Author Topic: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride (Read 15279 times)

TrashMan · **Reply #60 on:** February 01, 2010, 04:54:00 am

Well, 16 is more or less understandable..

12? Only if she's REALLY developed for her age, and even then it would be a HUGE stretch.

Anything less and there's something very wrong with you. That said, I really don't care much for pedo's having such impulses - as long as they don't act on them.
There are both straight and gay people who lived celibate. There's no excuse! None.

Colonol Dekker · **Reply #61 on:** February 01, 2010, 01:28:33 pm

No excuse whatsoever. . .

Narvi · **Reply #62 on:** February 01, 2010, 01:31:47 pm

It's an easy thing to connect age with sexual development, but sexual characteristics aren't completely... how to put this... consistent in terms of development with age. Some girls are remarkably developed even at age 13. There's a reason that thirteen was considered marriageable age in the past, you know.

Not that I'm saying it's okay to marry 13-year-olds or anything like that. However, since this is the Internet, I just know that somebody here is going to say "oh so you're saying it's okay to have sex and marry 13-year-olds". Which is not what I'm saying. At all!

It's ludicrous to consider teenagers as completely sexually disconnected anyway. Do they think that teenagers find each other hot because everybody suffers from temporary pedophilia during their teenage years?

Colonol Dekker · **Reply #63 on:** February 01, 2010, 01:43:18 pm

No, the same reason you hold hands with girls in primary school, or go to clubs in your twenties is that you. Stick. To. Your. Own. Age. Group. . .

Or grab a cougar whenever possible.

Stormkeeper · **Reply #64 on:** February 01, 2010, 05:14:02 pm

What's a cougar? I'm pretty sure we're not talking 'bout the cat here.

And I guess this means I won't be buying porn in Australia. I'm not a fan of tits that can suffocate people.

MR_T3D · **Reply #65 on:** February 01, 2010, 06:31:39 pm

Quote from: Stormkeeper on February 01, 2010, 05:14:02 pm

What's a cougar? I'm pretty sure we're not talking 'bout the cat here.

And I guess this means I won't be buying porn in Australia. I'm not a fan of tits that can suffocate people.

buy porn? you're on the INTERNET

Quote from: Rian on February 01, 2010, 01:49:43 am

I’m pretty sure she’s digitally generated from the waist down.

That picture is rapidly entering the uncanny valley, and not from the usual direction.

wow.
but yeah, in seriousness, this is unreasonable.
if it were banning shaving south, that could be slightly understandable, or banning women whom look explicitly underage as determined by an unbiased, impossible to actually make council

iamzack · **Reply #66 on:** February 01, 2010, 06:38:15 pm

It's not impossible to objectively determine whether a person looks prepubescent or not. Proportions and all, right?

TrashMan · **Reply #67 on:** February 02, 2010, 04:15:01 am

But does it all fall down to "I don't like how you look" and then stigmatiozing those people?

How is that different from not liking black or gay or religious folk and moving agaisnt them, painting them as unwanted?

karajorma · **Reply #68 on:** February 02, 2010, 04:54:41 am

Quote from: iamzack on February 01, 2010, 06:38:15 pm

It's not impossible to objectively determine whether a person looks prepubescent or not. Proportions and all, right?

Prepubescent, possibly but teenage, no way. So what you'd be doing is drawing a dividing line right down the middle and saying that if you take a picture of someone on the wrong side you go to jail regardless of whether or not the person in the picture is over the age of consent.

iamzack · **Reply #69 on:** February 02, 2010, 07:03:00 am

Which is silly. Just saying that someone looking younger or older than hey are isn't really subjective. Of course, a good haircut can fix it sometimes.

NGTM-1R · **Reply #70 on:** February 02, 2010, 02:42:58 pm

Quote from: iamzack on February 01, 2010, 06:38:15 pm

It's not impossible to objectively determine whether a person looks prepubescent or not. Proportions and all, right?

Sure, but the puberty age is still creeping back towards 12 last I checked.

Mongoose · **Reply #71 on:** February 02, 2010, 02:56:39 pm

For sure. There are boys in my younger brother's middle-school class who are a few inches taller than I am, and I'm average height for an adult male.

iamzack · **Reply #72 on:** February 02, 2010, 03:09:44 pm

Towards 12? Most girls I know started puberty by or around age 9-11.

Stormkeeper · **Reply #73 on:** February 02, 2010, 07:10:55 pm

I know a 12 yr old girl who has a rather developed chest. And she's quite embarrased about it.

Bob-san · **Reply #74 on:** February 02, 2010, 08:46:38 pm

Quote from: Stormkeeper on February 02, 2010, 07:10:55 pm

I know a 12 yr old girl who has a rather developed chest. And she's quite embarrased about it.

And as I pointed out before, when I was was 16 I knew a ~15yo girl with at least DD's. S**t like this would be pointless; a touch of makeup and there are a LOT of minors that'd look older than 18.

Stormkeeper · **Reply #75 on:** February 02, 2010, 10:47:27 pm

Yeah, I know. I've seen primary school girls dress up like they're teenagers.

Dilmah G · **Reply #76 on:** February 03, 2010, 02:50:27 am

In their defence, as long as their sparing with make-up use, some of them do look quite attractive.

No, but this law is a piece of ****, 13 year old girls look 16, and 16 year old girls look 20. Hopefully we'll elect someone who'll 'fix' this law, in the coming October/November. But that's a pipe dream, since the Libs are the conservative ones anyway.

Blue Lion · **Reply #77 on:** February 03, 2010, 08:28:42 am

Quote from: Stormkeeper on February 02, 2010, 10:47:27 pm

Yeah, I know. I've seen primary school girls dress up like they're teenagers.

Funny you should mention that

Miley Cyrus has a 9 year old sister who is starting her own lingerie line for kids.

Do not click on this link if you want to keep faith in humanity.

http://celebrities.ninemsn.com.au/blog.aspx?blogentryid=585857&showcomments=true&rss=yes

iamzack · **Reply #78 on:** February 03, 2010, 09:01:43 am

Well according to the link it's actually her friend's line, and from what I can tell it's more than just undies.

Blue Lion · **Reply #79 on:** February 03, 2010, 09:10:42 am

Quote from: iamzack on February 03, 2010, 09:01:43 am

Well according to the link it's actually her friend's line, and from what I can tell it's more than just undies.

They're "teaming up".

News:

Author Topic: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride (Read 15279 times)

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride

Re: Australia - You Must Be This Big (In Your Bra) To Ride