Family photos on Ebay, surely that's a bit odd?!

[peanutMD]

Or is it just me?

I searched 'Sock ons' on Ebay and came across 2 listings for family photos of children (apparently taken from an old album), 1 was listed as "vintage photograph of young boy bare legs socks on swing"

Maybe my hormones are making me think crazy but I can only imagine the mention of bare legs is for an... Erm.. Specialist audience.

[catgirl1976]

Eeew

That does sound a little odd

Why would you sell family photo? Why would you want someone elses?

I don't necessarily jump to "specialist audience" but it is odd.

[quoteunquote]

odd.

[persimmon]

That is highly dodgy IMO. Report the seller to EBay.

[wanderingcloud]

Super odd. But then the other day I inadvertently discovered the world of worn stockings on eBay... weird!

[peanutMD]

I don't normally jump on the band wagon but it was honestly my first thought for some reason when I read "young boy bare legs".

Perhaps its sleep deprivation making me think bizarre thoughts lol

But whether it us a target audience it bit why would you sell family photos?

[Quejica]

Why were you searching 'sock ons' what were you looking for?

[VIX1980]

I've come across that too while searching for the same thing and found it strange too.

quejica sock ons go over baby socks, they are meant to stop the baby pulling the socks off and in my experience, very rarely work

[JustWannaDrinkAndDance]

if you search 'vintage photo sock' it doesn't seem that unusual?

[firesidechat]

OP, have you reported it?

It's not odd, it's catering to certain sexual preferences and, if it involves children, should not be on Ebay.

[CaptainKirksNipples]

I found it, he has 300 other items mostly photos/postcards and they don't seem dodgy. Maybe not the best description though!

[peanutMD]

Quejika - Sock-ons are a childrens product to put on over baby socks to kind of grip them on their feet.


Vix thank you for the hidden warning... back to the drawing board for tiny, fidgetty DD :o

DrinkandDance - I'm confused, do you want me to look that up or did you think that's what I searched?

Fire - will report as I thought it was just me being weird.

[firesidechat]

I've now looked at the ones I think you mean.

It looks a bit borderline. Could be innocent, could be very clever seller. However with my cynical hat on, I can't see why he needs to emphasize the bare legs in all those photos. They will definitely appeal to a certain sort of buyer, so don't feel comfortable with them anyway.

[firesidechat]

Hate the fact that you can see vintage pictures of young children and even think that it might be dodgy. Sad that we've lost that innocence and wonder if there's more to it.

[MonaLotte]

Seems weird I would report. The description doesn't sit well with me :(

[CaptainKirksNipples]

It doesn't make sense that he is selling to 'cater to sexual preferences', if they are able to use a computer to search on eBay then there will be a huge range of other pictures available online...

[elliejjtiny]

That sounds weird to me too. OP you need to buy tights or leggings with feet for your DD. My DS pulls his socks off and it's the only thing that works.

[firesidechat]

Captain - it happens all the time on Ebay and is against their rules, so they will delete the more obvious ones.

People sell used shoes, sometimes childrens, and the description leaves no doubt what the target audience is. The mention of playground, shorts and bare legs seems to at least invite questions.

[CaptainKirksNipples]

Also the seller doesn't list private sales, which you do see with other dodgy stuff (like the well worn slippers on threads I've seen on here!)

[firesidechat]

I must admit that the OP's description made me think of a more obvious listing and that this one isn't in the same league. Having now seen it I would think twice about reporting it. It could still be dodgy, but not an open and shut case.

[nagynolonger]

That sale does look strange but it's not unusual to sell late 1800 early 1900 photographs. We have a few albums that we have inherited. We have no idea who the subjects are but some might be distant relatives.

They are all perfectly 'respectable' pictures apart from one album taken by a soldier in Africa. Some are OK. Fellow soldiers in camp but some show local women and boys.......probably considered harmless at the time, but opinions change. I think this album and some of the others were picked up when FIL was clearing out some old cottages before they were pulled down in the 1960s.

Not really sure what to do with these photographs but I can't bring myself to take them to the tip.

[CaptainKirksNipples]

www.ebay.co.uk/itm/VINTAGE-OLD-PHOTOGRAPH-YOUNG-BOY-BARE-LEGS-SHORTS-SOCKS-SAT-SWING-1930S-/200907685422?_trksid=p5197.m1992&_trkparms=aid%3D111000%26algo%3DREC.CURRENT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D14%26meid%3D6514277832699591352%26pid%3D100015%26prg%3D1006%26rk%3D1%26sd%3D200907685422%26

This is the photo OP is talking about. Probably more bare legs on show in a Boden catalogue...

[peanutMD]

Okay after reading through your posts I've realised that I'm probably over reacting a bit

Just to clarify its not the actual image I have an issue with (although as stated in title I do think its weird to sell family photos old or not) but I find the "bare leg" comment unnecessary and a bit specific.

[squeakytoy]

looking at his history there is nothing at all dodgy, and I think it is just unfortunate wording by a seller who hasnt even realised that his description may be the sort of thing that certain people would be looking for with a different purpose..

social/candid photography is something that a lot of people are interested in

[birdynumnums]

The simple answer to this question is that there are collectors of vintage photography. Nothing sinister or weird about it in my opinion though I agree the description could have better thought out.

[ghoulelocks]

I wouldn't see anything odd in it....