# Naked baby photos



## not_telling (Mar 31, 2008)

I recently took some very cute photos of 11 month DS having some "naked time" outside on a blanket with (clothed) DH. Lots of funny faces and cute squeezable tush shots. I sent these photos, along with a bunch of others, to DS's grandparents and aunt. My dad maintains a personal family website (the domain name is just "his last name".com) and he's been posting photos of DS since he was born. I just saw that he put up all the new photos of DS, including the ones where he's naked and his penis is showing. Technically, my dad's site is public...anyone could arrive there, though I don't know how you would unless you were googling the last name or something. I don't know who amongst his family and friends even visits the website. I'm thinking, though, that the photos that show DS' genitals should not be on there. Am I overreacting?


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

I agree with you so no, I do not think you are overreacting. I would ask him to remove the naked pictures of your son.


----------



## rebecca03 (May 27, 2008)

I also agree with you. I'm sure if you ask him and explain to him the sitch, he will understand and remove the photos.


----------



## RoseRedHoofbeats (Feb 27, 2008)

Definitely agree.

~Rose


----------



## Julia24 (Jun 28, 2004)

ITA as well.

It's a little safer as long as the captions on the photo don't say anything like naked baby or the like, or cute baby butt, that sort of thing....but still - anyone could come across those pictures through GOOGLE, yk? And those creepy people DO that sort of thing.


----------



## sunnymw (Feb 28, 2007)

I would just remove the penis ones, not the booty ones. Or if they are on photobucket, I've posted pics of DS1 nekkid where he had an ADORABLE face or something, and either cropped or put a black bar where it needed to go.

Then again I'm a bit more liberal with pic posting than some


----------



## Caneel (Jun 13, 2007)

I wouldn't be comfortable with naked pictures on the internet. Too many weirdos out there. If the same happened in my family, I would explain why I was uncomfortable and ask that they be removed.


----------



## vbactivist (Oct 4, 2006)

I will be the voice of dissent here. Of course if you are uncomfrtable Op, then by all means, ask him to remove them. But I really don't think you have anything to worry about. Waht exactly are you afraid will happen if someone sees a picture of yoru sons penis or butt?


----------



## octobermom (Aug 31, 2005)

If it makes you unconfortable I think its fine to ask they be removed.

Deanna


----------



## Julia24 (Jun 28, 2004)

vbactivist - well, I know a few years ago creepy website admins were right clicking and stealing photos such as those to put on nasty fetish sites - so you can only imagine WHAT was happening with said photos. jmho, though.


----------



## poppan (Mar 8, 2008)

Your dad's site won't come up on google unless he submitted it to google. Google has an "index" of websites that their search 'bots "crawl" over every day. Unless his site is in the google index or sites that are in the index are linking to his site, it is not being read by the search bots and therefore will not come up in search. So IMHO there is very little risk of a perv accidentally stumbling onto it, unless your dad's site is linked to by a lot of other sites. (Or unless he submitted it to search engines -- which I'm just making an assumption that he did not.)


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *vbactivist* 
I will be the voice of dissent here. Of course if you are uncomfrtable Op, then by all means, ask him to remove them. But I really don't think you have anything to worry about. Waht exactly are you afraid will happen if someone sees a picture of yoru sons penis or butt?

How would you feel if you saw that same picture on a child pornographer or some kind of fetishist's website? If that doesn't disturb or make you uncomfortable, then there's no reason to censor. Personally, the idea of someone getting off sexually from looking at pictures of my naked baby disturbs me enough to wish to prevent it.


----------



## Jewelie (Nov 18, 2005)

I can think of another reason not to have them out there which is that I have heard of DSS removing children who were photographed nude (not likely but I would not even want to be questioned). We're talking totally innocent sweet family photos. It's a reaction against said pornographers who are indeed out there and I think its crazy b/c there is nothing more sweet or innocent than a little naked baby but there you go. I would take them down. just my 2 cents.


----------



## emmalizz (Apr 14, 2009)

.


----------



## fruitfulmomma (Jun 8, 2002)

Quote:

A lot of people seem to think that because it's online, everyone can see it. Not so. If the site has not been submitted to search engines, it won't come up in search results.








All my websites come up in searches and I've never submitted them to search engines.

