Like I said, hard to know where to draw the line :)
When you say photos taken at a nudist resort - by whom? And for what purpose? If they are just private photos as per any holiday you go on, I don't see a problem with that (and they're quite strict about filtering out people who go to nudist resorts for the wrong reasons).
If someone's taking pics to eg illustrate an article for a newspaper, I don't think they should include any naked pics of the kids, even if their parents give permission.
The album cover is a tricky one - the younger the child the less it seems to be an issue, even though there are people who abuse babies. Perhaps it's so hard to contemplate that, that we (ie society) just don't see it as an issue in the same way as with eg 6 year olds.
I think it's also hard to judge because there's too much context around the album. Anyone saying it shouldn't have been published would be seen to be attacking the historical value of the album, its musical contents etc. It needs to be presented out of context to be judged just on the merits of the pic.
If it had been my child in that photo, I wouldn't have allowed it to be used for an album cover. But if they wanted the photo to be used for something similar when they grew up, that'd be their choice.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-10-08 05:37 am (UTC)When you say photos taken at a nudist resort - by whom? And for what purpose? If they are just private photos as per any holiday you go on, I don't see a problem with that (and they're quite strict about filtering out people who go to nudist resorts for the wrong reasons).
If someone's taking pics to eg illustrate an article for a newspaper, I don't think they should include any naked pics of the kids, even if their parents give permission.
The album cover is a tricky one - the younger the child the less it seems to be an issue, even though there are people who abuse babies. Perhaps it's so hard to contemplate that, that we (ie society) just don't see it as an issue in the same way as with eg 6 year olds.
I think it's also hard to judge because there's too much context around the album. Anyone saying it shouldn't have been published would be seen to be attacking the historical value of the album, its musical contents etc. It needs to be presented out of context to be judged just on the merits of the pic.
If it had been my child in that photo, I wouldn't have allowed it to be used for an album cover. But if they wanted the photo to be used for something similar when they grew up, that'd be their choice.