Is Schoolgirl CP? [PIC] - GoFuckYourself.com

lux_interior · 01-28-2005, 12:41 AM

I know some list owners are very puritanical about schoolgirl stuff which is kind of weird as it's obvioulsy just fantasy/role playing. Weird how the same lists will have some bitch being jackhammered by...well a fucking jackhammer! and think that's perfectly normal behavious (no judgement from me) but some woman who's obviously over the age of consent puts on a check skirt and calls her self a 'schoolgirl' and they get all self fucking righteous about it.

Your input on this issue needed desperatedly!

Here's an example!

Lux

foolio · 01-28-2005, 12:42 AM

over 18 right? Whats the prob?

lux_interior · 01-28-2005, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foolio

over 18 right? Whats the prob?

Exaclty my point! Thank you very much sir!

Lux

yuvalus · 01-28-2005, 12:44 AM

the girl on the right has some very nicely shapen lil boobies..... thats like .. my pefect size :-p

TheMob · 01-28-2005, 12:45 AM

I have no problem with such pictures.

rollinOn20s · 01-28-2005, 12:48 AM

who cares these chicks are hideous.

chupacabra · 01-28-2005, 12:48 AM

methinks i know who took that picture...

...as for schoolgirl, i'm all for it. anyone who gets all sassy about it can bite my foaming crotch..!

jt420 · 01-28-2005, 12:49 AM

if their over 18 its not cp. schoolgirls are hot

Mr.Fiction · 01-28-2005, 12:49 AM

If you want to get a lot of replies, you will probably have to accuse some big program owner of promoting CP because he has a girl with pigtails on his site. Name names if you want drama.

All sites with girls with pigtails, skirts, or long socks should be classified as CP and the owners should be jailed for life with no trial.

And no girl over 18, who looks under 18 to anyone on the planet, should eer be allowed to work in the adult industry.

That's what some people think.

DWB · 01-28-2005, 12:52 AM

It's not CP unless the genitals are focused on or they are engaged in a sexual act. Posing nude, even if she is a minor is not CP (unless the genitals are focused on). That's a crock if you ask me, but that's what it is. :-(

lux_interior · 01-28-2005, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Fiction

If you want to get a lot of replies, you will probably have to accuse some big program owner of promoting CP because he has a girl with pigtails on his site. Name names if you want drama.

All sites with girls with pigtails, skirts, or long socks should be classified as CP and the owners should be jailed for life with no trial.

And no girl over 18, who looks under 18 to anyone on the planet, should eer be allowed to work in the adult industry.

That's what some people think.

Thanks for the lesson in 'fake drama creating'. I'll keep it in mind for the next time I'm bored and I want a laugh.

LUx

reynold · 01-28-2005, 01:03 AM

Man, these girls look like minors.

lux_interior · 01-28-2005, 01:09 AM

No their definitely schoolgirls not miners! Miners would have hard hats on with little flashlights on the front.

Lux

Kapitan Ivanov II · 01-28-2005, 01:39 AM

It's the same as 18+ models who look like 12 year olds. It's sick and it's a legal loophole. If you find it attractive, you are a pedo.

lux_interior · 01-28-2005, 01:42 AM

Well drag my ass of to jail in that case!

Lux

slipkid · 01-28-2005, 01:46 AM

We love all legal over 18 schoolgirls!

MBS Auto · 01-28-2005, 01:48 AM

RaGe · 01-28-2005, 02:01 AM

I'm also one that believes if the girls are legal then its all good. Dress them like schoolgirls if you want.

The Apprentice · 01-28-2005, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rollinOn20s

who cares these chicks are hideous.

better than than any of the chicks you've set me up with...

In the Bedroom:
Dressing up and role playing is fine at any age. Schoolgirl outfits are the most popular, last I heard.

In the Biz:
18-22. AND NO HIGHER! Don't put girls older than 22 in schoolgirl outfits, and DON'T try to pawn 30 year old milf's as catholic school girls to your clientel.

Qualifications:
You can find real school girls @ school... Yep, it's true. There's millions of students. But they must meet at least (3) of the following criteria:

Is on the cheerleading squad.

Is wearing a uniform.

Is wearing glasses.

Is carrying Books.

Gives head to anyone who can catch a football.

The Apprentice · 01-28-2005, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitan Ivanov II

It's the same as 18+ models who look like 12 year olds. It's sick and it's a legal loophole. If you find it attractive, you are a pedo.

And if you can notice that contrast - YOU ARE OLD.

hova · 01-28-2005, 02:19 AM

they just have to be over 18

TeddyRacer1 · 01-28-2005, 02:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lux_interior

Well drag my ass of to jail in that case!

