• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Girls gone wild IS NOT PORN

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Originally posted by: edro13
Originally posted by: flamingelephant
someone flashing is not porno... irregardless of the age. Porno is sex, those vidoes have no sex, just chicks flashing their breasts. You can go see breasts at R rated movies, those aint pornos...

Disirregardless.
Undisirregardless
Nonundisirregardless
 
A 16yo post-puberty girl flashing boobs is not child pornography, and I'm not a pedophile for looking at it and liking it.

 
Originally posted by: VictorLazlo
Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Originally posted by: edro13
Originally posted by: flamingelephant
someone flashing is not porno... irregardless of the age. Porno is sex, those vidoes have no sex, just chicks flashing their breasts. You can go see breasts at R rated movies, those aint pornos...

Disirregardless.
Undisirregardless
Nonundisirregardless

antinonundisirregardless
 
Originally posted by: schizoid
Originally posted by: VictorLazlo
Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Originally posted by: edro13
Originally posted by: flamingelephant
someone flashing is not porno... irregardless of the age. Porno is sex, those vidoes have no sex, just chicks flashing their breasts. You can go see breasts at R rated movies, those aint pornos...

Disirregardless.
Undisirregardless
Nonundisirregardless

antinonundisirregardless

Shouldn't someone be studying for a logic midterm? :Q
 
Originally posted by: schizoid
Originally posted by: VictorLazlo
Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Originally posted by: edro13
Originally posted by: flamingelephant someone flashing is not porno... irregardless of the age. Porno is sex, those vidoes have no sex, just chicks flashing their breasts. You can go see breasts at R rated movies, those aint pornos...
Disirregardless.
Undisirregardless
Nonundisirregardless
antinonundisirregardless

misantinonundisirregardless
 
Originally posted by: AkumaX
Originally posted by: schizoid
Originally posted by: VictorLazlo
Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Originally posted by: edro13
Originally posted by: flamingelephant someone flashing is not porno... irregardless of the age. Porno is sex, those vidoes have no sex, just chicks flashing their breasts. You can go see breasts at R rated movies, those aint pornos...
Disirregardless.
Undisirregardless
Nonundisirregardless
antinonundisirregardless

misantinonundisirregardless

contramisantinonundisirregardless
 
Originally posted by: edro13
Originally posted by: flamingelephant
someone flashing is not porno... irregardless of the age. Porno is sex, those vidoes have no sex, just chicks flashing their breasts. You can go see breasts at R rated movies, those aint pornos...

Disirregardless.

hahaha
 
Originally posted by: VictorLazlo
Originally posted by: AkumaX
Originally posted by: schizoid
Originally posted by: VictorLazlo
Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Originally posted by: edro13
Originally posted by: flamingelephant someone flashing is not porno... irregardless of the age. Porno is sex, those vidoes have no sex, just chicks flashing their breasts. You can go see breasts at R rated movies, those aint pornos...
Disirregardless.
Undisirregardless
Nonundisirregardless
antinonundisirregardless

misantinonundisirregardless

contramisantinonundisirregardless

haha
 
Originally posted by: VictorLazlo
contramisantinonundisirregardless
Can I get credit for "An"(without), as in Ancontramisantinonundisirregardless?
 
Meh, I saw Joe Francis and his employees get arrested when this all happened. We were driving down the strip while they were impounding his Ferrari and taking him away in cuffs. I've seen how they lure the girls to flash with beads and ply them with alcohol. It is very shady indeed, however, those girls are not 5 year olds, and they know how to walk away. A vasty majority of them seek GGW out so that they can flash. Either way, from what I remember of the case when it first happened these girls sought Joe Francis out, and then one told their parents. They were pressured to then go to the DA and press charges against him.

 
Originally posted by: Mill
Meh, I saw Joe Francis and his employees get arrested when this all happened. We were driving down the strip while they were impounding his Ferrari and taking him away in cuffs. I've seen how they lure the girls to flash with beads and ply them with alcohol. It is very shady indeed, however, those girls are not 5 year olds, and they know how to walk away. A vasty majority of them seek GGW out so that they can flash. Either way, from what I remember of the case when it first happened these girls sought Joe Francis out, and then one told their parents. They were pressured to then go to the DA and press charges against him.

Agreed. Playing them as the poor little innocent victims is absurd. If they are too drunk to remember what they did or know what they are doing who is at fault here? At what point do people become accountable for their actions? These girls know perfectly well what they are doing. GGW doesn't force any of them to do anything they aren't willing to do of their own volition.
 
what doesn't make sense is he ruled that it wasn't porn because there wasn't any touching. so by that rational, you could have a 12 year old spreading her you-know-what, but it wouldn't be porn. 😕

edit: i'd say GGW is porn, just very soft porn.
 
Originally posted by: thomsbrain
what doesn't make sense is he ruled that it wasn't porn because there wasn't any touching. so by that rational, you could have a 12 year old spreading her you-know-what, but it wouldn't be porn. 😕

edit: i'd say GGW is porn, just very soft porn.

Ahem... is not child pornography
 
doesn't this open the door for more underage girl pictures? i bet next time that judge is going to order that we all start speaking japanese.
 
Originally posted by: thomsbrain
what doesn't make sense is he ruled that it wasn't porn because there wasn't any touching. so by that rational, you could have a 12 year old spreading her you-know-what, but it wouldn't be porn. 😕

edit: i'd say GGW is porn, just very soft porn.

That would qualify as lascivious display of the gentials and does qualify as child pornography. The real issue is was the image intended for sexual gratification and did it meet the requirements of the statute. We don't want laws that make pictures of nude children illegal or nearly ever parent in the US is going to jail. There is a very fine line here and the current laws are a more than adequate balance, if anything they are to strict in that prosecuters presume that naked children are sexual objects rather than assuming they aren't.

A naked child is not a sexual object, those that see a naked child as a sexual object need counseling.
 
Originally posted by: Yzzim
Originally posted by: Sifl
I like to play them backwards so it looks like the girls have learned their lesson.

hahahahahahhahahhaha

I still dont get this 🙁

is it coz the girls will have their clothes on if the vid is played backwards??
 
Back
Top