Case 1.



"If you fantasise about spanking our bare bums, don't worry - that's normal"

..........................................................................................

Case 2.



"If you fantasise about spanking our bare bums, don't worry - that's not entirely normal but, in the 21st Century, it's acceptable to most people"

.........................................................................................

Case 3.



"If you fantasise about spanking our bare bums, please turn off your computer and seek therapy - RIGHT NOW!"

Case 4.
If you fantasise about spanking the delightful Lotta's bare bum, don't worry - that is absolutely perfectly normal.

Hi Lotta

Which of the girls is you?

I can guess- it is you taking the photo!

I am wondering now if my friends at school here looked as stimulating. I had better play dummy about that!


Klaus

This one is straight forward to me

If what you want to do is reminisce about your school-days , real or at least real to your partial memory then fine . That's community history for good or bad . If you want to talk about what happens in the real world in places like Africa the Far east and Southern states of America , on either side of the argument fine .

And if you fantasise about any of the above , provided B) below doesn't apply , also fine.

But if you intend to in any way be involved

A) with any person consenting or otherwise under 18 , that's paedophilia . It is also questionable if you write fictional 'modern day ' stories which you pass off as being real whether you also make the cut.( like a fake Rolex passed off as the real McCoy)

B) If in any case you are a teacher or person in the close proximity of young people under majority , you are in the wrong job, and running a huge risk.

C) Further you keep dodgy images anywhere on your computer then you may like to note

Sussex Police's Paedophile On-Line Investigation Team (POLIT) has made a significant contribution to safeguarding children and prosecuting child sex offenders across the county since it was launched two and a half years ago.

and it doesn't just happen in sunny Sussex!!!!!

I'm not sure this discussion should be necessary on a family site if the moderators police material effectively.

Searching for a larger image for the normalcy option I found it was indeed a small world. Had I posted a picture that was not at its largest size, however incrementally, A_L would have already shared this one. I often choose not to because the size posted above is far clearer. Why are they hiding their hands?

CLICK

As a side comment to Another_Lurker's remark about the Daily Mail's criticism of the Girls' Aloud pictures, I'd point out that alongside the article entitled


there was a link to another article in the paper entitled

prof.n:
"I'm not sure this discussion should be necessary on a family site if the moderators police material effectively."

....except that this is not a family site - it's for spankos.

Hi, J formally Jethro ,

With the greatest respect , I suggest you read the rubric of network 54 on access to its sites.As I read it, the NETWORK management agreement specifies that the material on OPEN sites must be of a family nature ( ie nothing of a restricted nature , requiring viewers to be over 18/21 (it varies in the States, from state to state )) . Were this not to be policed, given the registration of Network 54 as a US company, then some gentlemen from the state machine would be rather concerned, if Network management hadn't closed the site down first.

If I'm wrong in my interpretation perhaps our management would so indicate for the avoidance of doubt. Remember in some jurisdictions the issue is not what stands plainly on the page , but also the tests are purposive/ motive seeking as well.

Of course these boundaries are not clear cut , just as the next boundary ( between what an individual may post on a closed site , and what is acceptable and lawful as not contravening vice laws) , is even more fraught, particularly given the difficulties of the internet crossing jurisdictional boundaries.

I , therefore ,for one , are concerned that nothing should go on these pages that cannot be so defended

That's why Larry and Carl etc., have a very difficult job , to ensure compliance.When even bad language is seen as crossing the borders of 'open ' material , posters have to be careful and self critical.

...it's for spankos.

No, it is not.