Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"She posted a video of herself masturbating in the grounds of a city centre church on xhamster. She posed naked in various public city centre locations in broad daylight, in front of passing traffic. That's up to her, but is actually illegal. It is news, and they haven't really 'got hold of some cheeky photo's ' . Posting it as an invasion of privacy type thing is stretching it IMO. Unless you know of them getting holding of these pics and video in some underhand way? MrB" Read the opening post and first thought was that it's more than a 'few cheeky snaps' to make it newsworthy. If public exhibitionism is your thing then you have to be pretty stupid to not realisr that a lot of xociety won't approve | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, turn it around and if it was a bloke knocking one out in similar circumstances and anyone regardless of age or gender had gone there to have a moment at the grave of their loved one.. right or wrong?" Male or female makes no difference to me. Guess it's just my outlook, we were all born that way and intended to be garmentless. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It might be illegal but legality should not always be the measure of how wrong or right something is. I don't know anything other than what I have read, seen and Googled. " Surely if something is legal it is classed as right in terms of law Surely if something is illegal it is classed as wrong in terms of law Seems a pretty simple measurement to me | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, turn it around and if it was a bloke knocking one out in similar circumstances and anyone regardless of age or gender had gone there to have a moment at the grave of their loved one.. right or wrong? Male or female makes no difference to me. Guess it's just my outlook, we were all born that way and intended to be garmentless. " agree but there are places for nudity a plenty, most people will see a churchyard as not one.. and she wasn't just embracing nature and the sun? on her body.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, turn it around and if it was a bloke knocking one out in similar circumstances and anyone regardless of age or gender had gone there to have a moment at the grave of their loved one.. right or wrong? Male or female makes no difference to me. Guess it's just my outlook, we were all born that way and intended to be garmentless. " And banging one out in a churchyard? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It might be illegal but legality should not always be the measure of how wrong or right something is. I don't know anything other than what I have read, seen and Googled. Surely if something is legal it is classed as right in terms of law Surely if something is illegal it is classed as wrong in terms of law Seems a pretty simple measurement to me" And who is the person to decide what is legal and illegal? Just because someone once decided that's it. Doesn't sit right with me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It might be illegal but legality should not always be the measure of how wrong or right something is. I don't know anything other than what I have read, seen and Googled. " But you must have read it on the sheffield star website or in the actual paper? That's all I've done, after you posted. The legality is a side issue. Has she been 'outed' and privacy invaded as your first post implies, or has she published all this as part of her kick? Looks very much like the latter. In which case the paper is justified in reporting it. If they've dug it out by subversive means, then it's another matter. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It might be illegal but legality should not always be the measure of how wrong or right something is. I don't know anything other than what I have read, seen and Googled. Surely if something is legal it is classed as right in terms of law Surely if something is illegal it is classed as wrong in terms of law Seems a pretty simple measurement to me And who is the person to decide what is legal and illegal? Just because someone once decided that's it. Doesn't sit right with me. " its not a perfect system but its preferable to us all descending into anarchy.. maybe.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It might be illegal but legality should not always be the measure of how wrong or right something is. I don't know anything other than what I have read, seen and Googled. Surely if something is legal it is classed as right in terms of law Surely if something is illegal it is classed as wrong in terms of law Seems a pretty simple measurement to me And who is the person to decide what is legal and illegal? Just because someone once decided that's it. Doesn't sit right with me. " I am not sure of the legality of her act. I am pretty sure that it was disrespectful and potentially hurtful to relatives of the deceased. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not sure of the legality of her act. I am pretty sure that it was disrespectful and potentially hurtful to relatives of the deceased." Exactly. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Mr ddc
Ps you don't honestly think we'd put up photos like ours without carefully checking the law in every country we've done it it do you?
