I decided to go ahead and create a login name for myself with Network 54. I noticed that in creating that account we can attach a photo that will appear next to our login name whenever we post something in any of our blogs...like the little dancing angel drawing you have all over your site. Obviously, no one would be offended here at a naked photo attached to a login name simply because WE'RE ALL NUDISTS ANYWAY! However, my question is...would Network 54 be offended or would it violate the terms of service? I found these statements from them:
What is a "lascivious" image?
Many courts apply the so-called Dost test to determine if a given image is considered to be "lascivious" under the law. United States v. Dost, 636 F. Supp. 828, 832 (S.D. Cal. 1986), aff'd sub nom., United States v. Wiegand, 812 F.2d 1239, 1244 (9th Cir. 1987) set forth a six factor test:
Whether the genitals or pubic area are the focal point of the image;
Whether the setting of the image is sexually suggestive (i.e., a location generally associated with sexual activity, such as a bed);
Whether the subject is depicted in an unnatural pose or inappropriate attire considering her age;
Whether the subject is fully or partially clothed, or nude;
Whether the image suggests sexual coyness or willingness to engage in sexual activity; and
Whether the image is intended or designed to elicit a sexual response in the viewer.
This test requires a case-by-case analysis and is devoid of bright line rules.
How is the Dost Test applied in case law?
Nudity is not enough for a finding that an image is lascivious, but clothing does not mean a photo is in the clear: "a photograph of a naked girl might not be lascivious (depending on the balance of the remaining Dost factors), but a photograph of a girl in a highly sexual pose dressed in hose, garters, and a bra would certainly be found to be lascivious." United States v. Villard, 885 F.2d 117, 124 (3d Cir. 1989).
Setting is critical, but must be taken in context. For example, "while the setting of a bed, by itself, is some evidence of lasciviousness, it alone is not enough to support a finding of lasciviousness." Id. One should consider not just the bed, but how the person is posed on the bed (i.e. sleeping vs. posing seductively).
Context is also important in determining "whether the image is intended or designed to elicit a sexual response in the viewer."
So, in all that legal mish mash, it looks like nudity is O.K. as long as its not sexually oriented. The bottom line would be are you alright with any nude photos associated with login names? Whew. A lot of post for just a simple question, huh?
Thanks for asking. Your right, we are not offended by such things. Have you notice the pic of Christ on top? Nude.
I have posted pictures of myself and others here before. Most websites hosts have this rule, but unless someone complains or its quite obvious sexual intent is forced on others, they usually dont do anything. I have seen many nude sites on geocities, where I put my site, but mine don't have any pics other than the little "angels" you see.
However, when you log into network 54 and go to another network54 forum, your picture will show up there as well, not just here. So be careful about that. If you are spending more time on nw54 forums other than naturists, then you might want to reconsider the idea of a nude photo. But it will be you that will be deleted from the account, not the forums you post to.
However, if I do a lot of nude pictures myself, then it will be my account (including this forum) that will be deleted if they decided that enough is enough.
I don't usually encourage photos here, but I will allow them if permission is asked and I pre approve it.
In your case, you have been with us long enough I'm not worried about it and, of course, I have no control over your account. So if you got a pic you want to use in your profile, go for it, log in and post. I'm sure many here will be fine with it.
Boyd Allen "May the Lord protect our nudity from the sight of those who will not benefit, and may he allow us to be seen by those who will."
I see nothing to be gained by posting my own nude image as an avatar nor am I eager to
see representations of others where they are merely seated.
A nude photo doesn't prove that I am a naturist anymore than the lack of one proves that I am not.
I am inspired by photos of families having fun at a beach or naturist park. That is good marketing to those who want to learn about the life.
Those who are willing to contribute such photos are doing a great service to those who not yet convinced.
Some of us live in conservative communities, some have conservative relatives or work in public scrutiny. If that's your situation, don't feel like you are a hypocrite or are keeping some dark secret. There is a lot of personal information about all of us that should only be shared with those who can be trusted, not on Internet forums. You can take a firm stand for naturism without posting photos.
Better than looking at photos in some darkened room, the best approach is to go somewhere yourself. Take a friend skinnydipping, travel to a nude beach, visit a hot spring, or take your family to a naturist park.
Considering the fact that this is Terry, one who goes to resorts, and have supported the naturist lifestyle for a long time, I'm not really concerned about his approach.
I doubt he is trying to promote naturism just by posting a nude picture of himself and to be seen by oglers.
However, if he wants to show a pic of himself nude, in our naturist world, does it make any difference? We want to promote the casualness of nudity, the naturalness of it. Some may want to go and get a formal picture taken in a suit, while others like the "casual friday" look.
To us, that is our normal state, not fake. So he is showing us a picture of himself in his natural state. If he showed us a picture of himself clothed, it would be unnatural for him, therefore he would not be showing a true representation of himself or beliefs.
When I look at sites where the photos is "Standing at door nude", it is rather dry. I prefer shots where the person appears to be involved to the point of being unaware of the camera, not "posing", (even if they are posing).
I guess that means you won't want the photo I wanted to post since I'm standing and leaning against a tree and looking at the camera. I agree that action photos are always best, but it's not always possible. I did take a few photos of me doing housework, and even one of me in the shower and am using them as part of my screensaver along with photos of my daughters and grandkids (dressed).
I see that some people have an avatar, either a self-photo or something else. How do I post one? I have one of me nude (from the waist up). Would that be OK? Is there some signing in process I must go through in order to have an avatar?
