“Children Photographed without Consent,” Cops Say. Uh…So?

Did anybody else hear about the Texas Supreme Court recently striking down the law that bans upskirt photography? Yes, that sounds awful, but the reason was because it was written so broadly as to ban ANYONE taking photos of ANY OTHER PERSON without their consent, if the photographer might also be thinking bad thoughts (or if they expected anyone who later viewed the photo to be thinking bad thoughts). That includes taking photos of sexy celebrities (so said the court). The case that struck the law down was a man taking photos of women and kids at a water park.

http://www.popehat.com/2014/09/21/texas-court-makes-upskirts-mandatory-outlaws-kittens-hates-your-mother/

He used “a powerful lens camera.” Those are far scarier than the regular kind.

“That’s my only request: if they’re good pics, I wouldn’t mind a copy.”

lol that actually happened to me… I was snapping candid pics of my girls playing with my “powerful” camera and a dad said would mind grabbing some of my kids? “I never bring camera to the park because moms look at me like I am perv unless I am right up on my kids and then pose cheesy fake poses. “

Slow news day. And what a wonderful community if the police have time to go on calls like this!

I’m trying to be charitable, okay? Because “The stupid, it burns!” is unkind.

My sons both swam competitively for a year round team. About two years ago, a guy was seen snapping photos of teenaged girls who were on the blocks getting ready to race. If you know swimming, you will know that swimmers are bent down in the starting position until the starter’s ‘beep’ goes off. He was taking pictures from behind the blocks. Someone noticed him doing this and watched him as he took pictures from this position and then followed him out to his car where he was uploading the photos onto a website. The photos were, as you can imagine, closeups of the swimmers’ backsides.

Photo taking from behind the blocks is now prohibited. There are always lots of parents taking pictures (every team does end of the season slide shows) but if you are acting strangely and trying to take pictures from behind, you will be stopped and questioned by the officials.

I’m only saying this because there are in fact, some creeps around who do this kind of thing. No one is suggesting that adults can’t take pictures at a meet, but there is no reason to take photos from that position.

@JulieC, were any children actually and truly harmed by someone taking photos of their butts? If so, how?

Creepy, possibly yes. Hurting anyone? I don’t see it.

It’s really weird to me how much this sort of thing comes up. Who cares if someone else has pictures of your kid? If you want to take pictures of my 2 year old I’m going to probably think you’re a little weird, but once you buzz off with those pictures what possible harm are you causing us?

I mean, my kid is ADORABLE, so of course you want pictures! Maybe you’re going to use them in some commercial enterprise. If so, we’re going to have some legal words about compensation. Hell, maybe I’ll sue you. But he’ll still sleep just as well and as safely as night, will be just as healthy as he was before you took the pictures.

There’s always someone who says, when this comes up, what if it’s some PERVERT and they look at pictures of your kid while TOUCHING THEMSELVES? Well, that’s gross, yes. But not only is it a billion times less likely than you make it out to be, but at the end of it there’s still no harm to my boy. The greatest violence going on here is to your own imagination, paranoiacs, and it’s self-inflicted.

How can you say no one is hurt by photographs of teenage girls in bathing suits while bending over being uploaded to the Internet? I’m going to go out in a limb and suggest that the website they were uploaded to was probably not the kind of site where you want pictures of your CHILDREN. Give me a freaking break. Child pornography and sex trafficking is a huge problem. I believe in free-range too, but this is out of control. I’m not going to say it’s ok for some creep to take pics of my kid in a bathing suit for whatever creepy and vulgar reason. I call bullshit on that.

I was born in the mid-70’s, and grew up as free-range as anyone in the 80’s. There was no “stranger-danger” talk, I walked to school by myself starting in kindergarten, and was a latch-key kid. And it was never a problem. When I was in high school, a guy started taking to me at my bus stop, and it was regular, good morning small talk and I didn’t think anything of it. It went on for a couple weeks, until he asked me where I lived and I told him my street because no biggie. Then he asked the street number and I got a little spider-sense and lied, and then I saw him on my street. Finally I told my dad who came with me to my bus stop one day, saw the guy and pushed him into the hood of our car with his hand around the guys throat and told him to stay away from his daughter. He got some information about the guy from someone he knew on the police force and turns out the guy was a criminal and sex offender. I never heard from that guy again, and actually the school changed my bus stop so didn’t have to walk the 0.9 miles to the bus stop anymore (can you imagine kids waking that far to their bus these days??). Anyway, long story short: that shit does happen. Did anything “bad” happen? Nope? Am I ok? Yep. But I’ll be fanned if that shit happens to my daughter, just as my dad was about it happening to his. I’m not a paranoid person, but I’m not blind either. Would my daughter be physically hurt if some jerk is pleasuring himself to a picture of her at a swim park? No. But f*ck you if you think I think that makes it ok.

