Does anyone else just find this WRONG?

I am puzzled... if I go to a public place, what right do I have to control who sees me there?

Jeff
None, which is what makes such legislation so ill-advised (IMO).
There is clearly some risk, albeit typically over-exaggerated - I doubt we'd feel comfortable about a gentleman approaching children on a beach to pose for his photos for instance. However I'm unconvinced about such legislation reducing child sexual abuse / sexual assault (which is the driver).

I think the common sense questions raised by Celia are fair. We don't know who took the photo, nor if there is a genetic influence in the family. What if the child only had a year to live? Maybe we'd give in to their every request? We judge the book by the cover and whilst the cover may be an accurate summary, there may be some significant twists & turns inside the pages.

regards

Ian

Every picture tells a story, don't it. (apologies to Rod)

Every photo in and of itself is valid. Every photo will be interpreted by every person according to that person's leanings (or needs). Each and every response to the photo is singular, although we know there is likely a commonality of sorts that exists, a "basic" predictable range of response.

What I don't know, I have to fill in the blanks. How I fill in those blanks tells me (and others) much about me, and who I am.

I respond to it in two ways: one response is regret for the child and anger at the parents. The child is a product of what the parents encourage or allow; she is not a fully formed and responsible being, and depends on the guidance of those parents. Barring some sort of disease or disorder (which would be unlikely but possible) this child has been trained to be obese---and childhood conditioning is one of the most difficult things to overcome, so much of her course is set now.

But it's not simply the obesity: it's the "WALL-E" effect. You have to have seen the picture to know what I'm talking about.

So there is a part of me that wants to be sanctimonious and righteous, and to scream at the parents/family for creating this child's situation.

Another part of me, the part that is overweight and could shed more than a few pounds, the part that enjoys indolence at times, and sensuousness, and sensuality, and abhors exercise, and can't fit as easily into some clothing that used to fit---that part is uncomfortable and embarrassed. Because I'm not a child, didn't have that problem as a child, and bear only my own responsibility for my situation now. And yet, I don't do anything about it.

We are, all of us, capable of sanctimony. Some more than others. Things that apply to others don't apply to us. Ask Rush Limbaugh. Ask those Medicare recipients that are screaming to apoplectic levels about the evils of 'socialized medicine'. Ask people that are smug and comfortable (and comfortably padded) who are ready to criticize others for being only slightly less disciplined than they.

So excuse me: I have to go rant about other people; then I have to go beat my breast.

Bravo, Ian and Hoke.

What does it say about a society that is concerned about a photographer taking pictures of children in public. Kids are a riot! Candid shots are great. Opps can't take a humorous picture unless the child is yours. Hmm Norman Rockwell loved to paint and sketch children that weren't his! We have become a pretty sick society.

One of the joys in life is watching young at play or out and about. Some of the greatest photographs over the years have been of children of all cultures and young of various species at play whether at a beach, in a pasture , the ocean, the jungle or in the rain or snow.

I feel sad for this child, but confess, also somewhat repulsed. And that child is too old to still need a stroller anyway, that's the real pity: she is likely doomed to a life of sedentary habits which she will have little control over.