Back
to top
Why is Nirvana's Nevermind Album Photo not classified as child porn? Watch
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
And be banned? My mum asked this question and I'm now wondering about it too.
0
reply
Report
#2
Well, it is just a naked baby. I don't think it's quite defined as child porn. Like, I'm pretty sure I've seen naked kids in baths and sh** before, so maybe stuff like that isn't considered child porn since it is just a kid in a pool. Idk man
0
reply
Report
#3
(Original post by GeolPhysics)
And be banned? My mum asked this question and I'm now wondering about it too.
And be banned? My mum asked this question and I'm now wondering about it too.
Do you see paedos everywhere you go? Look, there's one over there in the bushes
0
reply
Report
#4
Because the law automatically assumes that people are 'OK' unless sufficient evidence comes forward.
A baby being filmed for an album by a major record company, being distributed in mainstream stores. A photoshoot that was probably on record at the time as being attended by trusted professionals, and probably the parents of the child themselves.
However, it could very much be said that it is a form of abuse to display your naked child to strangers for money.
So, on that basis, I don't like the use of a naked child for that album cover.
It is not up to others to say that it is allowed because it's a metaphor. The final line is that the baby cannot consent to their naked form being seen by many strangers. So their naked image should NOT be used.
A baby being filmed for an album by a major record company, being distributed in mainstream stores. A photoshoot that was probably on record at the time as being attended by trusted professionals, and probably the parents of the child themselves.
However, it could very much be said that it is a form of abuse to display your naked child to strangers for money.
So, on that basis, I don't like the use of a naked child for that album cover.
It is not up to others to say that it is allowed because it's a metaphor. The final line is that the baby cannot consent to their naked form being seen by many strangers. So their naked image should NOT be used.
0
reply
Report
#5
Nudity does not make something porn.
Would you think a Johnsons baby oil/no more tears shampoo or pampers commercial is porn?
There's nothing sexual about it.
Would you think a Johnsons baby oil/no more tears shampoo or pampers commercial is porn?
There's nothing sexual about it.
0
reply
Report
#6
for a minute thought you was talking about the TSR member when you mentioned NIRVANA 
0
reply
Report
#8
(Original post by GeolPhysics)
And be banned? My mum asked this question and I'm now wondering about it too.
And be banned? My mum asked this question and I'm now wondering about it too.
There's a nice story for mum!
Sorry but I've been a Nirvana fan for years and I had to get in on the action
0
reply
Report
#9
Nudity doesn't necessarily mean porn. It's not even that bad either. It's not at all sexual.
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
Today on TSR
-
It's the election tomorrow!Here's everything you need to know about voting
- Which A-level subjects do unis value most?
- Mixed signals
- Uber offers free trips to vote for the disabled
- Greens leader Sian Berry answered your questions!