I was an abduction risk as a child. I had a father that tried to take me a few times and was dangerous. He wasn’t allowed to know where I lived, played or went to school. If someone were taking a photo of me without my mother’s consent, they would have heard a few choice words from her. Should she have just locked me up instead, just in case my history ruined a photographer’s good shot? Now, if the same person asked to take photos and explained their plans it would have likely been fine. You can still respect someone’s privacy in public.

“…clarify the circumstances surrounding the photography in order to address public safety concerns.”

What is the concern? This isn’t Ebola. Pictures and images of all of us are everywhere. Don’t walk in public if you don’t want your image taken without your permission.

Instead, educate the public on how to interact with their community members.
Sample conversation:
“Nice camera!”
“What a powerful lense you have” (just kidding)
“Are you getting any good shots today?”
“Can you send some to me? Here’s my email address. I’d love to see your work.”

Hobby photographers are usually proud to share images and I can personally say I have some of the my all time favorite sports images from a grandfather of one of her teammates I met using the above conversation. He asked me what number my daughter was and gives me pictures of her all the time. Instead of calling the police, have an actual interaction with another human being. You might just make a friend.

Funny!

A few years ago, a photographer took a photo of my son at an outdoor festival he attended. The photographer printed out a nice 5×7, matted it, and not knowing how to get hold of us, dropped it off at the local elementary school. It’s a gorgeous photo, and I display it proudly.

Not once was I concerned, nor am I now, that he took a photo of my kid without my permission. In fact, I’m glad he did. Professional photography is expensive!

We clearly need to do something about the proliferation and easy availability or these high powered assault lens cameras.

If a man I did not know was taking my children’s pictures and talking to them, I would go up and find out what was going on. If he seemed fine and was polite and I did not get the creeper vibe, then whatever. If he was abrupt, rude, set off my creeper vibe, then we would leave or go elsewhere or I would make sure I was blocking his shots of my kids.

I would not call the cops though because he technically broke no law.
I don’t mind strangers talking to my kids as long as they are just being friendly. Same with picture taking. But an innocent person would not be bothered by the parent coming up and asking what is going on either.

And how many parents protesting these picture takers are the same parents that VOLUNTARILY post pictures of their kids on Facebook, Instagram, and their own public blogs??

And whatever happened to communication? Another poster suggested that the picture taker be courteous and ask first. But why can’t parents nicely ask why the man is taking pictures? They may find out its something totally innocent or that the mistakenly thought the camera was aimed at a child when it actually wasn’t. Why are we so afraid to just talk with one another before jumping the gun and calling the cops?

First, pictures of children in bathing suits is not child porn. Second, sure, I would not be happy to KNOW that some stranger is jacking off to pictures of my kid in a bathing suit, but how the heck am I ever going to know this? I certainly don’t spend time on child porn websites to find these pictures myself. With the exception of my cop/lawyer friends who discover it during an investigation, I would think twice about my relationship with any friends or family members who find pictures of my child child porn sites. So, while it is one of those things that would make us go “ick” if discovered, we will likely never discover it, nor will our children, so there is no actual harm in the situation.

Pictures are somewhat of a concern. Heads can be put with different bodies in child pornography. Pictures can be used for other undesirable purposes too. Usually other parents try to just get their own kids and established friends. Schools and churches ask permission. Most sporting events are limited to families of the kids, so if a kid is in the backround it isn’t so much of a big deal. It wasn’t until I was with a friend who had a security issue with a stalker that the obvious picture taking became a real issue. We still see each other, but not with the kids. Within the last year I have met 2 really nice people who have had serious stalking problems. I have also read about cameras being used to take pictures of debit/credit cards in lines at stores. Most people politely ask permission. The ones who don’t might really not be innocent. Sorry to take the opposing view.