Lux

I like schoolgirls but that was a real dumb thing to say, I know people who just got out, it ain't no game! "There's some real Gs' doing time!"

reynold · 01-28-2005, 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Apprentice

better than than any of the chicks you've set me up with...

In the Bedroom:
Dressing up and role playing is fine at any age. Schoolgirl outfits are the most popular, last I heard.

In the Biz:
18-22. AND NO HIGHER! Don't put girls older than 22 in schoolgirl outfits, and DON'T try to pawn 30 year old milf's as catholic school girls to your clientel.

Qualifications:
You can find real school girls @ school... Yep, it's true. There's millions of students. But they must meet at least (3) of the following criteria:

Is on the cheerleading squad.

Is wearing a uniform.

Is wearing glasses.

Is carrying Books.

Gives head to anyone who can catch a football.

Thanks for that very substantial info dude.

chupacabra · 01-28-2005, 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitan Ivanov II

It's the same as 18+ models who look like 12 year olds. It's sick and it's a legal loophole. If you find it attractive, you are a pedo.

so... your saying that small boned, petite women w/ pretty innocent faces shouldn't be allowed to model, because *you* think they look younger than they really are? hehe, fucking surfers should just stick to lurking GFY for PICS and leave the posting alone... your sig will remain worthless regardless..

lux_interior · 01-28-2005, 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeddyRacer1

I like schoolgirls but that was a real dumb thing to say, I know people who just got out, it ain't no game! "There's some real Gs' doing time!"

Point taken and I too know people both in jail and who've done time but I'm proud to say none of them where in for CP and you know what? If they where they'd be no fucking friend of mine!

PS: Lighten up would ya!

Lux

flashfire · 01-28-2005, 03:24 AM

age is the only factor...+18 is fine

webseth · 01-28-2005, 05:05 AM

just for the sake of discussion, ignoring arbitrary law and focusing on morality -- what is the difference between a girl thats 17 years and 11 months old and a girl on her 18th birthday?

some 17 year olds are ready, some 25 year olds still arent. its all about using discretion to know the difference at any age

StuartD · 01-28-2005, 05:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lux_interior

No their definitely schoolgirls not miners! Miners would have hard hats on with little flashlights on the front.

Lux

miners aren't the same as minors. And it's "they're" not "their"

Kapitan Ivanov II · 01-28-2005, 05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chupacabra

so... your saying that small boned, petite women w/ pretty innocent faces shouldn't be allowed to model, because *you* think they look younger than they really are? hehe, fucking surfers should just stick to lurking GFY for PICS and leave the posting alone... your sig will remain worthless regardless..

I'm saying that a physically unmatured 18 year old is the same thing sexually as a 12 year old.
You pedos get so defensive of your deviant ways. You should keep quiet.

lux_interior · 01-28-2005, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NichePay - StuartD

miners aren't the same as minors. And it's "they're" not "their"

Thanks for pointing out my incorrect use of their.

The comment was actually a vague attempt at humour but I do appreciate that not everybody gets my particular brand of humour so that's fine.

Thanks again!

Lux

PS: And if you ever see any other grammatical cock ups in one of my posts please do let me know.

Spunky · 01-28-2005, 07:25 AM

Hmmm schoolgirls..In Homers voice

Head · 01-28-2005, 07:29 AM

If there's grass on the field: you can play ball.

MyNameIsEmily · 01-28-2005, 07:32 AM

If she's over 13, it's all good!

Bro Media - BANNED FOR LIFE · 01-28-2005, 07:36 AM

not into asians myself... but they do look underage to me

TeddyRacer1 · 01-28-2005, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Head

If there's grass on the field: you can play ball.

I heard that before, are you the guy that keeps repeating this phrase, or is there some guy going around saying this perverted sh#$. I would wait until she's 17 (almost 18) so I can say at least I tried to play by the rules.

TeddyRacer1 · 01-28-2005, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MyNameIsEmily

If she's over 13, it's all good!

You mean if she's horny she's good to go, but are you ready to go to jail for that young booty!

codymc12 · 01-28-2005, 08:29 AM

The only thing relevant - I thought there was a court case re: intentionally dressing up models that were 'of age' to appear 'under age' - and that it didn't come out in our favor.

I could be mistaken - but it's worth some research.

Der Schleicher · 01-28-2005, 08:33 AM

me thinks they just wear uniforms

nico-t · 01-28-2005, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaysin

but they do look underage to me

who cares if theyre 18+? thats the point of this thread.

sean416 · 01-28-2005, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nico-t

who cares if theyre 18+? thats the point of this thread.

it's the audience you're playing into when you do that. If someone doesnt want to list that kind of stuff, its their preogative.

