Posted automatically (#136668) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@tokui: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @uvulectomy)
This isn’t a courtroom so we aren’t bound by what you earlier called “legal evidence” and can use our brains to make obvious and perfectly appropriate observations. The outfit the child is wearing serves only one purpose. To be sexually titillating. That is literally the intended reason for an adult to wear that outfit - just as automobiles were invented as transportation. As I said above, it’s not a Halloween costume, it’s not a disguise, it’s not a bathing suit, there is only one purpose for this type of sexualized lingerie. One purpose. Stop pretending you don’t know that. There is a nude man and a child in lingerie. It is beyond ridiculous to pretend that the most obvious conclusion to draw from this is somehow inappropriate to draw. Sure, there could be some wacky sitcom explanation for this. A comet could also hit the earth tomorrow and vaporize all of us, but it’s absurd to call off work for tomorrow to plan for that.
If we find a man holding a knife, covered in his wife’s blood, standing over her dead body, he still has to go to trial to assess his guilt or innocence. But we know who the number one suspect is. Stop pretending otherwise.
in THIS particular picture? Well the man is OBVIOUSLY naked... so yes... exposing a nude adult male to a child IS illegal... but this pic does not show the abuse of the child...
hope you're not serious, it's not hard at all to determine what this is, the fact that there's an underaged kid wearing revealing/provocative clothing and a phoot was taken of them is grounds for being terminated.
I'm not saying it is or isn't anything, just demanding clarity. I'm well aware of white men and their sex tours of the comparatively impoverished south east Asian areas. I first learned of it in the 80's.
The youth appears asian, but the hair has some brown tint, hinting it may not be a sex tour in S.E. Asia.
I like to think with my brain, l leave the appeal to emotion to those who think with their vaginas.
A naked (or half naked, depending on the censored portion) holding the hand of an obvious child dressed in thigh highs and a two piece lingerie set is a very fucking dubious activity. Even if the picture doesnt show penetration.
view the rest of the comments →
tokui ago
What's the source? A lil context would help. I don't see any penetration or other dubious activity.
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/AskVoat comment by @uvulectomy.
Posted automatically (#136668) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@tokui: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @uvulectomy)
Dauphin ago
That would be illegal...
tokui ago
So, you admit nothing illegal is happening?
Case dismissed.
DohBoy ago
This isn’t a courtroom so we aren’t bound by what you earlier called “legal evidence” and can use our brains to make obvious and perfectly appropriate observations. The outfit the child is wearing serves only one purpose. To be sexually titillating. That is literally the intended reason for an adult to wear that outfit - just as automobiles were invented as transportation. As I said above, it’s not a Halloween costume, it’s not a disguise, it’s not a bathing suit, there is only one purpose for this type of sexualized lingerie. One purpose. Stop pretending you don’t know that. There is a nude man and a child in lingerie. It is beyond ridiculous to pretend that the most obvious conclusion to draw from this is somehow inappropriate to draw. Sure, there could be some wacky sitcom explanation for this. A comet could also hit the earth tomorrow and vaporize all of us, but it’s absurd to call off work for tomorrow to plan for that.
If we find a man holding a knife, covered in his wife’s blood, standing over her dead body, he still has to go to trial to assess his guilt or innocence. But we know who the number one suspect is. Stop pretending otherwise.
tokui ago
You've all been trolled by op.
Dauphin ago
in THIS particular picture? Well the man is OBVIOUSLY naked... so yes... exposing a nude adult male to a child IS illegal... but this pic does not show the abuse of the child...
tokui ago
You've never heard of nude health camps, nude beaches? The fear of nudity, this puritan sensibility, is unhealthy.
Chimaira92 ago
Nude camps don't dress their girls up in provocative lingerie which includes a "choker" neck bracelet.
Why has he recently taken his robe off while escorting the child somewhere?
Why do you have pictures of grown women sexually posing whilst dressed as little girls in your post history?
https://voat.co/v/whatever/3929212
maaaxheadroom ago
I suggest you gas yourself. Kike
BiggestDickOnVoat ago
While I would like to know the source and context as well, it's a bit hard to say that nothing dubious is going on here.
AntiMason ago
This dude has posted little girl pics. He is one of them.
SuperSaiyanCock ago
hope you're not serious, it's not hard at all to determine what this is, the fact that there's an underaged kid wearing revealing/provocative clothing and a phoot was taken of them is grounds for being terminated.
tokui ago
I'm not saying it is or isn't anything, just demanding clarity. I'm well aware of white men and their sex tours of the comparatively impoverished south east Asian areas. I first learned of it in the 80's.
The youth appears asian, but the hair has some brown tint, hinting it may not be a sex tour in S.E. Asia.
I like to think with my brain, l leave the appeal to emotion to those who think with their vaginas.
Vrblpollushin ago
You fucking serious?
tokui ago
I'm deadly serious. If this is a crime scene evidence of child abuse, someone is in trouble for possession and distribution.
Given the present context, ie social media platform, it's leaning towards deliberare misconstruation of a non-crime.
Vrblpollushin ago
A naked (or half naked, depending on the censored portion) holding the hand of an obvious child dressed in thigh highs and a two piece lingerie set is a very fucking dubious activity. Even if the picture doesnt show penetration.
SparklingWiggle ago
He's a pedo. He is serious. And he needs death.
Vrblpollushin ago
This is someone's alt. Has to be. Too brazen to be real.
SparklingWiggle ago
Gabara would do this shit.