To all of you that think permission should be sought…………look in the mirror. When you have been out and about, taking pics of your kids, and such, do you stop and get permission from the people in the background, or who might just end up in the shot? If you say yes, you are lying thru your teeth.

Suck it up, stop being paranoid, your kids are not that special.

And K, the whole photoshop heads on different bodies and the like……….like Donna said, unless you or people you know are frequenting child porn sites, who gives a rat’s ass.

Rose,
They are not assuming anything. The law says it is okay to take the photos. There is no assumption whatsover. Get over yourself.

@K2

But ultimately this is the same thing that this site is about in general. Stopping the perpetual cycle of “what if” fears and putting them into perspective. Ok so faces can be swapped. So what? And yes, some people might be doing bad things with their cameras, again so what? What is the actual likelihood of that? To what extent are we ready and willing to alter our behavior and increase our stress levels because the guy with the camera in the park MIGHT be someone who MIGHT be taking pictures that they or someone else MIGHT find titillating and they MIGHT upload those pictures to the internet wherein the people in those pictures MIGHT be identifiable and then other people that those people know or their future boss MIGHT find those same photos at some later time and they MIGHT use those photos to discriminate or otherwise harm the individual?

Point is, the only people who have ever just taken pics without permission were suspected criminals. I may not ever know what is done with those pics, but criminals have a way of doing things that can bite people in the butt later when they want a job that has some publicity to it like politics or entertainment. The chances of somebody finding the pic on the internet are high. Maybe it would be law enforcement that would be most likely to find it. It would then be awkward, embarrassing, time consuming, and costly to deal with. It doesn’t always just stay in another galaxy with no repercussions to the kid or family. I don’t think free range should mean that anyone can take pics of kids and do anything they want with them. There should be laws in place about using this type of pictures for illegal purposes. I don’t like the idea of the perv jacking off to kids in a bathing suit, any kids, expecially my own. In general, I;m not in favor of just letting the criminals roam freely throughout society, so that the whole society has to change. I think that there shouldn’t be a registry because there shouldn’t be a need for one. The worst offenders should be in jail for life and we shouldn’t trade our freedom for their rights and freedom. Unless close friends, I try really hard not to have other people’s kids in the background. It’s a small courteousy and most law-abiding people here do it too. A limited number of bad crimes are the reason we have lost free range, maybe forever. We should think twice about saying things that would support crime against children of any kind.

I have had multiple people ask to take my and my kids picture. I always said “Yes” because they seemed fine and were polite enough to ask.

So yes, if they asked permission I know I at least would be fine with it. They can even take the picture first and if I come up and ask “What’s going on?” and you explain why you wanted a picture, I would be fine with it.

But I don’t believe anyone on this planet is cool with a random stranger coming up and snapping tons of pics of you or your kids without giving you some type of explanation. If for no other reason just for curiosity’s sake to wonder why you were doing so.

@K2 “I don’t think free range should mean that anyone can take pics of kids and do anything they want with them.”

You seem to be missing the point. The free range aspect of this is people getting all worked up over something that is, in all probability, completely harmless and innocent, and then using that unjustified outrage to try to restrict the behavior of people who are doing nothing wrong. If a parent is getting a creepy vibe from someone taking photos in a public place, I see no problem with the parent politely asking the photographer about the photos or even asking the photographer not to photograph that parent’s children. But the default is – and should be – that if you’re in a public place, it’s perfectly ok for someone to take your picture (at least in the U.S.; I get the impression from your post that perhaps you live elsewhere).

I think people have forgotten the point of cracking down on child porn. The damage is not from some pervert getting off looking at perfectly innocent pictures of your child captured in public. As gross as that is, it harms no one, and to totally prevent people from taking pictures of children in public stops the 99.99% of the time those pictures have a legitimate non-perv use.

The point of stopping child porn is that real child porn involves a real child being forced to pose naked and in sexually suggestive ways. By stopping child porn, you are trying to save those real children who are being used and abused to produce those images.