Bro Media - BANNED FOR LIFE · 01-28-2005, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nico-t

who cares if theyre 18+? thats the point of this thread.

i sure as hell know, if they dont look 18+ i wouldnt list them.. just because they are, doesnt mean someone who is against that shit does and wont turn you into the authorities or something....

Head · 01-28-2005, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeddyRacer1

I heard that before, are you the guy that keeps repeating this phrase, or is there some guy going around saying this perverted sh#$. I would wait until she's 17 (almost 18) so I can say at least I tried to play by the rules.

It's the 1st time i said this onb GFY. Calm Down!! It's just fucking joke!!!

LawLaw · 01-28-2005, 09:30 AM

In Canada, the federal Criminal Code creates specific offences against making, distributing, possessing or accessing child pornography.

"Child Pornography" is defined by the Criminal Code to include visual representations that show a person who is or is depicted as being under 18 years of age in what appears to be explicit sexual activity, visual representations whose dominant characteristic is the depiction of a sexual organ or the anal region of a person under the age of 18 and any written material or visual representation that advocates or counsels sexual activity with a person under the age of 18 [Emphasis added]

The definition of "visual representation" applies equally to electronic media, such as web sites.

The important thing to note here is that the person need only be depicted as being under the age of 18.

A web site that encourages access to these materials could be implicated in the distribution of these materials and could be charged with ?aiding and abetting? others in the commission of these offences.

Also, there is currently a Bill being considered by Parliament that proposes amendments to the Criminal Code. Amongst other things, Bill C-20 would make the following changes:

(a) amend the child pornography provisions to broaden their application and limit the available defences to such a charge;

(b) add a second category of written material to s. 163.1(1) ?the dominant characteristic of which is the description, for a sexual purpose, of sexual activity with a person under the age of eighteen years that would be an offence under this Act?. As a result, written material would not longer have to advocate or counsel illegal sexual activity with a person under 18 to fall under the definition of child pornography

Please note that this posting is intended for educational and discussion purposes only and not as legal advice.

You can icq me at 232035213

Head · 01-28-2005, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LawLaw

In Canada, the federal Criminal Code creates specific offences against making, distributing, possessing or accessing child pornography.

"Child Pornography" is defined by the Criminal Code to include visual representations that show a person who is or is depicted as being under 18 years of age in what appears to be explicit sexual activity, visual representations whose dominant characteristic is the depiction of a sexual organ or the anal region of a person under the age of 18 and any written material or visual representation that advocates or counsels sexual activity with a person under the age of 18 [Emphasis added]

The definition of "visual representation" applies equally to electronic media, such as web sites.

The important thing to note here is that the person need only be depicted as being under the age of 18.

A web site that encourages access to these materials could be implicated in the distribution of these materials and could be charged with ?aiding and abetting? others in the commission of these offences.

Also, there is currently a Bill being considered by Parliament that proposes amendments to the Criminal Code. Amongst other things, Bill C-20 would make the following changes:

(a) amend the child pornography provisions to broaden their application and limit the available defences to such a charge;

(b) add a second category of written material to s. 163.1(1) ?the dominant characteristic of which is the description, for a sexual purpose, of sexual activity with a person under the age of eighteen years that would be an offence under this Act?. As a result, written material would not longer have to advocate or counsel illegal sexual activity with a person under 18 to fall under the definition of child pornography

Please note that this posting is intended for educational and discussion purposes only and not as legal advice.

You can icq me at 232035213

That is totally fucked. So if a site has models that are 25 and are waring 'schoolgirl' clothing and sucking lolly pop's: that CP.

LawLaw · 01-28-2005, 03:21 PM

It depends on the specific facts in each case and whether or not the model is "depicted as being under 18 years of age in what appears to be explicit sexual activity" etc.

The case law in Canada has looked at various criteria to determine whether or not the material was infringing. However, all that might change if Bill C-20 is made into law. If that happens, prosecutors may have an easier time of making a case that the material is CP.

Disclaimer: This post is intended for educational and discussion purposes and not as legal advice.

pxxx · 01-28-2005, 03:23 PM

Those chicks sure are ugly.

Lifer · 01-29-2005, 07:59 AM

You all are a bunch of pedos

They aren't 18... which just goes to show you...

There is little difference between 17 years and 363 days and 18 years old.

You should be ashamed of your self lusting after those teenie tiny titties

lux_interior · 01-29-2005, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lifer

You all are a bunch of pedos

They aren't 18... which just goes to show you...