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It might be illegal but legality should not always be the measure of how wrong or right something is. I don't know anything other than what I have read, seen and Googled. Surely if something is legal it is classed as right in terms of law Surely if something is illegal it is classed as wrong in terms of law Seems a pretty simple measurement to me And who is the person to decide what is legal and illegal? Just because someone once decided that's it. Doesn't sit right with me. " Who is the person to decide what is legal or illegal? That would be the government and the legal system. It's designed so that people don't just do what they want when they want to the detriment of society as a whole. Just because the law (or lack thereof) 'doesn't sit right with you' because you happen disagree doesn't make the law any less valid or grounded in fact. Beard | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It might be illegal but legality should not always be the measure of how wrong or right something is. I don't know anything other than what I have read, seen and Googled. Surely if something is legal it is classed as right in terms of law Surely if something is illegal it is classed as wrong in terms of law Seems a pretty simple measurement to me And who is the person to decide what is legal and illegal? Just because someone once decided that's it. Doesn't sit right with me. Who is the person to decide what is legal or illegal? That would be the government and the legal system. It's designed so that people don't just do what they want when they want to the detriment of society as a whole. Just because the law (or lack thereof) 'doesn't sit right with you' because you happen disagree doesn't make the law any less valid or grounded in fact. Beard" Okay, but now we've established that it wasn't illegal, what are your views on the story, or the OP's question? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Not even having sex in public is necessarily illegal. " Not even having sex (=not having sex) in public IS necessary (ily) (=to be required) illegal. Really? My Two cents, in this surveillance world, if your gonna do something like that in public expect a possibly of being caught. be respectful (grave shit is out of order). Also it is illegal as it is classed as indecent exposure. Personally, the pics look like she was posing for her Fab profile. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It might be illegal but legality should not always be the measure of how wrong or right something is. I don't know anything other than what I have read, seen and Googled. Surely if something is legal it is classed as right in terms of law Surely if something is illegal it is classed as wrong in terms of law Seems a pretty simple measurement to me" Slavery was legal. Sometimes the law is wrong | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Not even having sex in public is necessarily illegal. Not even having sex (=not having sex) in public IS necessary (ily) (=to be required) illegal. Really? My Two cents, in this surveillance world, if your gonna do something like that in public expect a possibly of being caught. be respectful (grave shit is out of order). Also it is illegal as it is classed as indecent exposure. " No it isn't (haven't we done this already? Section 66 SOA) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also it is illegal as it is classed as indecent exposure." Can you expand on this in relation to the law? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me the legality isn't really an issue one way or the other. The crux is, did the woman intend this to be public domain? If she posted it all on xhamster then she probably did. If the newspaper found it by some other means and publicised her against her intention, then she has been wronged." I'd have thought the issue was whether she intended to cause offence. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me the legality isn't really an issue one way or the other. The crux is, did the woman intend this to be public domain? If she posted it all on xhamster then she probably did. If the newspaper found it by some other means and publicised her against her intention, then she has been wronged." No publicity is bad publicity,as they say.. This Jamba character is probably surprised it has gone this well  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" No it isn't (haven't we done this already? Section 66 SOA)" Exposure contrary to section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 ...... The need to prove that the person exposed their genitals intending that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress means that a naturist whose intention is limited to going about his or her lawful business naked will not be guilty of this offence. Seen the pics? she hardly looks like a naturalist going about her lawful business. Law is always subject to interpretation... mine says guilty, your welcome to yours  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me the legality isn't really an issue one way or the other. The crux is, did the woman intend this to be public domain? If she posted it all on xhamster then she probably did. If the newspaper found it by some other means and publicised her against her intention, then she has been wronged. I'd have thought the issue was whether she intended to cause offence." I mean in relation to the OPs point saying 'would you like it if the local rag got hold of your pics and outed you' . This affects us all on here to some degree. I'm meaning has she been 'outed' or did she intend them to be public all along. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It might be illegal but legality should not always be the measure of how wrong or right something is. I don't know anything other than what I have read, seen and Googled. Surely if something is legal it is classed as right in terms of law Surely if something is illegal it is classed as wrong in terms of law Seems a pretty simple measurement to me And who is the person to decide what is legal and illegal? Just because someone once decided that's it. Doesn't sit right with me. Who is the person to decide what is legal or illegal? That would be the government and the legal system. It's designed so that people don't just do what they want when they want to the detriment of society as a whole. Just because the law (or lack thereof) 'doesn't sit right with you' because you happen disagree doesn't make the law any less valid or grounded in fact. Beard Okay, but now we've established that it wasn't illegal, what are your views on the story, or the OP's question? " I was reacting to the OPs question as to what makes things legal and who defines that in reference to what he likes. A touch of a tangent granted In terms of the actual thread I think that her choice of location was ill advised at best, legal or not, morally I think it was questionable | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me the legality isn't really an issue one way or the other. The crux is, did the woman intend this to be public domain? If she posted it all on xhamster then she probably did. If the newspaper found it by some other means and publicised her against her intention, then she has been wronged. I'd have thought the issue was whether she intended to cause offence. I mean in relation to the OPs point saying 'would you like it if the local rag got hold of your pics and outed you' . This affects us all on here to some degree. I'm meaning has she been 'outed' or did she intend them to be public all along. " I see what you mean. It was obviously filmed for porn but then you could argue anybody's photos on here can be taken and featured in the local rag in a similar way and then be followed by the same argument. I had a look at the film but she's a bit rough. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" No it isn't (haven't we done this already? Section 66 SOA) Exposure contrary to section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 ...... The need to prove that the person exposed their genitals intending that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress means that a naturist whose intention is limited to going about his or her lawful business naked will not be guilty of this offence. Seen the pics? she hardly looks like a naturalist going about her lawful business. Law is always subject to interpretation... mine says guilty, your welcome to yours "That's why you're not a lawyer...
If nobody saw her: No offence was committed.
If someone saw her but wasn't offended: no offence was committed.