The camera should be accepted as an extension of the human eye. It’s a way for people to capture the memories of what they have already seen. If it would be ridiculous for you to walk up to a stranger and demand that they un-see something that everyone present can see or get your permission before being allowed to look in that direction, then it would be just as ridiculous to demand that they not take a picture or that they get your permission first.

The example of the swimmers lined up and someone taking their butt shots… Frankly, people shouldn’t have been allowed back there to see it in the first place regardless of if they had a camera. The facilities should have blocked that area off as for coaches and swimmers only. If I was one of those girls, I would have been equally as uncomfortable with the idea of someone standing back there staring at my butt even if they didn’t take a pic.

No, the takeaway here is that some creep was taking picture of children in bathing suits. This has nothing to do with “monitoring” kids, but everything to do with those pictures possibly appearing on child pornography sites, but oh, right, you don’t mind sex offenders here.

Every time this topic is discussed, I’ve noticed that it’s pretty hard to get anyone to address a) the actual harm that comes to children when someone takes their picture and b) the constant presence of CCTV on streets, inside stores, inside elevators, in parking garages, in stairwells, in hallways…just to mention some. Your kids are having their photo taken all the time when they’re in public, and I’ve yet to hear anyone complain, much less suffer harm from it (unless of course they committed a crime).

Take all the photos you want of my kids if we are out in public.

I DON’T CARE.

I can tell you from experience…when you’re a competitive swimmer up on that block, you’re thinking about more important things than how your butt looks in a photograph. This is meaningless!!

Typically I know exactly what is done with any photos or video footage of my kids used in CCTV for security purposes. It is saved and then if they need to look at something for crime purposes someone watches it. That’s about it. It is not posted to the internet. It is not going to show up somewhere and embarrass my kid. So there is a difference.

So somehow we all know that every single person monitoring CCTV (and in stores, it’s not cops) is not a skeevy perv and don’t download or screenshot any images for their own personal use, but everyone with a camera at the park, pool, or athletic event IS a skeevy perv?

“The swim meet photographer was skeevy. Taking pictures of a child’s backside is just wrong. Probably not illegal, but still wrong. Doubly wrong if they’re bent over. If that was my kid, I’d probably have reacted badly.”

Then I’d suggest never having your child join a swim team. Our team photographer took many pictures from behind the blocks. In fact all of the actual racing pictures, as opposed to just candids of kids hanging out between their races, are from behind the blocks since in front of the blocks is a pool! Yes, there were a number of photos of kids bent over ready to go off the blocks taken from behind. Nobody was outraged. Nobody demanded that they be taken off of the public team Facebook page on which they were posted.

Now this photographer may have been skeevy as it appears from what was given that he had no connection to the team and was just taking pictures of girl’s butts and uploading them onto a random website.

The phrase “powerful lens camera”, in quotes no less, made me laugh really, really hard.

It’s been a long week.

The important thing that I see here is that the Texas Court actually decided that something as small and unimportant as the First Amendment (if you see photography as either speech or press) actually outweighs ‘the good of the children’, when it comes to something that can’t actually harm them.

The Texas court upheld part of the law and got rid of the portion that was overly broad and poorly written. Most other states have similar laws, but they were better written.

As for the original story, I just don’t see this as something to worry about for me and my kids when we are out in public. The other thing that I don’t understand is that the police were looking for assistance to clarify what happened and address public safety concerns. Presumably, this was a legal act. What business do the police have in investigating the photographer?

I am a bit shocked about the swim meet thing. Mostly, that parents were letting their kids wear suits that amounted to thongs if they thought those were inappropriate. On the other hand…a trip to the beach does seem to tell me that a lot of parents have no objections to minimal swim wear. So…it is up to the parents, I guess.

I do emphasize with the students. When on the high school track team the girls had really funky and tight knit polyester suits that were pretty much skin tight, and left no more to the imagination that a bathing suit. ALL the girls hated them but there wasn’t much we could do about it.

I’m with JKP and Beth here; kids (and adults) are already photographed every day in many ways, by increasingly common security cameras, and none of us know what’s happening to those images. So the horse has definitely left the barn.