Yes, I would ask him to remove them, not only for the sake of not having pervs see them but also because of the CPS issue.


----------



## aniT (Jun 16, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *emmalizz* 







: A lot of people seem to think that because it's online, everyone can see it. Not so. If the site has not been submitted to search engines, it won't come up in search results.

This is absolutely not true. If you submit it to the search engines it comes up faster, but eventually their bots WILL find it and it WILL be listed. Mine is.. and I can tell you I never ever submitted it.


----------



## MusicianDad (Jun 24, 2008)

I would ask him to take the pictures off the website. I wouldn't be the least bit comfortable with naked pictures of my children on the web.


----------



## gsd1amommy (Apr 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jewelie* 
I can think of another reason not to have them out there which is that I have heard of DSS removing children who were photographed nude (not likely but I would not even want to be questioned). We're talking totally innocent sweet family photos. It's a reaction against said pornographers who are indeed out there and I think its crazy b/c there is nothing more sweet or innocent than a little naked baby but there you go. I would take them down. just my 2 cents.


There are no hard and fast rules about pictures of nude children. You see them as precious family photos. Prosecutor A sees them as cute little memories. Prosecutor B sees them as inappropriate, possible child pornography. Every one in your family connected to them, who took them, who posed with your son, who is displaying them may be arrested, prosecuted, labeled a sex-offender. NOT WORTH IT!


----------



## Keria (Sep 27, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pumpkinhead* 
How would you feel if you saw that same picture on a child pornographer or some kind of fetishist's website? If that doesn't disturb or make you uncomfortable, then there's no reason to censor. Personally, the idea of someone getting off sexually from looking at pictures of my naked baby disturbs me enough to wish to prevent it.

I would never find a picture of a child of mine on a child pornography or fetishists site since I don't frequent those sites.

Honestly I agree, if it bothers you OP ask him I'm sure he won't mind, but for ME it wouldn't be a problem, I think even the worst perverts are not into babies, anyways, they all have the weirdest turn ons, they could get more excited about a kid in a red sweater than a completely naked one.


----------



## KristaDJ (May 30, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TropicalGirl* 
I think even the worst perverts are not into babies, anyways, they all have the weirdest turn ons, they could get more excited about a kid in a red sweater than a completely naked one.

And that is why I have NO pictures of my children on the internet anywhere and I refuse to let anyone else put pictures of my children online.
You're not over reacting if it makes you uncomfortable.


----------



## vbactivist (Oct 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Julia24* 
vbactivist - well, I know a few years ago creepy website admins were right clicking and stealing photos such as those to put on nasty fetish sites - so you can only imagine WHAT was happening with said photos. jmho, though.

What was happening that was _harming those parents or children_?


----------



## vbactivist (Oct 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TropicalGirl* 
I would never find a picture of a child of mine on a child pornography or fetishists site since I don't frequent those sites.

Honestly I agree, if it bothers you OP ask him I'm sure he won't mind, but for ME it wouldn't be a problem, I think even the worst perverts are not into babies, anyways, they all have the weirdest turn ons, they could get more excited about a kid in a red sweater than a completely naked one.

this exactly. I am not saying the op should not ask for them to be removed. if she is uncomfortable - then remove them. I just dont' see what the big deal is with strangers seeing/using PICTURES of my children.


----------



## KristaDJ (May 30, 2009)

I personally can't stand the thought of some UAV w***king off to pictures of my kids. Actually the thought of it makes my blood boil. People have all different feelings about this, though. Many women pose nude for pornographic magazines and have no qualms about strange men (and women) using their pictures while *pleasuring* themselves, but that would make feel....really....really....dirty. It's just a personal preference and feeling about one's own body and the same applies to the bodies of our children.
Oh, and there are pervs into babies, there are pervs for everything.


----------



## katiesk (Nov 6, 2007)

i think that if you are uncomfortable with it, you should ask him to take them down. and i post pictures liberally i think, and i love naked baby pictures, but i don't think i would post them online.

i just realized that people doing online searches for child porn are linking to my blog...on a daily basis, which is creepy, i think, even if no physical harm is coming to my dd, it's gross and unnecessary.

while i don't necessarily have an issue with porn in general, i do think that child porn is unspeakably vile...and wrong. even if that is innocent naked baby pics being used as pornographic images. (obviously not wrong of a parent to take or have the innocent pics, but for someone to misuse them.) and also, for adult porn, i think that participants should be consenting - not have pornographic images of them used by others for whom they were not intended.


