tickle_2k111
Registered User
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2002
- Messages
- 37
- Points
- 0
Hehe, managed to get a few nice shots of a girl sitting across the way from me in my uni management lecture :happy:
Last edited:
-
If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread -
The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us. -
>>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
Don't forget to include your username
Few Quickies In My Uni Lecture
- Thread starter tickle_2k111
- Start date
Kalamos
Level of Lemon Feather
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2003
- Messages
- 12,932
- Points
- 63
Nah, you're in good company. 😉Senshi said:
The prob is not shooting those pics. It's just a bit creepy, but creepiness ain't illegal yet.
The prob is sharing them over a public forum. That *could* lead to trouble a bit.
But I'm not the resident law-quoter; we could ask Val. She's usually knowledgeable about that.
🙂
Last edited:
Celtic_Emperor
3rd Level White Feather
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2002
- Messages
- 9,619
- Points
- 0
My opinion on this (and all other situations like this, when based in a fetish context) is to enjoy the moment if you want to and even commit it to memory if you wish, but taking pictures is not necessary. It sort of cheapens the moment in it's own way and it's no longer as special (and it is a bit creepy from an outside perspective in a peeping tom sort of way).
Sometimes, the most magical things in life are things only we alone were meant to see, either by fate, chance, or divine intervention.
True, what she doesn't know can't hurt her, but taking pictures of someone without their knowledge and sharing it with others on the internet, and particularly one known to often times be of a sexual nature, is something to think about on at least the base principle of it. She's not your model, and her body, or even just her feet were never ours to enjoy unless she will have consented to it and had full knowledge of why we wanted to see them.
She does not have that, therefore, she's been intruded upon.
I don't think its anything too severe, but then, you'd never know unless you asked her. She's the only one who has the right to judge whether or not it was. Even the administration here can make a ruling but only she has the right to question and truely decide the morality or permissability of it...which, conveniently for you/us, she cannot do for herself, which is part of the very reason this type of candid picture taking is problematic and intrusive (and will consequentally be allowed to slide unfortunately)- theres no defense or protection for the watched and observed and they are not being viewed impartially and are being caught unawares. Therefore, theres no case, as theres no opposition from anyone who has a right to request the pictures be removed (keyword being "right", not "priviledge").
I don't expect anything to come of this, but it does make for a good side-bar conversation on whats too far, just enough, or too little.
Sometimes, the most magical things in life are things only we alone were meant to see, either by fate, chance, or divine intervention.
True, what she doesn't know can't hurt her, but taking pictures of someone without their knowledge and sharing it with others on the internet, and particularly one known to often times be of a sexual nature, is something to think about on at least the base principle of it. She's not your model, and her body, or even just her feet were never ours to enjoy unless she will have consented to it and had full knowledge of why we wanted to see them.
She does not have that, therefore, she's been intruded upon.
I don't think its anything too severe, but then, you'd never know unless you asked her. She's the only one who has the right to judge whether or not it was. Even the administration here can make a ruling but only she has the right to question and truely decide the morality or permissability of it...which, conveniently for you/us, she cannot do for herself, which is part of the very reason this type of candid picture taking is problematic and intrusive (and will consequentally be allowed to slide unfortunately)- theres no defense or protection for the watched and observed and they are not being viewed impartially and are being caught unawares. Therefore, theres no case, as theres no opposition from anyone who has a right to request the pictures be removed (keyword being "right", not "priviledge").
I don't expect anything to come of this, but it does make for a good side-bar conversation on whats too far, just enough, or too little.
Last edited:
