Huber continues.

06/10/2008 03:51:52 PM · #2

I might comment more later but as for getting away with murder; 1) this guy didn't commit murder, and 2) it sounds like he is going to jail for a very long time as he broke numerous laws.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

06/10/2008 03:58:54 PM · #3

Ok, ok it's not literally murder it was a figure of speech :P It's just vile to me that we walk around wondering why the majority of the female teenage population see themselves in this way. When adults who should know better are the ones taking the pics of them. The shot I saw was a shot of the photographer crouched on the ground taking the pic of the girl. Who's to blame there an immature teenager or the photographer and the media for portraying and exploiting young girls in this way?

Message edited by author 2008-06-10 15:59:46.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

06/10/2008 04:24:22 PM · #4

Originally posted by overclover:

Who's to blame there an immature teenager or the photographer and the media for portraying and exploiting young girls in this way?

How about just the creep who took the photos? I'm sure some men were ogling girls before cameras and TV were invented. I'm equally sure the majority of the female teenage population do not base their self-image on upskirt photos and that the media does not portray them that way. It sounds like you'd like to blame the media for the actions of this individual, but there might not be any connection whatsoever.

06/10/2008 04:33:29 PM · #5

Actually it was a female photogrpaher and a member of DPC that took the photo and members of DPC that made the comments on the photo in a site outside of DPC. I am trying very, very hard to be fair and just vent instead of naming names or posting the pic's in question. I just think it totally irresponsible of the female photographer and vile that men 3 times the age of the young girl would comment, ick ick ick. I am repulsed, I'm venting here about my own ethics and moral code in the rant section, ranting doesn't mean I want to argue, it means I want to vent. Or did I misunderstand the meaning of rant?

I said sexually explicit photos ... not in particular upskirt, upskirt was the photo I am refering to. The complaint is that teenagers under the age of consent!!!!! for gods sake should not be allowed by their parents the photographers or the media to be photogrpahed filmed or anything else in that manner.

Message edited by author 2008-06-10 16:37:23.

06/10/2008 04:36:15 PM · #6

*opens a can of worms*

Just wondering, why does the age of the man matter?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

06/10/2008 04:38:13 PM · #7

OMG this is repulsive why does the age of the man matter??? when a girl is a very young teen?

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

06/10/2008 04:39:41 PM · #8

I think what he might be getting at is that we "accept" it if it were a boy her age. Boys will be boys and that kind of thing.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

06/10/2008 04:40:01 PM · #9

Originally posted by overclover:

OMG this is repulsive why does the age of the man matter??? when a girl is a very young teen?

A question is repulsive? I'm just wondering, 20, 40, 60. Shouldn't the point be one is an adult and one is a minor? Why do you seem fixated on the fact they are three times their age?

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

06/10/2008 04:40:37 PM · #10

Originally posted by karmat:

I think what he might be getting at is that we "accept" it if it were a boy her age. Boys will be boys and that kind of thing.

or maybe not. :)

06/10/2008 04:43:34 PM · #11

I mean I know older guys are well, older and smell like mothballs before being aired out... but it almost sounds like it would be less offensive if the guy involved was only 20 instead of 60, shouldn't it either be ok, or not ok, regardless?

06/10/2008 04:46:36 PM · #12

Originally posted by overclover:

Anyone who partakes in such so called ART needs their heads examined. So when I came across this just now in a news update in my email I was even more disgusted than I was earlier, actually I am still disgusted by what I saw earlier I always will be. But this is the same thing just a different level of it.

Hm. It seems you're equating photographs of girls in a studio setting having subject matter you personally find distasteful with pictures surreptitiously taken up girls' skirts for prurient reasons. You might want to clarify.

06/10/2008 04:46:45 PM · #13

I'm fixated on it because it's repulsive and as a mother if a man made a comment to my daughter not that there would ever be such photos of her online but in life in any way like that he'd have no gonads left. I think personally ask any man with a young 13-14-15yo daughter if he thinks it fine to have photos like that of her in public display or even drooled over by men old enough to be her father he'd find it repulsive quick smart.

06/10/2008 04:47:56 PM · #14

The guy ogling the photo at 20 would be less offensive. The fact the photo was taken at all will always be offensive.

06/10/2008 04:50:00 PM · #15

No Louis I am equating it with the same vile distaste I am of older men thinking underage teenage gilrs are sexy. Same thing just one as it would appear here seems more socially acceptable.

Message edited by author 2008-06-10 16:50:29.

06/10/2008 04:56:03 PM · #16

And just to clarify I personally am not offended by nudity or sexually provactive pictures of ADULTS I am not a prude. I am however adamant that as a society there should be limits to what is acceptable. If you disagree with that so be it. My purpose isn't to change the mind of sick individuals who think it's ok in fact it just proves my point society is screwed up if they can argue with what is obviously a real and moral point!

06/10/2008 04:59:41 PM · #17

Riiight. Look out Bill Henson I guess.

06/10/2008 05:06:29 PM · #18

"Henson presents â��adolescents in their states of despair, intoxication and immature ribaldry" I do believe the word immature was used in his own description. Immature and underage and as such adults do have a responsibility to protect and try to shelter an increasingly troubled and mixed up youth. *oh soap box let me off* art is not depicting an underage child in a sexually explicit manner. Sorry argue all you like. I care not I've said my piece.

06/10/2008 05:13:21 PM · #19

Yes, it's disturbing when people refuse to see obscenity or prurient intent every place you see it.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

06/10/2008 05:18:27 PM · #20

How can you refuse to see obscenity in a photogrpaher taking a sexually provactive picture of a child? More importantly why would you want to argue it? or be snippity about it. Making smart alec comments to me about my levels of tolerance does make me wonder what kind of person you are in all honesty.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

06/10/2008 05:19:04 PM · #21

Originally posted by overclover:

Immature and underage and as such adults do have a responsibility to protect and try to shelter an increasingly troubled and mixed up youth.

Be careful what you wish for.

06/10/2008 05:19:44 PM · #22

Or is it simply the fact I'm a woman making a point?

06/10/2008 05:23:17 PM · #23

Why argue? Because you posted a thread in a public forum and appeared to be taking a position that is untenable, seemingly equating "upskirts" with bona fide photography that, conveniently for you, you refuse to point to examples of. Your style of speech sounds alarmist, your postings hysterical. To top it off, you attack the character of the only person talking to you in the ugliest way possible. Congratulations.

06/10/2008 05:25:26 PM · #24

Originally posted by overclover:

Or is it simply the fact I'm a woman making a point?

Oh yeah, that's got to be it. Wow, I didn't think my eyes could roll that far back into my head.