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TropicalGirl* 
I would never find a picture of a child of mine on a child pornography or fetishists site since I don't frequent those sites.

Honestly I agree, if it bothers you OP ask him I'm sure he won't mind, but for ME it wouldn't be a problem, I think even the worst perverts are not into babies, anyways, they all have the weirdest turn ons, they could get more excited about a kid in a red sweater than a completely naked one.


A lot of mothers here found pictures of their cloth diapered babies on a fetishist's website not so long ago. No one here frequented those types of sites. It came up during a search for something related to cloth diapers. It happens. It sucks and it makes many of us more careful about what we post.

There was a picture of a child using a breastpump from breastfeeding.com that somehow turned up on a child porn website that was come across somehow online a few years back. Sometimes the referral sites/links can be seen by site admins. None of us frequent these type of sites, but the web really isn't a big place.


----------



## Julia24 (Jun 28, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *vbactivist* 
What was happening that was _harming those parents or children_?

Eh....well, I don't know that it's harming them, I just don't like it. It grosses me out. And I loathe the idea of it being MY child that some creep is perpetuating his/her sickness with. That's basically it.


----------



## Snuzzmom (Feb 6, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *emmalizz* 







: A lot of people seem to think that because it's online, everyone can see it. Not so. If the site has not been submitted to search engines, it won't come up in search results.

I have no idea where you're getting that. It is simply not true. I have a website that I never submitted anywhere and it most assuredly comes up on all search engines. I have about 4 websites that I created for other people... ditto.


----------



## not_telling (Mar 31, 2008)

Thanks all, for your thoughtful replies. I ended up asking my dad to take them down, which he did. I do have one of the photos on my Facebook page, that only "Friends" are able to see. That's safe from pervs on the internet, right? (assuming none of my "Friends" are pervs...







)


----------



## churndash (Mar 25, 2009)

Your father could also password-protect the site, so only family members would be able to access it.

Where "outside" were the photos taken? Hopefully in your fenced, private backyard. So many phones have cameras these days.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

It wouldn't bother me at all, but the important thing is that it bothers YOU. I'm sure your father would not want to make you unhappy or uncomfortable, so tell him.


----------



## SunshineJ (Mar 26, 2008)

I'd have your dad remove the ones with the penis showing. The vast majority of people who see a cute tushy shot are going to realize it's a frickin cute baby pic and nothing else. When genitals are shown it can get very tricky however. Anyone who works in the computer industry is a mandated reported of child pornography. The possible repercussions I would be concerned about would include your dad's site being taken down and him dropped by his provider, mandated reporting to the police for displaying child porn, CPS intervention, etc. Can others find his site? Even if his site is passworded and locked down, it can still be _found_, however with password protection it cannot be accessed by most people (there are ways around it). So if it's just a regular site, then yes, it can be seen by others. I'd also like to point out that Google is far from being the only search engine out there.


----------



## 1littlebit (Jun 1, 2008)

i am glad everything worked out







i am sure he understood your concerns, he probably just didn't think of it (which is a good thing IMO) he was just showing off his sweet grandbaby.

and on that note, what a world we live in where a mama has to worry about perverts leering and her sweet baby and well meaning but misguided officials taking her children and arresting her family for taking an innocent picture.


----------



## Zenful (Jun 27, 2009)

It's just a penis...maybe if people stopped being so uptight about such things, there wouldn't be people with fetishes...every action has an equal and opposite reaction.


----------



## MusicianDad (Jun 24, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *vbactivist* 
What was happening that was _harming those parents or children_?

Can I just say, that even knowing what someone may be using those pictures for can be very emotionally upsetting for someone. You can't just forget the fact that a picture of you or someone close to use is being used without consent for people to "enjoy".

It is the reason that I don't post pictures of my children, my DH, or myself.


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Zenful* 
It's just a penis...maybe if people stopped being so uptight about such things, there wouldn't be people with fetishes...every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

So what would the answer be for pedophiles? Make sure abundant child pornography is readily available? What about those with fetishes associated with non-genital body parts like feet or fingers? I'm sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense.

Not wanting nude photos of one's child up for public viewing on the internet isn't uptight.


----------



## jeminijad (Mar 27, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pumpkinhead* 
So what would the answer be for pedophiles? Make sure abundant child pornography is readily available? What about those with fetishes associated with non-genital body parts like feet or fingers? I'm sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense.

Not wanting nude photos of one's child up for public viewing on the internet isn't uptight.

I agree.

Also, we don't live in a world where people, including the authorities, have "stopped being so uptight about these things." You have to play by the rules of the world you _do_ live in, or possibly deal with repercussions (perverts, prosecution, etc,) whether or not you agree.


----------



## Kushali (Sep 17, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SunshineJ* 
Anyone who works in the computer industry is a mandated reported of child pornography.

I've been in the computer industry for years and this is patently untrue. Many hosting companies, Internet Service Providers, etc have mandatory reporting policies. If there isn't a policy I'd hope that most people would report illegal activity (of all types) if they came across it. But there is not a legal requirement to report in the computer industry the way there is in other professions (doctors, teachers, etc).


----------



## aniT (Jun 16, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SunshineJ* 
Anyone who works in the computer industry is a mandated reported of child pornography.

Wow, that is news to me! We owned a computer repair shop for two years.. I never knew we were "mandated" to report stuff. But then again.. DH never looked at peoples files.. he just fixed their computers.


----------



## Kushali (Sep 17, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *not_telling* 
Thanks all, for your thoughtful replies. I ended up asking my dad to take them down, which he did. I do have one of the photos on my Facebook page, that only "Friends" are able to see. That's safe from pervs on the internet, right? (assuming none of my "Friends" are pervs...







)

You probably already know this but your friends can save any pictures on your FaceBook to their computer and print or distribute them as they see fit. I'm sure your friends are great people but if you want to have complete control of who sees the images (and what they they do with them) they shouldn't go on the internet or in email.

Sorry...


----------



## kimiij (Jun 18, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kushali* 
if you want to have complete control of who sees the images (and what they they do with them) they shouldn't go on the internet or in email.

ITA. I think it's just best practice to not send out picks (even to family) that you would not one some pervert happen. So many ways for those pics to get into someone else's hands...


----------



## pixiekisses (Oct 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MusicianDad* 
I would ask him to take the pictures off the website. I wouldn't be the least bit comfortable with naked pictures of my children on the web.

Indeed.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MusicianDad* 
Can I just say, that even knowing what someone may be using those pictures for can be very emotionally upsetting for someone. You can't just forget the fact that a picture of you or someone close to use is being used without consent for people to "enjoy".

It is the reason that I don't post pictures of my children, my DH, or myself.

And yes, indeed, again.

(There was a case here, where someone used a photo of a young girl in a, let's say, not so pleasant setting. She sued and they went to court, and it was indeed extremely uncomfortable and upsetting for her.)


----------



## momtolivy (Jun 29, 2005)

I wouldn't be comfortable with it at all - no harm asking him to take them down, right?


----------



## BaBaBa (Jun 30, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kushali* 
You probably already know this but your friends can save any pictures on your FaceBook to their computer and print or distribute them as they see fit. I'm sure your friends are great people but if you want to have complete control of who sees the images (and what they they do with them) they shouldn't go on the internet or in email.
.

Yeah, also facebook keeps EVERYTHING you have ever posted, even if you delete it and they _can / do_ share the info with their advertisers and even with the CIA. I don't know if that matters to you.


----------



## SunshineJ (Mar 26, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kushali* 
I've been in the computer industry for years and this is patently untrue. Many hosting companies, Internet Service Providers, etc have mandatory reporting policies. If there isn't a policy I'd hope that most people would report illegal activity (of all types) if they came across it. But there is not a legal requirement to report in the computer industry the way there is in other professions (doctors, teachers, etc).