Also, what is going on with us as a society when our minds turn instantly to the most lewd and tawdry explanation for what, thirty years ago, would have been seen as fairly innocent behavior? I suggest that those who spend their time obsessing over where those pictures might end up should elevate their minds. If you want to protect you kids, see to their nutrition, exercise and education, and stop worrying about threats that aren’t very threatening.

I’m completely fine with sex offenders jacking off to photos of children happily playing in the pool/on the beach/in the park if that keeps them (the sex offenders, not the photos) from actually touching real children.

@Jenny: Heh heh heh 🙂

“And, if pedophiles were really jonesing for pictures of very cute kids in bathing suits, our public Facebook page that anyone can join would have more than 185 members for a 200 kid swim team.”

I think this might have been pointed out above (I’m not sure), but there are probably thousands of images of kids in swimming suits already on the internet. That being the case, why do we assume that “pervs” need to take their own photos..thus why do we assume everyone taking photos is a “perv”?

The more photographic we get, the sillier we are. Imaging runs more rampant than imagination.
Everything’s a camera.

I remember photo geeks. They bought Nikons. They had darkrooms in the basement. They phtographed the world.
A camera was not a weapon, a picture was not a threat.
Often….their social skills were minimal. But their eyes were magic. They saw things the rest of us didn’t.
We never saw them as dark strangers. We fell into their art, instead. And it was art. While the rest of us merely took posed snapshots, they were recording the soul of us.

Now, I have my own Nikon. It mystifies me. All I take with it are snapshots. But then…I never was a photo geek.
But I’m still glad some people are. I still love the art.

My kids, including my preteen daughter, were photographed in their bathing suits at the local water park, and the photos were in the local newspaper. The young male photographer asked me their names after taking the photos, but no waivers were signed and no police were called. You can’t tell people before you take candid shots of them, and candid shots of kids are local newspaper bread and butter. My extended family obtained multiple copies to see my cute kids in the newspaper and no one was concerned that they were in their swimsuits, which they live in all summer long, being seen by thousands of people.

OTOH, I could envision circumstances where photographing kids at the water park while talking to them could be a cause for concern, specifically if they were asked to pose in questionable ways.

Lollipop lover: you speak the truth. I have seen some pretty horrid things at water parks. But my kids are dense and so busy having fun they don’t even notice stuff like that usually.

My husband and I tried to go to a water park on our honeymoon and left after an hour because we got tired of looking at people in bathing suits not flattering to them. gross.

I am not a perfect bikini body either but that is why I wear a one piece and try to cover myself up.

I find interesting the argument here between those who think that perverts looking at pictures of children causes no harm and those who think it does serious harm.

Certainly, when it comes to child pornography, the overwhelming majority of society believes that children are victimized when perverts look at them. The US Supreme Court has explicitly recognized that children whose pornographic pictures are viewed are victimized not only by the photographer but by each and every viewer of the photos (in Paroline v. United States). This holds true for adults as well. You will certainly find mentioned in the popular press, over and over, how the celebrities whose private nude photos were recently leaked are being constantly re-victimized by new viewers of the photos.

Now, granted, none of the photos discussed in this thread qualify as nude or pornographic, but certainly it is reasonable to by unhappy with someone photographic the girls bent over on starting blocks.

To those of you who adopt a sneering tone when suggesting that people shouldn’t care if perverts photograph their kids in public, please recognize that you are actually a very small minority and your sneering tone is unlikely to convince anyone. I suggest that as a holder of a minority opinion, you have better odds of success if you actually try to make a reasonable argument.

The difference between porn (child or adult) and what we are talking about is extremely pertinent. My privacy is invaded by someone passing around naked pictures of me because I don’t choose to present myself to the world naked. I get to choose who sees me naked and anyone else viewing me naked is a violation of my right to choose who gets to see me naked. That is what makes child porn a violation for every viewing. Since the children never consented to anyone viewing their body naked, each viewing of those pictures is an invasion of that child’s right to control who sees his or her body.

However, we are talking about pictures taken in public places by people who are actually viewing you at that moment. They aren’t using telephoto lenses and peering into your private moments. They are standing right there and capturing nothing more than how you choose to present yourself to the world. You have absolutely no right whatsoever to control who looks at you in a public place. Capturing you as you choose to present yourself to the world is not an invasion of your privacy.

