Rahma Azhari...

In light of all those happy punters out there looking for Indonesian celebrities, here is Rahma Azhari in all her glory (or lack thereof).

Enjoy the second installment in this series of Indonesian celebrities!

The World Cup 2010 -- A Body Paint Retrospective...

Surprisingly enough I watched most of the 2010 World Cup. I do not mind watching some good football. This is not to say that every game was a cracker and worth the price of admission. Nevertheless, I enjoyed it and I enjoyed watching it.

The final was a bit of a let down, on a personal level, I was hoping that the Dutch would get up for the win. However, in the big scheme of things it really did not bother me that Spain won. The game was interesting to watch for the comparison between the beautiful and brutal game adopted by Spain and The Netherlands respectively. I cannot recall a game where I have seen so many yellow cards and only one red one.

Now, on with the show. This retrospective is about what could have been. There definitely needs to be more fans getting into the body paint thing. This would ensure that the cameramen and camerawomen had something to do when the game became a little boring. Besides, I am not sure if anyone else has noticed this, there is a lot of crowd shots and close up shots of good looking crowd members (usually women) at all sporting events now. I noticed this not only at the world cup but also on the cricket last night on the television. I can understand it in cricket, there needs to be something to break up the monotony of watching the grass grow.

So, this post is about the fans that we did not see in the crowd (these are the more tame pictures that I found).

Luna Maya Gets Arrested...

Well, it was really only a matter of time before the police upped the ante on this one and arrested Luna Maya and placed her in custody. The official reason the police have given is that she is being "uncooperative".

It is hard to determine whether or not this should be read as just not wanting to make a statement or answer police questions or whether she is actively obstructing the investigation of the police. In any event, she is now in custody and enjoying the hospitality of the Indonesian National Police Force.

She is being held under provision in the Anti-Pornography Law and the Criminal Code. This is interesting because the police had rather steadfastly maintained that she was a victim in this incident. So, by arresting her are the police suggesting she is no longer a victim but rather a part of the much larger plot to produce and disseminate amateur porn?

If either Luna Maya or Nazriel "Ariel" Irham were looking for a career change then they probably should have put more effort into producing a quality piece of work, particularly if they are going to have to do some jail time for it.

On the flip side of this equation is Cut Tari. Apparently, she continues to breath the sweet air of freedom on the outside of a cell because she has been, and continues to be, cooperative. By confessing to being the woman in the sex tape does somewhat limit her options for being uncooperative.

Ho hum...

Facebook -- Nude Photos -- Defamation?

This is not an only in Indonesia story as it the 'art' of sexting and sending naughty pictures of oneself happens pretty regularly so it seems. It has been reported that Tiger Woods asked at least one of his mistresses to send him a naughty photo or two. I guess he has more than one mobile phone, otherwise the odds of getting caught out by the wife seem a little on the 'not worth it side'.

Anyways, it has been reported that a 26-year-old civil servant encouraged his 17-year-old girlfriend to send a naughty picture of herself to him. She obliged. The nude photo then found itself uploaded onto a Facebook page. Apparently, the report was that he defamed her. I am not sure that this is the right 'complaint' to be lodging with the police. It would seem that the new pornography law and the information and electronic transactions law would be a little more appropriate. Considering the age of the 'victim' in this case there could be a criminal code angle to explore as well, perhaps along with some child protection issues.

Nevertheless, the nude photo is only part of the problem. It seems that the pair had a sexual relationship and decided that they needed to take some mobile phone footage of their encounters. The boyfriend has been using this footage as a means of keeping the girl his girlfriend by telling her that if she leaves him then he will show the footage to her parents.

Maybe the moral of the story is: do not voluntarily or knowingly allow yourself to be filmed in compromising positions and don't be tempted to send naked photos of yourself to supposed trusted confidantes. Sometimes things just do not work out.

Child Pornography...

Are there any lines to be drawn in the sand as to what constitutes child pornography? It would seem that for some the definition is clear and for others the definition is less than clear. In fact, the definition can be interpreted in any old fashion that may be required for the purpose of an arrest and a subsequent prosecution.

For example, is the possession of photographs of a child in a swimming costume playing in a pool or riding in that same swimming costume in the back of a truck or sitting on a relative's lap a case of being in possession of child pornography? Would it make any difference if that child was a relative of the person in possession of that photograph. Perhaps even more personal, if I am in possession of a photograph of my son swimming naked in the pool, am I in possession of child pornography? Would it make any difference if I then placed that photograph on my blog or used it as a screen saver on my computer?

These are important questions for many reasons. Personally, I find child pornography abhorrent and do not condone its production or distribution. However, I cannot reconcile that me having a photograph of my own son swimming naked in my pool is child pornography. I also cannot reconcile that placing that photograph on my blog would be tantamount to disseminating or distributing child pornography online. I appreciate that there are evil people out there who might get some degree of cheap sexual pleasure from the photograph, but should that mean my posting of the photograph or even having it in the first place be considered as being in possession of child porn?

