[mazerunner_888]

Originally Posted by sassysocks

Worldly is a polite way of putting it - wouldn't been around the block be more appropriate!

Assuming you have an attractive wife, girlfriend or sister, would you be happy for them to pose nude. Wouldn't you hope they had more self-respect than that?

Chloe is not only a sad and needy girl but she is a total hypocrite.

All that crap she spouted when she over-reacted about the incident with Jeremy proudly harping on about CHOICE when she reminded us that she took her clothes off for a living but this did not give men rights to touch.

No it doesn't, and Jeremy did not touch, but doesn't she understand that girls that do what she does give out the wrong impression to men. They make men think women are there for their gratification, and if they don't want to pay for it, some will take.

Girls like her are part of the problem.

I am truly shocked by your view here. A woman has the right to artistic expression without that meaning any male meth addict then has the right to sexually abuse her. This is 2015 I think we should not go back to 1970s views of women.

[sassysocks]

Originally Posted by mazerunner_888

I am truly shocked by your view here. A woman has the right to artistic expression without that meaning any male meth addict then has the right to sexually abuse her. This is 2015 I think we should not go back to 1970s views of women.

No we should not and that is what I am saying. Girls like Chloe perpetuate the views of those times, causing men to see women as sex objects there to be touched. Unfortunately women like Chloe talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.

Hark at your use of the word artiistic - nothing Chloe does is artistic - just cheap and tawdry.

She made a humungus fuss about Jeremy touching/moving part of her dressing-gown when she was in a very safe enviroment. It a deliberate act for air time.

What about the poor victims who have actually been sexually abused by men who have been looking at tasteless pictures of girls like Chloe and got so worked up they went out and took what they wanted from someone who was not in a save enivonment and did not put themselves on display. Girls like Chloe are partly to blame for that.

[mazerunner_888]

Originally Posted by sassysocks

No we should not and that is what I am saying. Girls like Chloe perpetuate the views of those times, causing men to see women as sex objects there to be touched. Unfortunately women like Chloe talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.

Hark at your use of the word artiistic - nothing Chloe does is artistic - just cheap and tawdry.

She made a humungus fuss about Jeremy touching/moving part of her dressing-gown when she was in a very safe enviroment. It a deliberate act for air time.

What about the poor victims who have actually been sexually abused by men who have been looking at tasteless pictures of girls like Chloe and got so worked up they went out and took what they wanted from someone who was not in a save enivonment and did not put themselves on display. Girls like Chloe are partly to blame for that.

Please these views are both offensive and outrageous to suggest that if a women poses nude she is encouraging men to commit acts of sexual violation towards women. Women can do what they like and that does NOT mean they are then responsible for crimes committed by men.

Please re-examine the views you hold or your setting back women's rights 50 years.