As for the harm, for all I know all my friends have masturbated to the pictures that I have posted on Facebook or pictures they took of me or pictures that I sent them. Who knows what some people find erotic. Maybe I have a friend who secretly fantasizes about me and my perfectly mundane pictures get him off. Maybe he has swapped my head onto a naked body to get his jollies.

While my relationship with him would likely be harmed if I discovered this, I’m not personally harmed by it. First, the pictures are not of a provocative or private nature. Second, I will likely never even know this is occurring. I can’t read minds and my friend is not going to come up to me and say “I really enjoyed masturbating to the picture of you sledding last night.”

I’m even less harmed by a stranger doing this. The pictures themselves are not provocative and there is almost no chance that I will ever know what is done with those pictures. I simply don’t have time in my life to worry about this complete non-issue. Or to fret over what people do with non-private pictures of me behind my back.

My kiddo wears a modest bathing suit for a few reasons. 1. I don’t want her to grow up being body conscious, and worrying about “looking good in a bikini”. I want her to be able to move around and have fun without constantly tugging every little scrap of fabric back into place.
2. She’s whiter than a sheet of copy paper, and burns easily. Anyone who tries to take a picture of her for creepy reasons is going to be sorely disappointed at the lack of skin showing.

Problem solved!

I wish I knew how to post pics on here, she looks adorable – and very comfortable.

@Warren:

No, it’s not likely. It’s far more likely than pedophiles though. Also, 80% if employers google people before they even consider an interview so kind of ..restrivtive to say that you don’t want to work there and that’s assuming there’s enough jobs to be picky.

Now I am not saying that means people should freak out if someone is taking their picture, but I think they are within their rights to be concerned with someone taking their picture a lot and are within their rights to ask what you are going to do with said picture and ask you to delete it. If you are a considerate person, you would happily explain why you are taking their picture and delete it if it would not hurt you to do so.

Gah, Never mind, I’m too tired to make sense, I’ll try again in the morning.

So if there is a perverted or unflattering picture of you on the net somehow, with your name attached or even now facebook has technology that recognizes your face and will link to it, then the potential employer will see it and it can prevent you from being hired.”

Worst-first thinking. I find it hard to believe that any reputable employer wouldn’t recognize that people’s photos can appear on the internet without their knowledge. And if an employer needs facial recognition software to decide if I’m a worthy candidate for the job, I didn’t do a very good job on my resume nor my interview.

Can’t believe this is coming up again. Yes, it would be icky to actually know that some creep was jerking off to a picture of any of my kids. But seeing as I’m never going to know that, it’s neither here nor there.

And while it might make me in a ‘minority’, delurking, though I have no idea what ‘fact’ you are basing that on, I really wish that perverts were jerking off to innocent photos of my kids, rather than to photos of children who were actually harmed in the taking of those photos. Have said that before and will continue to say it….

And once again, you travel in certain parts of the world, not only will people not ask your permission before taking your child’s photo, at times they will physically grab said child and arrange him/her to their heart’s desire, in order to achieve whatever photo they had in mind. You just smile and tell the kid to suck it up – it’s about the only time ordinary kids like ours are likely to be treated as if they were famous :-).

Warren: I did not write the article. I assume the people that wrote the article did their research. My husband works in IT and yes, he said it is very very common for IT people especially to be googled when they are being hired. Not only will a negative thing on your google search get you not hired, but if they can’t find anything positive on you, they might pass you over. This is specifically for IT but they expect to have “heard of you” so to speak on the internet.

He had to create some pages with info about him for hiring purposes with some of his programs and coding.

It depends on the employer, but if you want high security clearance jobs, I imagine they can and probably do use facial recognition software. My father had a high security clearance job and it is no joke. They look at a lot of random stuff about you and your family before they will hire you.

It is a legitimate thing to worry about that kind of stuff being out there for employment. I don’t care about someone whacking off to my kid but I do worry about them being embarrassed and not hired over something on there.

“but if you want high security clearance jobs, I imagine they can and probably do use facial recognition software.”