The idea that any image of a naked child is child pornography means that there is no artistic merit exception for artists that produce images of naked children. I am not an artist and therefore cannot give an adequate answer as to the artistic need for such images, but I believe that artists can make a case for the need for such an exception. The furore that erupted over images produced by Bill Henson last year is an example of do we need to draw lines in the sand, and if we do, then where do we draw them?

An interesting case has arisen in the US military where a National Guard soldier has been found in possession of images of a child, his four-year-old relative in a swimming costume. The images were sent to him by his mother as an attempt to relieve some of his homesickness associated with being posted on a tour of duty in Afghanistan. The US Army brass has decided to purse an investigation of the images with a view to a court martial. The penalty under US Army law is potentially a ten-year jail term. The rest of the soldier's unit has already returned back to the US after their tour of duty.

If this case is as simple as this soldier having a couple of images of a four-year-old relative in a swimming costume, then the US Army is wasting its time. Simply, it is making mountains out of molehills. By all accounts the images found by the US Army do not include any naked images. The closest you have to a porn image is a partially exposed buttocks (apparently still in a swimming costume).

The definition of what constitutes child pornography is going to have to be very tight. And, there will need to be consideration given to intent. There simply must be a mens rea component to the charge. If there is not a mens rea component then any image of a child may give rise to a possible child pornography charge. Seriously, is a shot of a young girl in a pose for a beauty pageant to be considered sexual or seductive?

The mind boggles as to where this can lead.

Although this post might lend itself to a photograph or two, I am not posting any...a silent protest (sort of).

Whatever Happened to Playboy Indonesia?

Early this evening I was checking out my blog statistics. I sometimes do this to see who is looking for what, what pages people are viewing, what people are downloading off of my blog, and what sorts of search terms they are using to find certain posts. There is lots of handy software for this sort of thing.

Anyways, this little stroll into blog statistics alerted me to the fact that lots of people are using search terms to find images of Indonesian and Japanese women that have been in the news. However, a recent trend has seen people searching for "Playboy Indonesia". So, with that in mind, I thought perhaps a Playboy related post was in order (and some happy snappies that are freely available on the internet).

Indonesian Playboy Magazine had a short run. I can only recall three issues being published. Although, I have to admit I was not a regular purchaser of the magazine. In fact, my guesstimates on the number of issues is based on the number of different covers that were thrust up against the window of the taxi I was in when I was stopped at traffic lights throughout the city. To be honest, if one is looking for pornography in the printed form in Indonesia then my guess is that the toll gates over Kebon Jeruk way might be a good starting point. I recall a couple of taxi rides back from the Universitas Pelita Harapan campus, which takes you past these particular toll gates, and some interesting picture material thrust up against the window of the taxi and accompanied with, "Hey Mister, picture good, cheap, only 20 thousand!"

Oh well, enough of the reminiscing and back to the post. Playboy, at least the Indonesian version, seems to have faded into extinction. It might make a comeback one day. Who knows?

Nevertheless, the furore that it generated was interesting because it is the only Playboy magazine that I can recall that really was not a skin magazine. The pictures, and some are attached here, were really tame. Tame in the PG sense of tame. It is also the only version of Playboy magazine that when you said, "the only reason I bought a copy was to read the articles" was in fact the truth. The articles were generally OK. The pictorials left way too much to the imagination. There simply was no titillation whatsoever.

It was funny to watch people come out and claim that the magazine was all about pornography, and that even if the pictures were not pornographic that it was still porn anyway by reason of the name of the magazine. In any event, a couple of the models were pursued for a while and the editor was tried for being a purveyor of porn and other indecent material. As I recall, nothing much came of the pursuit of the models and the editor was eventually acquitted. In the trial of the editor the judges took time out in their decision to provide a bit of a rebuke of the prosecution case and how it was poorly thought out and constructed.

The anti-porn law should put paid to an eventual comeback, but one never knows. It would be an interesting test case for the law.

For those of you searching for "Indonesian Playboy" I am almost certain that this post will not satisfy your curiosity...keep searching! However, here are some happy snappies of Andhara Early and Joanne Alexandra from Playboy and other places. Enjoy!

Mobile Phones and Nudes

My philosophy has always been that if you are going to take naked pictures of yourself, your spouse, your friends, or whoever on a mobile phone, then you want to take extra care not to lose your phone or leave it lying around in public places unattended.

However, this is not the case in Fayettville, Arkansas, where a Mr. Phillip Sherman left his mobile phone in McDonald's. Realizing his misfortune, he called the store and staff apparently agreed to secure the mobile phone until Sherman was able to return to collect it. Secure it they did. It would also seem that they checked out what was on Sherman's mobile phone and found some naked pictures of a woman, who is in fact Sherman's wife.

Theses pictures somehow found their way onto the Internet and their existence was made know to Sherman. In response for the embarrassment he and his wife have suffered, Sherman has filed suit seeking USD 3 million in damages. His claim is against McDonald's, the franchise owner for that part of the world, and the store manager. Sherman wants a jury trial. I am guessing he wants a jury trial because he feels that maybe 12 of his peers will be more sympathetic to his claim than a judge.

The moral of the story, if you are going to take naked pictures of people using your mobile phone then take extra care not to lose the thing! (the photo is from here)