There is little difference between 17 years and 363 days and 18 years old.

You should be ashamed of your self lusting after those teenie tiny titties

Don't say 'teenie tiny titties' like that man. It's turning me on!!!!

Lux

Basic_man · 01-29-2005, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foolio

over 18 right? Whats the prob?

Same opinion here !

evanmorgan · 01-29-2005, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy

It's not CP unless the genitals are focused on or they are engaged in a sexual act. Posing nude, even if she is a minor is not CP (unless the genitals are focused on). That's a crock if you ask me, but that's what it is. :-(

thats what lionel hutz said when he was defending me in court anyway

01-28-2005, 12:41 AM	#1
lux_interior Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hawaii Posts: 366	Is Schoolgirl CP? [PIC] I know some list owners are very puritanical about schoolgirl stuff which is kind of weird as it's obvioulsy just fantasy/role playing. Weird how the same lists will have some bitch being jackhammered by...well a fucking jackhammer! and think that's perfectly normal behavious (no judgement from me) but some woman who's obviously over the age of consent puts on a check skirt and calls her self a 'schoolgirl' and they get all self fucking righteous about it. Your input on this issue needed desperatedly! Here's an example! Lux __________________ Join Asian Xtreme Top List Dump your links at FuckPile.com

01-28-2005, 12:42 AM	#2
foolio ICQ: 178725656 Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sunny San Diego Posts: 12,366	over 18 right? Whats the prob? __________________

01-28-2005, 12:44 AM	#4
yuvalus Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,906	the girl on the right has some very nicely shapen lil boobies..... thats like .. my pefect size :-p __________________ Mail me: [email protected]

01-28-2005, 12:48 AM	#6
rollinOn20s Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: ontario Posts: 2,006	who cares these chicks are hideous. __________________ Trade With xApsters Thumb TGP's Today - Some Of The Biggest and Best On The Net!

01-28-2005, 12:49 AM	#8
jt420 Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: in the foothills of the mind. ICQ: 279561428 Posts: 2,479	if their over 18 its not cp. schoolgirls are hot __________________ I made my fortune selling pubic wigs! New program Merkin Money coming soon!

01-28-2005, 12:45 AM	#5
TheMob Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: 2006 Posts: 8,584	I have no problem with such pictures.

01-28-2005, 12:48 AM	#7
chupacabra Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 3,626	methinks i know who took that picture... ...as for schoolgirl, i'm all for it. anyone who gets all sassy about it can bite my foaming crotch..!

01-28-2005, 12:49 AM	#9
Mr.Fiction Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Free Speech Land Posts: 9,484	If you want to get a lot of replies, you will probably have to accuse some big program owner of promoting CP because he has a girl with pigtails on his site. Name names if you want drama. All sites with girls with pigtails, skirts, or long socks should be classified as CP and the owners should be jailed for life with no trial. And no girl over 18, who looks under 18 to anyone on the planet, should eer be allowed to work in the adult industry. That's what some people think. __________________ Don't be lazy, protect free speech: ACLU \| Free Speech Coalition \| EFF \| IMPA

01-28-2005, 12:52 AM	#10
DWB Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Encrypted. Access denied. Posts: 31,779	It's not CP unless the genitals are focused on or they are engaged in a sexual act. Posing nude, even if she is a minor is not CP (unless the genitals are focused on). That's a crock if you ask me, but that's what it is. :-(

01-28-2005, 01:03 AM	#12
reynold Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Global Traveler Posts: 51,271	Man, these girls look like minors.

01-28-2005, 01:09 AM	#13
lux_interior Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hawaii Posts: 366	No their definitely schoolgirls not miners! Miners would have hard hats on with little flashlights on the front. Lux __________________ Join Asian Xtreme Top List Dump your links at FuckPile.com

01-28-2005, 01:39 AM	#14
Kapitan Ivanov II Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 763	It's the same as 18+ models who look like 12 year olds. It's sick and it's a legal loophole. If you find it attractive, you are a pedo. __________________ Ivanov - The Original Russian Board Guy

01-28-2005, 01:42 AM	#15
lux_interior Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hawaii Posts: 366	Well drag my ass of to jail in that case! Lux __________________ Join Asian Xtreme Top List Dump your links at FuckPile.com

01-28-2005, 01:46 AM	#16
slipkid Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: USA Posts: 791	We love all legal over 18 schoolgirls! __________________ Tons of porn sites Sell Adult products on your sites

01-28-2005, 01:48 AM	#17
MBS Auto Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Sin City Baby... Posts: 1,725	__________________ Shoes and Boot

01-28-2005, 02:01 AM	#18
RaGe Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Toronto Posts: 1,158	I'm also one that believes if the girls are legal then its all good. Dress them like schoolgirls if you want. __________________ Get your guaranteed gallery listings on bunnyteens.com! Over 650k hits daily. One of the original thumb TGPs! Click here.

