Man gets upset when Kinko's refuses to print nude family christmas photo

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

http://consumerist.com/2009/12/no-fe...mas-cards.html

I was about to throw this up on CS, but when I thought a moment about what responses it could potentially illicit, I decided fratching was probably the better place for it.

Seriously, how weird and creepy is this?

[LeChatNoir]

If it was just the man and his wife...fine, whatever. But his three sons are in it, and he says on his blog that he had to bribe them to get them to participate. Um, shouldn't that tell you something? Your kids are uncomfortable, don't make them do it! Two out of the three don't even look happy to be there.

If Kinkos doesn't want to print them, then good for them.

And as an aside...how do you "accidentally" start the tradition of posing naked for Christmas cards?

[DesignFox]

I think it's weird, but I don't see anything pornographic about it.

I've seen much more offensive things in print ads and on day-time television than he's presenting in that photo. I've seen skimpier outfits on people out in public, too.

My main problem with his joke is that he involves his children. If they don't want to participate and have to be bribed into doing it, he should just leave them out of it.

Not to mention the fact that while there is nothing suggestive happening in the picture, I'm not sure where the line is drawn as far as the law goes. Those kids are way past the "cute bath-tub photo" age, and obviously not old enough to be posing nude. If they were in swim trunks it would be different, but when you follow the link to the guy's site and view the photo in question...the kids are completely nude and barely covered. You don't see anything...but they'd be more covered wearing speedos. o_O

That's my only issue with it, and I think that's why the employees wouldn't print the cards.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Even the store I worked at probably would not have printed it if his kids were in it. And that's saying something, because we were depraved enough to print just about anything, provided the customer wasn't a dick.

This customer was probably a dick. Hence their grabbing onto an excuse to send him packing.

You bring kids in, no, we probably would not have printed them, either.

I bet this guy's Christmas card list gets smaller and smaller every year. Who wants to see that?

[jackfaire]

If a Fedex Kinkos in Charleston will print a picture of a girl in a bikini or a boy with his shirt off, then they should print my Christmas cards.

Yeah hey moron that is because they are pictured in clothing. Being dressed and being naked are two different things.

Two if Your kids are uncomfortable at doing these pictures then it's abuse. If your child ever comes to you and says, " I am uncomfortable doing the (insert slightly sexual) action with parents here" Then you damn well better listen and not bribe them to do it.

Sorry this was a right hook at the hot button.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

The rule of thumb for porn was, loosely, "If you are naked and alone it is simple nudity. If you are naked and someone is touching you, it's porn." Filtered liberally though a little common sense. Clearly, a nude person obviously getting on with himself is porn, for instance.

Also, at Kinko's and also at the labs I worked with, if something made you uncomfortable, you could refuse the job. It did not have to be porn. If the customer could not find anyone comfortable with doing his job for whatever reason, they were SOL. We only invoked the "I'm not comfortable with doing that job" thing once that I knew of, and it was not porn, it was racist propaganda.

But yeah, I can see the guy bringing in this thing, with nude kids in it, and getting turned away. It would not have to be pornagraphic. The employee simply had the right to invoke the "I am not okay with running this job" rule.

Of course, that was back when it was actually Kinko's and not FedEx.

[Fryk]

Yeah.... I was all ready to defend the guy at first, because the idea, on its face is kinda funny. I was thinking they'd all be sitting on a couch or something, and the boys would be well covered. Then I went to the Cringley's site and saw the photo. None of the poor boys are covered all that well, and one of them is front and center on the floor, covered only by his legs (as an aside, if your posing instructions for your children include "tuck it back", just save CPS the trouble and put your kids up for adoption). And what's really funny to me is that mom and dad apparently chickened out. THEY each get an apron!

"But mom needs an apron to cover up her boobies!"
Than plan the shot better and find a more creative way to cover her. Wuss
"But dad may be too hairy to cover up everything without an apron!"
Nope. You shoulda re thought the shot if you were going to try something this brazen. And those aren't the real reasons anyway, I'm convinced. It's because you were too chicken to put yourself through something that you forced your own children to do, you fucking hypocrite.

[tropicsgoddess]

I always say each to their own, but a nude family Christmas card is beyond creepy!

[jackfaire]

And if your friends make a big deal about insisting you don't forget to get the card to them they are creepy and you need to keep your family away from those poeple.

You sent this to me I would end our friendship.

[alowlypotato]

There are two things about this that bother me:

First, as others have pointed out, the kids are more naked than the adults, who are supposedly all "yay nudity." Like, hello? Twist your kids' arms into doing something that obviously makes even you uncomfortable, despite your claims to the contrary?

Second, it's not exactly wise to post something like this on the internet. There are so many twisted people out there, and this will shine like a beacon to them. So, not only did this pillar of our community bribe his kids into doing something they felt uncomfortable doing, but he's posting pictures of them for his own self-aggrandizement on the nuthouse that is the internet.

Bravo!

[Amanita]

That article creeped me out too. As others have said, the fact that he had to bribe his kids with candy says a lot. If the kids had been "yay, let's do it!", then that would have been another story. But they didn't. They needed an incentive.

I can't say I blame the kinko's manager for refusing the job. I would have too. Why? Because Pedophile is the new witch, in some ways.
You folks remember the burning times- where an accusation of witchcraft was pretty much an automatic death sentance, no matter where the accusation came from, or how farfetched. Modern hysteria over alleged pedophiles is almost as crazy. I've heard of single women chased out of public parks by police for "being a danger to children", when there were not even kids anywhere close by. I've seen parenting groups telling parents not to let their kids visit the mall Santa because he might be a pervert. Never mind that these people undergo background checks, and many genuinely love children (in a good way, not creepy)
I remember reading about a famous NYC photographer who documented street life in places like Harlem and the Bronx. A lot of her shots included kids doing interesting and funny things. Back then, she was hailed as an artist. Now, she would probably be chased off for allegedly stalking kids. Heck, even I have gotten screamed at by a YMCA worker, because I happened to have a camera in hand when she was leading a group of kids out for a walk. "NO PICTURES" She yelled. What was I trying to photograph? The construction site next door, in particular its Tower crane.
Even the accusation of pedophilia or other impropriety can ruin careers, families, and lives, even if it's found to be false. Just the accusation leaves a person with a massive stigma, which may be impossible to fully erase.

Of course, there ARE real pedophiles and predators out there. And they need to be smacked down hard. But I can fully see that FedEx Kinkos manager looking over those pics and saying "Aww heck no!". Because he might be thinking "What if law enforcement or social services finds out? Will they think these pics are obscene? If they do, I could be charged as an accessory even for printing them, maybe even producing and distributing. I don't want to go to jail, screw this!"
I can fully understand a Kinkos manager saying "Better safe than sorry" in a case like this.

[tabbyblack13]

I agree with Amanita that the article and photos are creepy. The manager did the right thing. If a worker was uncomfortable with the photos and called the police then there would be a lot more trouble.

If I got a Christmas card from this guy I would be calling the CPS to investigate. Then I would tell he to never contact me again.