If someone saw her, and was offended, but she could show she took reasonable steps to avoid being seen by someone: no offence was committed.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" No it isn't (haven't we done this already? Section 66 SOA) Exposure contrary to section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 ...... The need to prove that the person exposed their genitals intending that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress means that a naturist whose intention is limited to going about his or her lawful business naked will not be guilty of this offence. Seen the pics? she hardly looks like a naturalist going about her lawful business. Law is always subject to interpretation... mine says guilty, your welcome to yours "Yep. Doing what she did where she did it is an important factor in the application of the law. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP, turn it around and if it was a bloke knocking one out in similar circumstances and anyone regardless of age or gender had gone there to have a moment at the grave of their loved one.. right or wrong? Male or female makes no difference to me. Guess it's just my outlook, we were all born that way and intended to be garmentless. " So you'd be happy for a like go whack one off in a park that kids frequent....I mean, after all he is only doing what comes natural and succumbing to his Base urges wherever he sees fit, garmentless. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" In terms of the actual thread I think that her choice of location was ill advised at best, legal or not, morally I think it was questionable " Most papers would say swinging is immoral. Most religions say sex outside marriage is immoral. Heck, according to the Pope, any sex unless for the specific purpose of procreation is immoral. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I mean in relation to the OPs point saying 'would you like it if the local rag got hold of your pics and outed you' . This affects us all on here to some degree. I'm meaning has she been 'outed' or did she intend them to be public all along. I see what you mean. It was obviously filmed for porn but then you could argue anybody's photos on here can be taken and featured in the local rag in a similar way and then be followed by the same argument. " That's the key isn't it? Photo's on here, I would say are for viewing by Fab members only. The lady has put them on xhamster to be viewed by "anyone' . So has the paper 'outed' her or has she done it herself? If the paper published pictures they got from this site, I would argue very differently that they are invading peoples privacy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I mean in relation to the OPs point saying 'would you like it if the local rag got hold of your pics and outed you' . This affects us all on here to some degree. I'm meaning has she been 'outed' or did she intend them to be public all along. I see what you mean. It was obviously filmed for porn but then you could argue anybody's photos on here can be taken and featured in the local rag in a similar way and then be followed by the same argument. That's the key isn't it? Photo's on here, I would say are for viewing by Fab members only. The lady has put them on xhamster to be viewed by "anyone' . So has the paper 'outed' her or has she done it herself? If the paper published pictures they got from this site, I would argue very differently that they are invading peoples privacy." Anyone can view the pictures on here. And they do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I mean in relation to the OPs point saying 'would you like it if the local rag got hold of your pics and outed you' . This affects us all on here to some degree. I'm meaning has she been 'outed' or did she intend them to be public all along. I see what you mean. It was obviously filmed for porn but then you could argue anybody's photos on here can be taken and featured in the local rag in a similar way and then be followed by the same argument. That's the key isn't it? Photo's on here, I would say are for viewing by Fab members only. The lady has put them on xhamster to be viewed by "anyone' . So has the paper 'outed' her or has she done it herself? If the paper published pictures they got from this site, I would argue very differently that they are invading peoples privacy. Anyone can view the pictures on here. And they do." Only once signed up, or they are blurred out and there's no profile info. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I mean in relation to the OPs point saying 'would you like it if the local rag got hold of your pics and outed you' . This affects us all on here to some degree. I'm meaning has she been 'outed' or did she intend them to be public all along. I see what you mean. It was obviously filmed for porn but then you could argue anybody's photos on here can be taken and featured in the local rag in a similar way and then be followed by the same argument. That's the key isn't it? Photo's on here, I would say are for viewing by Fab members only. The lady has put them on xhamster to be viewed by "anyone' . So has the paper 'outed' her or has she done it herself? If the paper published pictures they got from this site, I would argue very differently that they are invading peoples privacy. Anyone can view the pictures on here. And they do." 
And Fab is in the Daily Star yet again...
with pics
"Ooh, dirty swingers, how immoral" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" In terms of the actual thread I think that her choice of location was ill advised at best, legal or not, morally I think it was questionable Most papers would say swinging is immoral. Most religions say sex outside marriage is immoral. Heck, according to the Pope, any sex unless for the specific purpose of procreation is immoral. " I'm not talking about what religion or tabloids say, I'm not so naive as to think that my morals are the same as everyone else's and I'm aware that there are more than just judicial laws at play in society. Playing devils advocate with my argument is an interesting approach 
Beard | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I'm not talking about what religion or tabloids say, I'm not so naive as to think that my morals are the same as everyone else's and I'm aware that there are more than just judicial laws at play in society. " True. Sadly there is "trial by media" 
"Playing devils advocate with my argument is an interesting approach
Beard" I find it makes people think, including myself
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I'm not talking about what religion or tabloids say, I'm not so naive as to think that my morals are the same as everyone else's and I'm aware that there are more than just judicial laws at play in society. True. Sadly there is "trial by media"
Playing devils advocate with my argument is an interesting approach
Beard
I find it makes people think, including myself
"Well played sir | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