I too have been in IT for over 15 years now. In 1998 a legislation was passed called the Protection of Children from Sexual Predators Act. Originally it simply required that ISP's notify the law if they knew of any sites displaying child pornography, creating an exception to the rule that ISP's could not volunteer information without it being requested by subpeona. However, in 1999 this was amended to read that anyone engaged in providing an electronics communication service to the public was required to report any knowledge of such an event. This is where it becomes tricky though - for example if you work for a company that has a portion of their information online and interactive, then you may technically qualify as a mandated reporter - and face a $50,000 fine for non-compliance (first offense). To my knowledge at this time there has been no concrete definition of what an "electronics communication service" is. While technically not every single person employed in the IT field would be considered a mandated reporter, it could be interpreted that many if not most are. In the meantime, some states are looking into passing a specific law requiring computer prof's to be mandated reporters as well (I don't know how many, I haven't kept up on specific state activity in this area). I'm really surprised people are unaware of this, it's been drilled into me at every position I've held since it was passed except for 1!

OP I'm glad he took the pictures down. I think if it makes you uncomfortable then that's reason enough!


----------



## aniT (Jun 16, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SunshineJ* 
I too have been in IT for over 15 years now. In 1998 a legislation was passed called the Protection of Children from Sexual Predators Act. Originally it simply required that ISP's notify the law if they knew of any sites displaying child pornography, creating an exception to the rule that ISP's could not volunteer information without it being requested by subpeona. However, in 1999 this was amended to read that anyone engaged in providing an electronics communication service to the public was required to report any knowledge of such an event. This is where it becomes tricky though - for example if you work for a company that has a portion of their information online and interactive, then you may technically qualify as a mandated reporter - and face a $50,000 fine for non-compliance (first offense). To my knowledge at this time there has been no concrete definition of what an "electronics communication service" is. While technically not every single person employed in the IT field would be considered a mandated reporter, it could be interpreted that many if not most are. In the meantime, some states are looking into passing a specific law requiring computer prof's to be mandated reporters as well (I don't know how many, I haven't kept up on specific state activity in this area). I'm really surprised people are unaware of this, it's been drilled into me at every position I've held since it was passed except for 1!

OP I'm glad he took the pictures down. I think if it makes you uncomfortable then that's reason enough!

DH has been working as a sys. admin. since 1998. For a brief period of time we had a computer repair shop as well. He has never heard of this. I have never heard of this. If it is a law.. it's obviously not a very well known one. Or maybe it didn't matter where DH worked since he was working with internal servers.







. He has also never run into child porn. Just regular porn at which point it reports it to management. (cause you know, it's not illegal.)

PSSSST. DH has been a system admin for the *Federal Court System* for a year now. So the federal government isn't passing on this info either, if it is indeed a law.


----------



## Novella (Nov 8, 2006)

This comment took a bit of heat, so I'll speak in support:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Zenful* 
It's just a penis...maybe if people stopped being so uptight about such things, there wouldn't be people with fetishes...every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

Going along with "well, that's not the way the world is nowadays" doesn't bring about any good. If something is good, and right, and normal - defend it. I don't hear the rallying cries of this board urging mothers to just "play it safe" and accept that epidural/c-section/vaccination etc. simply to avoid scrutinizing eyes. Why would this be different?

Acting super-vigilant and crazy about some cute nakey-baby photos just *contributes* to over-sexualizing et al. And feeding that wonky sense of sexuality that North America seems so taken with makes all of us _less safe_.


----------



## ashleyhaugh (Jun 23, 2005)

i dont mind sharing cute baby butt shots, but we dont share penis shots, online or off. i actually try not to get those, because then i cant show them to anyone, but it happens sometimes (like right now when hes potty learning)


----------



## pumpkinhead (Sep 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Novella* 
This comment took a bit of heat, so I'll speak in support:

Going along with "well, that's not the way the world is nowadays" doesn't bring about any good. If something is good, and right, and normal - defend it. I don't hear the rallying cries of this board urging mothers to just "play it safe" and accept that epidural/c-section/vaccination etc. simply to avoid scrutinizing eyes. Why would this be different?

Acting super-vigilant and crazy about some cute nakey-baby photos just *contributes* to over-sexualizing et al. And feeding that wonky sense of sexuality that North America seems so taken with makes all of us _less safe_.


I disagree that keeping naked photos of our children off the internets is "super vigilant and crazy". My kid runs around naked all damned day







. I just don't post pictures of it on the internet.

On a different note, it's his body too. Maybe there will come a day when he won't want to find cute nakey baby photos of himself on the interwebs. Perhaps as parents we should be respectful of that.


----------