01-28-2005, 02:19 AM	#21
hova Traffillionaire Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: ICQ:209371571 Posts: 22,430	they just have to be over 18 __________________ http://traffillions.com/ Sign up and get lifetime revshare on your traffic

01-28-2005, 03:24 AM	#26
flashfire ICQ 1 6 7 8 5 3 4 9 2 Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 13,098	age is the only factor...+18 is fine

01-28-2005, 05:05 AM	#27
webseth Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 362	just for the sake of discussion, ignoring arbitrary law and focusing on morality -- what is the difference between a girl thats 17 years and 11 months old and a girl on her 18th birthday? some 17 year olds are ready, some 25 year olds still arent. its all about using discretion to know the difference at any age

01-28-2005, 07:25 AM	#31
Spunky I need a beer Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: ♠ Toiletville ♠ Posts: 133,949	Hmmm schoolgirls..In Homers voice __________________ *YOUR INFORMATION HERE*

01-28-2005, 07:29 AM	#32
Head Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Starship Enterprise Posts: 8,278	If there's grass on the field: you can play ball. __________________

01-28-2005, 07:32 AM	#33
MyNameIsEmily Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 887	If she's over 13, it's all good! __________________

01-28-2005, 07:36 AM	#34
Bro Media - BANNED FOR LIFE MOBILE PORN: IMOBILEPORN Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Tinseltown NL Posts: 16,502	not into asians myself... but they do look underage to me

01-28-2005, 08:29 AM	#37
codymc12 Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 719	The only thing relevant - I thought there was a court case re: intentionally dressing up models that were 'of age' to appear 'under age' - and that it didn't come out in our favor. I could be mistaken - but it's worth some research.

01-28-2005, 08:33 AM	#38
Der Schleicher Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 1,189	me thinks they just wear uniforms __________________ Teeny Teen Girls - One of the best free pictures and videos online. WEBMASTER - We offer free hosting and dream submitter sign up now!

01-28-2005, 09:30 AM	#43
LawLaw Registered User Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 14	In Canada it can be CP In Canada, the federal Criminal Code creates specific offences against making, distributing, possessing or accessing child pornography. "Child Pornography" is defined by the Criminal Code to include visual representations that show a person who is or is depicted as being under 18 years of age in what appears to be explicit sexual activity, visual representations whose dominant characteristic is the depiction of a sexual organ or the anal region of a person under the age of 18 and any written material or visual representation that advocates or counsels sexual activity with a person under the age of 18 [Emphasis added] The definition of "visual representation" applies equally to electronic media, such as web sites. The important thing to note here is that the person need only be depicted as being under the age of 18. A web site that encourages access to these materials could be implicated in the distribution of these materials and could be charged with ?aiding and abetting? others in the commission of these offences. Also, there is currently a Bill being considered by Parliament that proposes amendments to the Criminal Code. Amongst other things, Bill C-20 would make the following changes: (a) amend the child pornography provisions to broaden their application and limit the available defences to such a charge; (b) add a second category of written material to s. 163.1(1) ?the dominant characteristic of which is the description, for a sexual purpose, of sexual activity with a person under the age of eighteen years that would be an offence under this Act?. As a result, written material would not longer have to advocate or counsel illegal sexual activity with a person under 18 to fall under the definition of child pornography Please note that this posting is intended for educational and discussion purposes only and not as legal advice. You can icq me at 232035213

01-28-2005, 03:21 PM	#45
LawLaw Registered User Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 14	Depends on the Circumstances It depends on the specific facts in each case and whether or not the model is "depicted as being under 18 years of age in what appears to be explicit sexual activity" etc. The case law in Canada has looked at various criteria to determine whether or not the material was infringing. However, all that might change if Bill C-20 is made into law. If that happens, prosecutors may have an easier time of making a case that the material is CP. Disclaimer: This post is intended for educational and discussion purposes and not as legal advice.

01-28-2005, 03:23 PM	#46
pxxx First African GFY Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 12,114	Those chicks sure are ugly.

01-29-2005, 07:59 AM	#47
Lifer Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Working Posts: 871	You all are a bunch of pedos They aren't 18... which just goes to show you... There is little difference between 17 years and 363 days and 18 years old. You should be ashamed of your self lusting after those teenie tiny titties __________________ CCBill Sponsor Programs Get Paid On Time - Everytime!