Absolutely Anything Else

We visited a dentist ages ago here in HU who asked if you wanted a pain killer or not before drilling!
Like that is even an option!!
Terrible story about the foot/finger infection at the baths.
My baby bro had surgery 18 months back to remove one of his toes.
He picked up a horrid infection in Hawaii when he cut himself on a piece of coral. Spent the next week of his Honeymoon in hospital. They wanted to remove his toe in Hawaii but he flew home and tried to save his toe. 18 months later, off it went, something very nasty got into his system from the coral.
I had a painful experience at a cosmetic surgeons office about 10 years back here in HU.
I asked for it though, vanity can kill you!
I paid good money to have a skin peeling with a laser. just seemed like a reasonable price for such a treatment. I worked at the time as a casino dealer in Vegas and looking ones very best is part of the job.
Silly me, did it in Aug. when it is hot in HU.
Couldn't even go in the water, my poor face was sore, swollen and my tears of pain made my skin go on fire.
After a few weeks of recovery I did attempt to cool off in Balaton, no sun was allowed on my new skin so I wrapped my head and face up with a scarf and wore super dark sunglasses. People at the lake were pointing to me and calling out, Michael Jackson.
Felt like an idiot!

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

......no sun was allowed on my new skin so I wrapped my head and face up with a scarf and wore super dark sunglasses. People at the lake were pointing to me and calling out, Michael Jackson.
Felt like an idiot!

Oh the ignorance of some people.....everyone knows you can only be called "Michael Jackson" if you have kids called Cardigan, Duvet and Ratchet and you put some stockings over their heads when you go out.  You must also sleep in an oxygen tent.

Feet and teeth are very sensitive places.
My step- dad had a N. Korean pedicure as a POW in the Korean War.
Not fun.
He also received a new set of dentures courtesy of the US dept. of Vet Affairs at age 26,another fun time when he got a N. Korean "Dental treatment".
It is amazing how much the human body can endure if needed.
I say, give me the meds' all the meds whenever possible.
Speaking of meds...
My father was a US Army medic in WW11, stationed in SE Asia.
He thought he would "out smart" the war and signed up for medic training in the US when he was drafted.
Was sure by the time his training was over with the war would be over and he would be a shoe in for the GI Bill, go onto more intensive medial training to be a doctor for free.
He was sent to CO. for over 18  months of training, had a great time wearing his fancy uniform and being a good looking young man. All the women were ready to go out with him back home while all the "smucks" were overseas fighting.
As luck would have it , when his medical training was done he was sent to the front lines in the Philippines. He had a medical bag full of morphine. He said he would give himself a daily dose or two, or three every morning or as needed. Wow, thought that was interesting to hear from good ol dad.
Said it was bad enough to be running around with a red cross on his helmet, a target for anyone to take out.He saw enough action to know it was best to not feel a thing.

Disgusting!

Apart from being not good, it's a a bit odd.  Belgium seems to be anomalous as does Latvia. What makes them different?

UK and Scandinavia  way down there as expected.   I wonder how Australia, NZ, Canada do? 

I won't include the USA in that list since, with the new Trumpism, assaulting women (and by extension men) for sexual reasons is looking acceptable in so called developed countries.   New wave of Putinism, Trumpism, Orbanism etc.

I begin to wonder if I should even think of comparing Hungary or Romania to Islamic State, the Middle East etc where women get imprisoned for being raped (on the grounds of sex outside marriage).

That chart is disturbing.
I will say that we can not always believe everything we read.
We knew a Hungarian women who arrived in the US around the time my husband did back in 1973.
She happened to escape HU and went to Austria.
She was a super smart if not  a slightly strange person. I helped her get a job and worked with her daily, I knew she was considered by most people in Cal at our job to be over the top.
Her surname rhymed with the word Bazaar so they decided to just call her Bazzar.
She told me when she was in the refugee camp on Austria that one time she was out walking near a field in the daytime when several 3 world men also refugees raped her in the field.
She much later in the early 1990's was locked up in a mental ward in CO.
I received a person to person call once in NM from her hospital in CO. She told me all about being addicted to heroin and she was clean. Said she was a drug consular  now but needed us to sign  her out for the day? Made no sense at all if she was not a patient.
She had married another HU refugee after her attack, probably more for protection then for love.
Her husband was a sweet guy, we knew him also.
I don't really have more to say on the chart but circumstances can be strange anywhere if you do not know your surroundings.
Believe me, as a pretty young teenager living with my sister in Hollywood there were many times I would not leave the house for a walk in  certain hours unless I was walking both the Lab and the Great Dane
My mother has tales of men getting "fresh" back when she was a teenager too in the 1940's in conservative middle class Conn.
Once she missed her bus to work when she was around 18 years old. It was pouring rain and she knew she would be late if she waited for the next bus.
A older, clean looking man , like a grandfather saw the bus go, he drove over to her and asked if she wanted a ride.
She knew better but hated being late for work so she got in the car.
The old dude was OK at first then he drove super fast down a dirt road, my mom was screaming to get out, he just kept on driving like a madman.
Thankfully they had a road block with construction workers, MY mom beat the old guy over the head with her umbrella and ran out of the car. Walked home, all covered in mud tears streaming down her face. She got an ear full from her two elderly aunts and then put her to bed to recover.She missed work that day.
Another time in the 50's before I was born she was attacked again in a nice area of Conn.
She worked nights so my dad could babysit since he worked days.
She walked home most of the way with 3 other women but broke off with them for a couple of blocks home.
As she walked near the park a man grabbed her from behind with a knife under the throat.
He was dragging her into the trees.
She was putting up such a hard fight that a passing car called the cops.
They arrived before any major damage was done.
My mom fought that guy so hard that he let her go.
The cops gave my father a ear full this time. She quit her night job.

TPTB (the powers that be) deleted my topic on the image above, and moved my topic to this post list.

And TPTB did not update this topic's post time line. And it still showing the last post was two weeks ago. I asked for a correction to this, but nothing happened. Effectively burying this topic.


So this comment is simply designed to bring this to the forum top post list again. 

klsallee wrote:

So this comment is simply designed to bring this to the forum top post list again. 

I've seen people just comment with "bump" previously.  Took me ages to work out why they wrote "bump" in a forum.

It does not say if the people surveyed were men, women or both. I suppose if it was both men and women the results might seem less alarming. Consent is always a difficult thing to prove in a court of law as there will rarely be independant witnesses.

Can't always believe a witness or a chart.
Of course there are crimes against men women and children everywhere.
Knew someone who spent over 3 months in a HU jail for a sex crime that they were 100% innocent of.
A young women lied to the police because she was rejected so her plan was to get even by lying.
In the end she couldn't go through with the lie so the guy and  his friend were released from a hard core HU prison.
If she had not told the truth who knows how long they would of been locked up.
I know several people who were molested as children by their own parents so really I do  not know the answer to this problem.
If one can't trust their own parents then who can they trust.

Sadly we are living in an ever increasing sexualized world.

Maybe we are just hearing about it more these days.
Used to be a dirty secret and now everyone wants to open up.

anns wrote:

Sadly we are living in an ever increasing sexualized world.

Ever increasing OVER-sexualised world?

Maybe it's just the same but more visible now we have selfies, sexting, revenge porn, none of which was possible until the advent of the smart phone.

Yes the world has too much access to negative sexual content, I think.
I am so glad I am not raising a young child these days, not sure how to go about it with so much outside overly sexual media out there.
My mom was no prude in many ways but she did keep us kids as long a possible. No Playboy mags in the house etc.
She would make us leave the room if her house guests started speaking about anything she considered adult subjects.
One of her close friends was a ex lady of the night, just to set it straight that my mom was not judgemental towards anyone, she just wanted to keep her 6 kids pure, safe and happy.
These days you would have to keep your child locked in   a closet to keep them from hearing or seeing adult content.
Not sure why the media wants to mess with the family or so it seems to me. The break down of some values also breaks down the family unit.
I am I think a very open minded person but childhood is a sacred thing and anyone who breaks that trust between innocent children and the real hard world is evil in my mind.
I had a friend who I met when we were both 14 yeas old. Last time I saw her we were 19.
We were actually born on the same day and perhaps even the same time, soul sisters sort of.
She often made references to her older brother doing sexual things to her when they had been younger. I sort of brushed it off as her trying to be shocking or different.
I found out just a few years ago that she did herself in when we would of been 33.
Makes me sad and makes me wonder if she was telling the truth and no one would listen. Our BD is coming up soon and i always say a few private words to her on our day.

Yes it's an increasingly over sexualised  world. I'm glad that I am not the main carer for children because it is near impossible to avoid the sexualised content of all the media. 
It's also a shame that so many people have been damaged by their childhood experiences.  And even constantly hearing these stories can be damaging to individuals and society but what can we do.

Only thing I can think of is for each parent or caregiver to try their hardest to protect children from outside forces.
Some people seem to go to extremes and other's just drop the ball.
I worked in a family style beauty salon in the Bible Belt area of New Mexico in the 90's. We had magazines in the shop like Family Circle or Good Housekeeping, real PG stuff, well one client went insane over a photo for a soap add in the mag, the women was taking a shower in the add, she insisted we remove all "prono" from our salon!
Can't please everyone .
Then again kids having access to real porno with the media is really out of control now.
Last visit to Las Vegas I was able to finally meet my little 10 year  old great-niece.
My niece works in Vegas sometimes as a manager of a dept in a SF IT firm, they have a office in Vegas so she often comes to check things out.
She brought her girl with her since they had a school holiday and I was able to "kid sit" for the day. They were staying at a very nice hotel, the Bellagio on the strip.
I am so out of touch these days with kids but as family we hit it off the second we met.
I took her to the big 3 story M&M candy building ( never again, 3 floors of M&M's in every form, everything M&M, t-shits, key rings, tea cups, bed sheets!!!)
As we walked on the strip to the M&M shop I held her hand like there was glue on it. Never let my eyes off her for a second.
Later at the Bellagio pool, a really nice place she went to the WC by herself. After 2 mins. I started freaking out, thought I had better go check on her an dhow dumb for me to let her go by herself.
She came out, I said nothing about it not to scare her.
Not even sure how to raise a child these days, don't want to strangle them with fear but then again safe is better then sorry.

anns wrote:

..... because it is near impossible to avoid the sexualised content of all the media. 
...

It's an arms race.  And one I'm not winning.

I want my sprogs to be tech-savvy and Mrs Fluffy and I are extremely liberal about much but I seriously wonder what is going on with Fluffyette1 on Facebook either by PC or by smartphone.  We're unable to find out in sufficient detail.  Mrs Fluffy is supposedly monitoring but it's hard to police 24x7.  Fluffyette2 is quite young so hasn't got into Facebook yet. 

What I am really unhappy about is  not so much sexual content but the trivialisation of violence and drugs.  I find my kids watching car camera crashes and accidents on YouTube and I object to them doing that as I think it encourages it to be seen as some kind of video game.  I also fear the general increase in paralleling some cultural things with drug use. 

I want them to know there are consequences for violence and drug use.  It's really hard work to keep on top of it all.   

One thing I am forbidding is the use of PCs in their bedrooms - I want to see what they are doing.  I may even implement a restriction on Internet use during the night based upon their personal devices.

Things I fear most they will get involved in:

Drugs
Child Molestation
Crime/Violence
Teenage Pregnancy/Sex

Surprising in that off the cuff list that Teenage Pregnancy is lower down the list.  I am not bothered if they have boyfriends/girlfriends when they are 16 as there's nothing Mrs Fluffy and I can do to stop them meeting up and doing whatever they want to do.  I just want to make sure they protect themselves.

I have to say my mother was super strict about us seeing boys but drugs...
She would often hand me a valium herself !
Of course in the 60's most "straight middle class" parents didn't see much harm in taking a pill every so often if their trusted doctor gave it to them.
Funny thing is my great-grandmother and great-aunts used to smoke weed in the 20's and 30's in the house!
They used to actually sell pot in small boxes mixed with some other herbs for asthma .
The brand was called," Asthma Relievers" and sold in the corner pharmacy.
Of course they also used to use real codeine in cough syrup over the counter.
I know when my sis lived in the UK in the 70's they still added that to cough meds.
My mother was super proud of the fact that none of her 4 girls "got into trouble" didn't seem to matter much that I often was on LSD at family dinners at age 16.
Our son is now 40 years old and was actually a very good teenage boy. Never wanted to do much other then play video games. Those can be dangerous though, he and his wife are gamers, half the time they live in another world.Reality is not for them.
I never ever would of bought him a video game if I knew how dangerous they can be.
He underwent 3 broken arms and 3 major surgeries on his arm at age 12. He had to have his bike and outdoor toys taken away to prevent hurting his frail arm. Video games seemed like the way to keep him busy while he healed up.
To tell the truth, if I knew how dangerous video games could and can be, I would of rather had his arm just  removed to save his brain.
Funny how back years ago parents were more worried about unwed mothers then drugs, now it seems the other way around.
I know some of the reasons why the older generations were so anti- sex was because back before they had penicillin and other drugs people actually died from having sex with the wrong person.

I agree that there is far too much violence on TV and it seems to be shown all day rather than only after 9 pm or whatever. I never watched TV in Hungary but I do in Croatia because they use subtitles rather than dubbing. I can't say I've found any porn on Croatia TV but I only get what comes on the normal terrestrial channels, no dish or cable.

I think it is important to make the destinction between nudity and porn as I personally do not believe one human being can be corrupted by seeing the naked body of another human being. Whilst I have never practiced naturism myself I defend the right of others to do so and I think it is wrong to have laws about indecent exposure.  Some of the rules meant to protect children can lead them to think their bodies are shameful or disgusting. My sister in law had 2 children by a previous marriage before she met my brother. Both kids were keen on swimming and often won awards at school swimming events. She is justifiably proud of their achievements but has no photo or video records to cherish because no photography is allowed.

fidobsa wrote:

I.....She is justifiably proud of their achievements but has no photo or video records to cherish because no photography is allowed.

We take photos of our kids all the time.  I would take on anyone who tried to pull that level of silliness on me.  It's just paranoid nonsense.  If it's a public place, it's perfectly OK.

It's like photographing policemen or public buildings. There's nothing to stop you doing that in the UK despite what some people may think they know.  Perfectly legal to take photos in the street or even pictures of planes landing and taking off at an airport.

Seems like the no photo thing is religious in nature?
I know many native Americans never wanted their photos taken because they believed their soul was being captured etc.
I have no photos of my grandmother and her side of the family.
They were native Americans but did have photos taken, they just got lost in a house fire.
Too bad I never saw what my granny looked like, not like me at all from what I have been told.
She was tiny with long black hair, I am tall with light hair.
Nudity,well to be honest religion makes many people ashamed to be naked.
I never saw my mother in the "raw" or my sisters either even though we shared a bedroom, just not allowed in our family.
I have gone skinny dipping as a young person but never really felt comfortable doing that and the few times were as a teen with a few girlfriends in their pools or in my pool with the lights out at night.
Cultures also play a role in nudity.
I know in Hawaii the local women go swimming wearing long shorts and a t-shirt on top of their swimsuits. In Japan once a women becomes a mother they usually don't wear swimsuits and if they do they are very modest ones.
Then again in Hawaii they have allot of nudist beaches, just for westerners really.
Hawaiians are very modest people because of the whole missionary invasion, just like most native Americans, they learned to be ashamed because of religion.
My husband and I went on holiday to Maui in the mid 80's.He had a brand new Sony video camera and we wanted to take allot of videos to show my mother who was sitting our son. Her dream was to go to Hawaii although in the end she never made it there.
We were told about a really nice beach that was perfect for swimming, no sharks, calm waters etc. We drove our rent a car to this remote beach area.
Maybe a few dozen people were there.
As we got to the sandy area I realized it was a clothing optional beach.
I wanted to leave but hubby insisted that we stay, he didn't want to drive all over the place.
Put down our thing s and he pulled off his swimsuit!
I of course left my one piece suit on, I am not that free spirited.
I was slightly mad though because I was not able to use the video camera that day, I am sure my mother wouldn't want to see my husband running around the beach nude with so many other free spirited people in the shots.
I suppose I am a prude too, as I swam for the longest time I got a cramp in my leg, noticed the only person nearby was a naked strange man, I dog crawled to the shore, never wanted to find myslef being saved by a nude man.

I think it is silly if you can't take pictures of your own children,  school events and swimming.  Although I must agree that there are unsavoury types hanging around beaches and children's playgrounds.  And in shopping centres  and stores like ikea. 
I worked for many years in legal services so sadly know all the behaviours including people secretly photographing children.

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

Seems like the no photo thing is religious in nature?

No, it's because of paedophiles/child molesters taking pictures of underage kids.

Only private places can have rules regarding photography - private includes schools.

But streets are public places and anyone can take photos.

There are obviously restrictions on taking pictures for promoting terrorism or invading privacy like taking photos into people's windows from the street.

But generally, anyone in a "crowd" scene is fair game to be snapped and no permission is required.

anns wrote:

Sadly we are living in an ever increasing sexualized world.

Which, in my humble opinion, may entire miss the point.

Even if we all ran around sans clothing, and sexuality was a part of normal everyday life (which it actually appears to have been through most of human history and in most cultures) that does NOT excuse sexual assault. In any, way or form.

fluffy2560 wrote:

I want my sprogs to be tech-savvy and Mrs Fluffy and I are extremely liberal about much but I seriously wonder what is going on with Fluffyette1 on Facebook either by PC or by smartphone.  We're unable to find out in sufficient detail.  Mrs Fluffy is supposedly monitoring but it's hard to police 24x7.  Fluffyette2 is quite young so hasn't got into Facebook yet.

Not telling someone how to parent, but.... just some thoughts of mine on this issue.

Your house, your rules.

No parent needs to give their children a "Smart" phone. In fact, no child (or adult) really needs a "Smart" phone. Food and shelter are requirements. All else are add-ons to life. Getting any life add-ons really should need a reason, else they are just toys. Want to stay in contact, then a "dumb" phone works fine.

And if you are in charge of the local network in your home, and you should be, you can simply block Facebook there. Sure, you can not block access from others places, and one may argue that just shifts the behavior to an unmonitored space... but seriously... we were all teenagers and we all found ways to do that anyway out of the parents home. But when at home then maybe the child needs to engage in more important things than what is on a PC or a "Smart" phone. Which is healthy.

I am one who grew up with the "meanest mother in the world". But then I did grow up. And I realized she was the best mother in the world.

That was not what I was saying.
I was saying that we are increasingly living in a sexualised world and other members on here have commented the same. ***

fidobsa wrote:

It does not say if the people surveyed were men, women or both. I suppose if it was both men and women the results might seem less alarming. .

So.... if one woman says it is okay that another woman can be sexually assaulted.... that makes the entire idea of sexual assault less alarming???? So it is less alarming if one woman walking alone at night can be assaulted just because another women thought it was okay?

And to be provocative.....

So.... if an African thinks slavery of Africans is okay, then slavery of Africans in general should be seen as less alarming???? Should we go back to the good 'ol USA of 1859?

So.... if some governments think the idea torture is okay, then the idea of torture is then simply less alarming?

Sorry. We can disagree. But I just find that type of thinking just wrong. In other words, other people's opinions should not invalidate your basic human rights to not be assaulted, enslaved or tortured. But in the "new democracies", also know as illiberal democracies, where majority rules and minority rights can be ignored, such human rights can be disregarded by the tyranny of the majority. Scary. And you should be scared.

fluffy2560 wrote:

Perfectly legal to take photos in the street or even pictures of planes landing and taking off at an airport.

In theory. Reality is more complicated:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_ … ifications

Yes, they were finally acquitted. But the issue may, at any time, reappear for anyone. And legal bills to fight for your legal and given rights are expensive. Sure it stinks. C'set la vie.

fluffy2560 wrote:

But generally, anyone in a "crowd" scene is fair game to be snapped and no permission is required.

I will have to check on this... And get back to this thread... but a "crowd" alone in Hungary may not be enough. It may have to be a "public crowed", as I understand it. Private events, such as concerts with entrance fees may not no apply. But again, I may be wrong. So I will correct myself after I researched it.

When I was growing up there was no such thing as a "private place" in my mom's home. She even read my diary which led to me having to see a "head shrinker" for just one visit.
My mom and step-dad thought they were being all progressive with having me talk out my "issues" with a pro.
What a darn joke he was!!
Pro my back side!
I was a super shy 12 year old innocent girl who still played with dolls when this "pro" thought he was funny by asking me as soon as I walked into his office, "How's you sex life"?!!What???
I clammed up and and my parents paid for nothing.
He was a perv in my view and creepy!!
I was even to ashamed to tell my parents how weird the doctor was.
It is sometimes good to get to know what ones kids are doing.
My son used to spend hours on end in his room as a teen with his video games, he had no internet then and no cell phone so whatever he was into was his own doing.
My parents were hard core watching almost everything we did until we were in our mid to late teens and they seemed to have either given up or put their energy into the younger family members. I knew for the most part as long as I stayed away from boys I could do almost anything with my friends from going to concerts to spending weekends at their homes.
No teens having boys troubles were allowed, seemed ok to be higher then a kite, drink Boone's Farm wine in the graveyard etc, as long as we stayed far, far away from boys.
It is funny really as a almost 62 year old women, since I met my husband at age 19, I doubt I have matured much since then as far as the dating game goes. I would have no clue what is going on these days in the real world of dating, mating etc. I am sort of happy to be sheltered from the little bit I know of what's going on these days. Scary to think about the insane pressure on young people these days.

klsallee wrote:

fluffy2560 wrote:

But generally, anyone in a "crowd" scene is fair game to be snapped and no permission is required.

I will have to check on this... And get back to this thread... but a "crowd" alone in Hungary may not be enough. It may have to be a "public crowed", as I understand it. Private events, such as concerts with entrance fees may not no apply. But again, I may be wrong. So I will correct myself after I researched it.

Imagine if the paparazzi needed to get permission to take photos of street incidents or if the TV news had to ask every football fan to sign a form to allow disclosure.   Wouldn't work.

Without looking at exceptions - airports/military bases/public toilets etc - then anywhere public is generally OK . Private locations can have their own rules.

fluffy2560 wrote:

Imagine if the paparazzi needed to get permission to take photos of street incidents or if the TV news had to ask every football fan to sign a form to allow disclosure.   Wouldn't work. .

Sighs....

Streets are of course public. Why even mention this as a rebuttal?

Football stadiums are typically paid with public funds so are public spaces by definition, despite fees to enter. And I did not mention football at all.

But to be clear, by paid spaces at concerts I meant at private clubs, bars, etc..... Thus I found you singular word "crowd" to be too amorphous and ambiguous and was trying to correct it appropriately.

But for what it is worth, I have been to concerts, at public places like stadiums, that displayed a sign on entrance "You may be filmed" as a warning. So, yes, at times, even public spaces may have limits. It is up to each person to decide if that is okay or not (i.e. not to enter the concert if you do not want to be filmed).

anns wrote:

That was not what I was saying.

Thanks for the clarification.

***

klsallee wrote:

Streets are of course public. Why even mention this as a rebuttal?

It's not always clear if a street is public or not.  For example, roads through the forest might be accessible by the public but they could be actually on private property.

klsallee wrote:

Football stadiums are typically paid with public funds so are public spaces by definition, despite fees to enter. And I did not mention football at all.

Football was just an example.  The police photograph hooligans without their permission.  But in any case most football stadiums are actually privately owned (at least in the UK).   Many big UK clubs own their own grounds.

klsallee wrote:

But to be clear, by paid spaces at concerts I meant at private clubs, bars, etc..... Thus I found you singular word "crowd" to be too amorphous and ambiguous and was trying to correct it appropriately.

Crowd might be singular as a noun but it refers to a group of people.  Bit like nouns: fish, sheep and deer or police.

klsallee wrote:

But for what it is worth, I have been to concerts, at public places like stadiums, that displayed a sign on entrance "You may be filmed" as a warning. So, yes, at times, even public spaces may have limits. It is up to each person to decide if that is okay or not (i.e. not to enter the concert if you do not want to be filmed).

Stadiums not always public spaces.  Parks, possibly, almost certainly, government maintained roads, yes, bridges very likely,  forests maybe.  But I think you get the point.

fluffy2560 wrote:

It's not always clear if a street is public or not.  For example, roads through the forest might be accessible by the public but they could be actually on private property.

Have you checked Hungarian law on this? Because maybe you should.

fluffy2560 wrote:

The police photograph hooligans without their permission.  But in any case most football stadiums are actually privately owned (at least in the UK).   Many big UK clubs own their own grounds.

A. There can be different rules for the police if they are enforcing public order.
B. Have you noticed, this is not the UK?----- 

fluffy2560 wrote:

klsallee wrote:

But to be clear, by paid spaces at concerts I meant at private clubs, bars, etc..... Thus I found you singular word "crowd" to be too amorphous and ambiguous and was trying to correct it appropriately.

Crowd might be singular as a noun but it refers to a group of people.  Bit like nouns: fish, sheep and deer or police.

And thus the word "crowd" is ambiguous as to the location of the "crowd", which under Hungarian law, location may matter. And like I said, I have not researched this full yet. I may be wrong. Stay tuned. (I can admit error)

fluffy2560 wrote:

klsallee wrote:

But for what it is worth, I have been to concerts, at public places like stadiums, that displayed a sign on entrance "You may be filmed" as a warning. So, yes, at times, even public spaces may have limits. It is up to each person to decide if that is okay or not (i.e. not to enter the concert if you do not want to be filmed).

Stadiums not always public spaces.  Parks, possibly, almost certainly, government maintained roads, yes, bridges very likely,  forests maybe.  But I think you get the point.

Actually, I do not think I get your point. 

My point was one needs to know if a "crowd" is in a public space or not. So just saying taking photos of a "crowd" was not sufficient IMHO. It might be a matter of geography. So if one says :

Parks, possibly, almost certainly, government maintained roads, yes, bridges very likely,  forests maybe

then we are in agreement that taking pictures of a crowd may be allowed on government maintained roads, but for all else since "possibly, almost certainly.... maybe" is not a 100% guarantee that crowd is in a public space.... and that maybe it is not (by your own words). So, ergo, a person may not take a legal photograph unless one is 100% certain. Which is the problem

But again, I have not researched fully the current law (it seems to change constantly here). So again. i may be right. Or I may be wrong. Stay tuned. All issues till then are just fleas arguing who owns the dog.

klsallee wrote:

fluffy2560 wrote:

It's not always clear if a street is public or not.  For example, roads through the forest might be accessible by the public but they could be actually on private property.

Have you checked Hungarian law on this? Because maybe you should.

Well, no I haven't but I can observe.  There's an apparently public road near me up to the top of one of the hills (Janoshegy) and this is now acquiring a barrier.  Obviously  it's to stop cars driving through which I know has been a problem in the past as I cycle there and see the police catching people.  I think the road passes through protected land but in that respect, it's public (state owned) land as far as I can observe.

When we fist visited Hungary in 78. We were told every 5 mins. by my BIL not to take a family photo here or there, too close to a gov. building or too political of a site.
Not like that anymore in Hungary at least not so much restriction on public photos.
Anyone taking pictures etc. near a military base is questioned even in the US and in this unstable world maybe it is a good thing.
My niece posted many photos of us with her girl on FB. I tried to make sure they were only seen by friends and not for public viewing.
I am not shy but since she is a minor I don't want to post her photo for everyone to see.
Some people are way oversensitive about photos. I posted a sweet photo on FB of my parents from back in the 1940's when they were just dating.
My half-sis took offense because she didn't like my dad that led to a FB Family Fight and now I am not in contact ( my doing) with my sis and my cousin.
Nothing says RED NECK more then a family feud on FB!
Too back we can't pick our family!

I know I had to sign wavers a few times in my life because my "image" was on film.
Used to do hair shows as a model with my sister and we had to sign the OK in case our picture was published in a magazine.
We worked for free as a model so no business contract was done up we all singed we would not sue if our photos were taken etc,
Last time I signed a waver was when I was a table games dealer in Vegas.
The comedian, Wanda Sykes brought a film crew with permission to my place of work to do a comedy routine about playing blackjack.
I was asked if I wanted to deal to her and a guy they allowed in to show her how to play. I thought why not, break up the boring work day so I dealt cards for them. I had to sign a waver because I was not getting paid extra if my image was on her tv special. I never even bothered to se if that even aired on tv.
Wow, mom, I coulda been a star!!!