This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Art or pr0n?

Jump to new
C

CAB SAV

Joined
12 June 2008
Posts
215
Reactions
0
So now society accepts 6yr old children to be photographed nude for Art's sake. Rather see a 20yr old. What do u think? OK?

Took my dog for a walk at the beach this morning, he makes some beautiful art work on the sand, but the council makes me put it in a plastic bag.
 
Re: ART or pr0n

CRACK!!


That's the sound of another can of worms being opened up. opcorn:
 
Re: ART or pr0n


I think it is complete madness,...

I don't think taking photo's of nude kids for general display is right at all,

Why is that we stop parents taking photo's of there kids at school funtions and sports days, But then we allow full frontal nude shots of other kids to be on display.... crazy.
 
Re: ART or pr0n

Hello
You can’t photograph you own child at a school sports day? That is very sad, I am sorry for the parents of today’s kids .

Regards
 
Re: ART or pr0n

CAB SAV said:
So now society accepts 6yr old children to be photographed nude for Art's sake. Rather see a 20yr old. What do u think? OK?
Click to expand...

My problem with it is, while the artist and publishers don't view it as pr0n and it is all done as "art", sick minded people will turn it into pr0n and/or post it in the wrong places on the web and use it as a sexual image. I wouldn't be letting my daughter do it I know that.

Also how long will it be now before we see the "it's art" defence in court when someone is now caught with child pr0n on thier computer?

CAB SAV said:
Took my dog for a walk at the beach this morning, he makes some beautiful art work on the sand, but the council makes me put it in a plastic bag.
Click to expand...

lol
 
Re: ART or pr0n

i think its sick..

1 - at age 6, i for one was happily riding my bike and out in the yard playing not posing nude

2 - that girl, quiet clearly, has been manipulated by her parents and brainwashed


A 6 year old doesn't have the capacity to make a decision like having nude pictures taken.
 
Re: ART or pr0n

Agreed. To the artists it may be art. But to the sick minded people it is pr0n.
Its unfortunate for the artist, hopefully they have done it under good faith, but id rather them not to do it and not create more material for the 'pedos'
 
i havn't seen the pics... but, were genitals shown? does it get classified, under law, as child pr0n? parents take photos of their naked babies all the time, with the doodle showing... OF COURSE if it gets into the wrong hands it could be mis-treated... ANYTHING in the wrong hands can be abused & mistreated ( you can murder someone with a fluffy pillow! ) .

hmm - how about this, the sound of women playing tennis could be deemed as very sexual, the heavy grunting they do, the short skirts they wear that reveal their sports knickers, the sweating,the panintg... oh my! I don't care if most of you think it's "sport", because "...to the sickos" it's soft pr0n broadcast nationally!!! omg, saves us from this immoral display!!

where does it end? when can we just accept things for what they are and not always collapse into this nanny state "its the worst case" train of thought?

I think the real "sickos" are all of those who even had the degenerate thought of it being interpreted as pr0n.
 
Re: ART or pr0n

Tysonboss1 said:
...we stop parents taking photo's of there kids at school funtions and sports days,
Click to expand...
Is this for real? Parents are robbed of preserving memories of their children playing sport? unbelievable...
 

whats the bet it already has.. you do realize people sell these kind of pictures on the internet among pedophilia rings??

and, if its ok for a 6 year old, is it ok for a 16, 20, maybe 60 year old? what about if they are handicapped or disabled - i spose thats ok too?

queit clearly, at 6 she has no mental capacity to make an informed decision only based on what her parents tell her

where does one draw the line between art and pr0n?
 
The issue comes down to content (what the picture is saying) which then flows to intent.

Now having done fine art to Masters level I can assure you there are PHd papers in abundance argueing and presenting further questions on just this connundrum.

So I wish you all luck. As far as each individual work is concerned it needs to be viewed individually on its own merits for clues to its intent, sometimes that requires knowledge of the artist or presenter, and then everyone will still have a differrent opinion.

A socialogical nightmare.
 


Post of the day.
 
seem to recall we discussed this elsewhere, Germaine Greer posting photos of young boys etc. One big difference, I would say, - maybe others would disagree - is that she didn;t have their permission to do so, lol.

But the question of permission by 6 yearolds (in this recent case) has gotta be contraversial. The loophole probably in this current case (was it a setup? lol) being that the mother took the photos - and she could no doubt answer for the kid I guess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germaine_Greer

PS back to Germaine, she seems quite happy to portray young boys as "sexual objects" - and you reckon she's not a fruitloop . :venus: :viking:
 

Attachments

  • germaine1.jpg
    36.9 KB · Views: 308
  • germaine2.jpg
    12.9 KB · Views: 1,380
hi,

have just watched the interview with the girl on the front cover of the magazine. i feel nothing but pity for her.

as for bill henson, if he approached me to do nude picks of my daughter, he'd be shown the door quick smart, with the sharp end of my stiletto jamed up where the sun don't shine.
 
My personal view is that this is getting just a little too weird for my liking. There is just so much so you can tolerate in the end.

What is freedom without control? Chaos?
 
Art shmart. If I kill someone in the name of art is it somehow OK.

The pics are exploitation of the sexuality of a minor IMO. The latest ones are sick publicity/attention stunts ... imagine how you would feel now if your own parents had pulled that stunt and sold out your childhood innocence!!!!!!!!!?????

Take the pics if you want but why publish! Having said that, anyone that takes those sort of pics of prepubescent children in private is still a sick ****.
 
saichuen said:
.

What is freedom without control? Chaos?
Click to expand...

There can be no freedom till there is complete education for every individual to at least 3rd year uni with social science components and then there would be no problems and the debate would be understood

These types of threads are wrong because only a few experts can know the truth.

The rest is pure speculation which is akin to cr p in the current debate.
 
Well maybe it is art, but it is pr0n too.
6 years old?
Sorry, that's sooooo wrong.

Will sell more of the magazine, which I am sure is the real intention. Sickos.
 
We let our kids play naked on the beach. No problem for most. but when a tasteful picture is taken of a naked child all of a sudden its pr0n???? does this mean that all naked pictures or paintings of naked adults is pr0n???
if pedophiles want material they will go to the internet and get some real kiddy pr0n. not some nice tasteful picture of a naked child.
big deal... get over it.
nothing wrong with it.
whats wrong is what average people(that dont under stand art) turn it into.
 
What is pornographic about this???
Very tasteful IMO
Weird but not pornographic
 

Attachments

  • Tastful.jpg
    23.7 KB · Views: 14,845
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...