No they don’t. I have a friend who works for the State Department, a couple others who are super high level military, another who worked with nuclear weapons. These agencies send people out to personally interview friends, family, former employers, co-workers and neighbors before they hire (these people are so serious that one sent someone to American Samoa – a trip that involves two days of flying and requires a minimum 4 night stay – to talk with a former employer in person) and not a single one uses facial recognition software to scour the internet.

And so what if they did use facial recognition software?

(A) Assuming that you are not a child prodigy, you are many years beyond a picture taken at a water park when you are a child and facial recognition software would not identify that.

(B) THESE ARE PICTURES TAKEN IN PUBLIC!!!!!

Donna,
Was thinking that these employers that do such in depth internet searches….if they have advanced facial recog., then they would easily be able to say connect a screen name in here, to the real person. Say like SOA, and then filter out all her comments, take them to a shrink, and not hire her. Maybe even alert the authorities and have her commited for a psyche evaluation………..

Sorry could not resist.

Bitch please, I don’t need a job and don’t plan on having one anytime soon. Jealous?

I mean if you want to really go that route then maybe they are helicopter parents and they will find your posts here too and not want to hire you because you are one of those crazy free range parents.

So under that reasoning no one should post anything on the internet.

The point is where is the benefit to me or my kids? We get zero benefit from someone else taking our photographs. There might be very minimal risk to it, but there is certainly no benefit. I have never benefited from a stranger taking photos of us without our permission.

But there might be a slight risk from it. So in that case, while I am not going to go call the cops or freak out about it, I don’t have to like it either and I might say something to them.

But the few times a stranger asked to take our photos, we happily obliged. Because they were polite and they asked and it was not a picture I minded being out in the world. If someone asked to take a picture when I felt it was not an opportune time, then I would decline.

Dolly, you know we’re no longer talking about asking permission to take photos, right? We’re talking about your assertion that employers scour the internet and use facial recognition software to determine if a potential employee ever had their photo taken in a swimming suit when they were 6.

And your response to being proven wrong is “Bitch”? Look in the mirror.

Not in the workforce, no intention of looking for work, and yet Dolly is an expert in hiring protocols and practices. You are so awesome.

LRH – you rock. I agree with your position. I don’t understand people who constantly over share on Facebook then turn around and get pissed that someone is taking pictures in public. My Privacy!! How dare you invade it! You are IN PUBLIC buddy, that’s actually the opposite of private!!

And why are these same people not actually concerned about the massive invasions of privacy from our governments? Surveillance is everywhere via CCTV in the name of security. Here in canada our reactions to the NSA/CSEC spying crap, for example, is all, Oh well, it’s ok because after all, we don’t do anything wrong and if it’ll help catch the bad guys…….. Why are Canadians so nice?? Not my stance, of course. But it doesn’t feel like freedom and I don’t think privacy has ever been at a lower level ever. Maybe that’s why people are trying to defend what little they feel they have left of privacy – like people who take photos in public.

@Warren: Ah, so my first instinct was right. I don’t read anything into that, my interest was strictly linguistic 🙂

No need to apologize, Beth. I was just pointing out we are no longer having a rational discussion here when it’s morphed from photos at water parks into a worst-first, employment-ending scandal because Facebook has face recognition.

WOW Maria, there is absolutely NO WAY to address any of your, um, polite and thoughtful statements. I’ll just say that you don’t have a single clue about what free-range parenting is about, and possibly you should educate yourself before damning everyone else.

Also. I’d hate to be the person that even glances in the direction of your kids at the water park. I think your response would be completely out of control.

@Maria – thanks for the laugh :-). My kids will be fascinated to learn that they were foul mouth little jerks who ran around grabbing, biting and pushing others. Must have done it in their sleep, lol!

Have fun raising perfect kids. The rest of us will settle for raising responsible, reasonably well-behaved ones. Who hopefully lack the paranoia you seem to consider a requirement in life. 🙂

@lollipoplover

OMG!!
__________________________________________________________

The second water park nonsense was in upstate New York. We were in the wave pool when my sister flagged me and told me to flee the water ASAP before the kids see it.
Then I saw it.
Bleaching my eyes will not undo what I saw.
The large, earthy mama in front of us had what looked like a large, dead badger growing in her lady garden and her loose shorts couldn’t contain the beast with the waves hitting her.
My daughter spotted it and started pointing in horror. We got out so fast and never went back in.

