Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Legal definition of masturbation as applied to 2257.

  1. #1
    I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of vaginas. They bother me in the way that spiders bother some people. Huskyhunks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Santa Fe, NM
    Posts
    670

    Legal definition of masturbation as applied to 2257.

    I have been searching all day to find a legal definition for masturbation as it applies to 2257. Does anyone know if this means anything other than jerking off or finger for women ?
    Artist/Painter and Webmaster of Huskyhunks.com.


  2. #2
    chick with a bass basschick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    7,922
    i really think you should talk to a lawyer about this one. i know that stroking your genitals, even through pants, can be considered masturbation. using sex toys, or any genital sexual stimulation is masturbation.

    basically keep all hands, toys, running water, or anything from touching the penis, and it's probably not masturbation. i would think warm air from a blowdryer would feel great - which probably makes it masturbation.


  3. #3
    I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of vaginas. They bother me in the way that spiders bother some people. Huskyhunks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Santa Fe, NM
    Posts
    670
    Thank Basschick.

    I will probably use the broadest interpretation possible for my content - that is any type of activity that a person uses to produce an erotic state or orgasm.

    Simulated orgasm doesn't seem to fall into the "actual sexually explicit conduct" area but I think that would really be pushing it.

    One day I will break down and use an attorney. Their all very busy right now it seems.
    Artist/Painter and Webmaster of Huskyhunks.com.


  4. #4
    chick with a bass basschick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    7,922
    that they are!

    i'm sticking with no contact of any sort involving genitals, which can't be displayed in a lascivious manner anyway.

    in fact, except for vintage, i'm probably going to keep underwear on all models and keep their thoughts above the waist


  5. #5
    JustMe
    Guest
    Greetings:

    Quote Originally Posted by basschick
    i'm sticking with no contact of any sort involving genitals, which can't be displayed in a lascivious manner anyway.

    in fact, except for vintage, i'm probably going to keep underwear on all models and keep their thoughts above the waist
    Are you going to change your mind if there's an injunction granted so that secondary doesn't have to be record keeper?

    If not, what if the regs eventually get thrown out all together?

    I guess what I'm asking, is if this change for you is a temporary shield of protection, or a full fledged shift in focus?


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •