Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Man and woman in swimsuits, c. 1910; she is exiting a bathing machine Annette Kellerman, early 1900s, in swimwear which she wore when arrested for public indecency In the United States, indecent exposure refers to conduct undertaken in a non-private or (in some jurisdictions) publicly viewable location, which is deemed indecent in nature, such as nudity, masturbation or sexual intercourse. [1]
Indecent exposure is the deliberate public exposure by a person of a portion of their body in a manner contrary to local standards of appropriate behavior. Laws and social attitudes regarding indecent exposure vary significantly in different countries.
Under FCC rules and federal law, radio stations and over-the-air television channels cannot air obscene material at any time and cannot air indecent material between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. "Indecent" material is language or pictures that, in context, describes or depicts, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards ...
In India, British colonial acts such as "indecent exposure", "public indecency", and so on, that involve exposure of a specific body part (genitals, buttocks, anus, nipples on women), a specific intention or effect (being sexually suggestive, offending or annoying observers) are illegal. People in India have the right to wear any dress they like.
Acting in a manner that is perceived as violating public decency is punishable under administrative law, the sentences are proscribed by the respective state police or state security laws of the Austrian states in conjunction with the Austrian Administrative Criminal Law [].
Also called the Blue Dog Democrats or simply the Blue Dogs. A caucus in the United States House of Representatives comprising members of the Democratic Party who identify as centrists or conservatives and profess an independence from the leadership of both major parties. The caucus is the modern development of a more informal grouping of relatively conservative Democrats in U.S. Congress ...
The Supreme Court primarily addressed the matter of whether government regulation of broadcasting content comports with the free speech rights of broadcast operators under the First Amendment. [7] The high court ruled 5–4 in favor of the FCC, holding that the Carlin routine was "indecent but not obscene". Therefore, the Commission could not ...
The FCC made notice about the complaints received in the weeks after the incident. The Commission ultimately remarked, "The Commission does, however, have the authority to enforce statutory and regulatory provisions restricting indecency. Specifically, it is a violation of federal law to broadcast obscene, indecent or profane programming.