Water parks are very, very scary places.
_____________________________________________________________

HOWLING in laughter!

Can’t. stop. laughing.

And the keyboard didn’t appreciate the Dr Pepper I just spit up..

hineata – No need to go the illegal route. Xanax prescriptions are handed out like candy. Just go to your doctor and tell him/her that parenting is stressing you out. What you do with them from there ….

@Donna: I as well.

At the risk of ruining the humor, let me reiterate something that many people reading here seem not to understand:

Child porn is not perverts looking at pictures of children in swimsuits and getting aroused. Child porn is forcing children to perform sex acts on camera. Not “if you squint and turn your head sideways you might be able to interpret this as too much skin or too-tight clothing.” Literally, acts of sexual intercourse, sometimes with each other, generally with adults.

And I’d better stop here because I have too much stuff to do to have a sensory flashback today.

Just: stop with the “OMG somebody might go all pervy over my daughter’s tankini” nonsense, OK? Stop. You are ignorant. Be grateful for that.

It might be impolite to take someone’s picture without their consent. HOWEVER, what have the cops to do with that? In a free country, the cops’ job is to defend people from BODILY HARM and from THEFT OR DESTRUCTION OF THEIR PROPERTY. Taking a picture does NOT harm a person’s body or property, so no cops needed. There is NO crime here, just, possibly, some impoliteness.

And, again, you are throwing out straw men, delurking. There is a big difference between someone photographing you dressed in a way that you never intended to be for public consumption and someone photographing you exactly as you left the house that day. Continuing to insist that taking pictures of people naked or with private parts unwillingly exposed is the same as taking pictures of someone playing in a water park dressed exactly as they chose to present themselves to the world just negates any valid point that you may have had.

Delurking – If you don’t intend for bending over on the blocks to be for public consumption then don’t join a swim team. There are hundreds of people at swim meets, many of them milling around behind the blocks. The coaches, swimmers, time keepers, parents, spectators walking to the bathroom (bathrooms are directly behind the blocks at our pool). Yes, some of them are snapping photos.

If you can’t see the difference betwren someone taking a picture of you as your covering is ripped (or blown) away against your will and someone taking a picture of nothing more than an activity that you chose to engage in willingly then there is no point in continuing this discussion.

delurking –

I don’t actually see the two things as degrees of the same things. I see them as comparing two totally different things. People taking a picture of something you never intended to be seen by anyone is simply very different than someone photographing something that you thought was perfectly acceptable for anyone in the vicinity to see.

I said about 60 posts ago that I thought the photographer at the swim meet sounded sleezy from what was given. But, I really don’t see much of a difference between the parents of the 195 kids on my kid’s swim team who are total strangers to me having pictures of my daughter bent over and this stranger that I don’t know having a picture of my daughter bent over. Being a parent doesn’t make one impervious to being sleezy or a pedophile.

Frankly, I do think it is fairly unreasonable to worry about pictures that do nothing more than freeze what you voluntarily showed everyone in the viewing vicinity. Particularly when those pictures cover all the necessary body parts and are really nothing more than pictures of a kid participating in a swim meet.

A butt, is a butt, is a butt. How in the world would anyone be able to tell who you were from an upturned image of your butt (provided it didn’t have your name emblazoned across it)?

So who cares if someone takes a photo?

Gosh, half the time I can’t identify my kids front on in the pool….

On swimmers and photos:

All of my kids have been on our local swim team in the summer. Our swim team is HUGE, crowds of swimmers stand around in teeny-weenie suits, and folks with cameras EVERYWHERE. I’ve been a timer and had many an ass in my face for hours straight. It is not sexual, it is a SPORT.

I have a start photo of my youngest daughter at age 7, given to my by a STRANGER with a POWERFUL camera who is now a friend, of her doing a perfect racing dive off the block high above the competition on each side. It is an amazing photo that I would never, ever be able to capture. She lost the race (she swims like molasses…but what a start!) but some stranger (a parent of one of the older swimmers) took photos without my consent of what delurking calls “girls bent over in a pose commonly used in pornography and associated with sexual submission and exploitation of women.”
Nope. Not even close.