By: emucorp
23/05/2008
2:20 pm Yahoo! Profile:
emucorp Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Childhood is in the mind of the child"
Really ... ? Clearly those b@stards making laws about kids need to read some of your manifesto and get a grip ... |
|
By: antago.nist
23/05/2008
2:20 pm Yahoo! Profile:
antago.nist Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Ah I remember the feeling of being able to run around in the Nud, actually, come to think of it, I was Born in the nud.
To this day I walk around naked at home because IT FEELS GOOD. Because I CAN.
It's certainly interesting to me that the most apparent things to come out of churches these days are reports of child abuse and paedophilia. Church of England. Roman Catholic Church. and from the same ranks come all the do gooders.
I wonder at what age these people were allowed to read Song of Solomon for themselves? |
|
By: new_horizens
23/05/2008
2:25 pm Yahoo! Profile:
new_horizens Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Australians who, like Kevin Rudd, would suggest that the photos of the young girl were revolting are simply perverted! They have dirty thinking minds!
Such perverted people are revolting... to turn something quite innocent as those photos that were taken for art-sake into something sordid is simply disgusting. |
|
By: antago.nist
23/05/2008
2:26 pm Yahoo! Profile:
antago.nist Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Amen to that, brother or sister! |
|
By: new_horizens
23/05/2008
2:30 pm Yahoo! Profile:
new_horizens Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Did Kevin Rudd say how revolting it was about that old man who was given prime time TV coverage to tell us about his sexual relationship with his daughter with whom he had a child? No he didn't!
Is that case less offensive than the young girl's photos? Certainly not.
It's typical hypocrisy!
It's a ruddy bloody shame! |
|
By: antago.nist
23/05/2008
2:31 pm Yahoo! Profile:
antago.nist Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"They have dirty thinking minds!"
Australians who, like Kevin Rudd, would suggest that the photos of the young girl were revolting are simply perverted! They have dirty thinking minds!
Such perverted people are revolting... to turn something quite innocent as those photos that were taken for art-sake into something sordid is simply disgusting.
I'm not here to give Kev a rev, but just because he's the Prime Minister of Australia doesn't mean he should be allowed to moralise in this way. Yes the dirty thoughts came from a dirty mind.
Kevin Rudd owes that girl an apology. |
|
By: kade_mclachlan
23/05/2008
2:32 pm Yahoo! Profile:
kade_mclachlan Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
id say there would be a fine line between art and pornography, were the normal person would see a picture as artistic and have meaning compared to a sicko who would see the picture as material for getting off.
were do we draw the line, certainly age should be an issue when children are involved, i believe a minor under the age of 15 should not be photographed under any circumstances when it involves nudity. |
|
By: antago.nist
23/05/2008
2:33 pm Yahoo! Profile:
antago.nist Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| There wouldn't be much left in the galleries of the world if all the "pornography" was removed by censorship. |
|
By: sticks0
23/05/2008
2:34 pm Yahoo! Profile:
sticks0 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
How you could possibly condone taking naked kiddie pics as 'art' is beyond me!
Lock the rock spider up I say! He crossed the line! |
|
By: kade_mclachlan
23/05/2008
2:35 pm Yahoo! Profile:
kade_mclachlan Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| the parents should be ashamed of themselves for allowing it. |
|
By: antago.nist
23/05/2008
2:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
antago.nist Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Oooooo....""i believe a minor under the age of 15 should not be photographed under any circumstances when it involves nudity.""...oooOO
Every family album contains porno filth then?
I'll have to ask the censor to remove the huggies ads then. |
|
By: kade_mclachlan
23/05/2008
2:38 pm Yahoo! Profile:
kade_mclachlan Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| well if you like people to see photo of your child in an indecent manner there your just as bad... |
|
By: pansi1951
23/05/2008
2:39 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pansi1951 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Trying to masquerade soft child porn as art. I hope they destroy all the photos of naked children and prosecute the parents for giving permission for their children to be exploited. |
|
By: ripfelix
23/05/2008
2:41 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ripfelix Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Art has always pushed the boundaries. It is arts job to redefine a generation by portraying what is acceptable. it is the job of society to clearly state what the boundaries are.
If Rudd and Nelson, and a large number of other "non-arts" find it offensive, then there lies the boundary.
The fact remains that the use of nude photos of underage children is not acceptable. This is the barrier, if we let it fall then the next barrier is Pornographic images and exploitation of underage children.
I am semi-comfortable with the barriers as they stand, and certainly cant condone shifting them because some artsy fartsy artist tells me its right.
Art is the expression of a societies standards, not of an artists standards. |
|
By: antago.nist
23/05/2008
2:41 pm Yahoo! Profile:
antago.nist Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
the parents should be ashamed of themselves for allowing it.
I hope they get to comment in the public forum and defend their actions vigorously. They are her parents. They recognise their daughter's right as a HUMAN BEING to do what she did.
It's a shame that more people don't understand true art.
all they see is skin and they have dirty ideas about it.
Very sad indeed. |
|
By: sticks0
23/05/2008
2:43 pm |
Message deleted. |
|
By: antago.nist
23/05/2008
2:45 pm Yahoo! Profile:
antago.nist Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Art is the expression of a societies standards, not of an artists standards.
RIPFELIX, what planet are you from, since when has the above statement been true?
When has art EVER expressed societies standards. No wonder there are so many people who have no idea how to express themselves, if that were true we would all have the same views as everybody else.
Sounds like a great world to live in, where individuality has been franchised by the moral minority. |
|
By: antago.nist
23/05/2008
2:47 pm Yahoo! Profile:
antago.nist Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
sticksO the king (or queen)of contradiction.
Mr Rudd must have looked just a little too long at the images then? |
|
By: mr_rekshun
23/05/2008
2:48 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mr_rekshun Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
>>Art is the expression of a societies standards, not of an artists standards.>>
Art doesn't just express society's standards, it challenges and questions them. Good art holds up a mirror and challenges the viewer to question why they perceive things in the way they do.
Then again, to some people, art is a painting of a bowl of fruit. |
|
By: antago.nist
23/05/2008
2:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
antago.nist Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Has anyone on this board actually seen the exhibition in its entirety?
Only the privileged so far I believe, ie politicians, cops and censors. |
|
By: alois.heidler
23/05/2008
2:51 pm Yahoo! Profile:
alois.heidler Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Has anyone on this board actually seen the exhibition in its entirety?
I'm afraid if I see it I might be morally corrupted and doing perverted things like keep sardines in my pockets. |
|
By: jimmy.waksavage
23/05/2008
2:52 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jimmy.waksavage Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Come on these photos are indecent I feel sorry for these girls having there pictures splashed everywhere I believe if the photos weren't taken in a pornagrahic way which they apear not to be it does not count as born miley cyrus has just been degraded for having a picture of her naked back in a magazine so you personally decide if its art or porn personally I think its art as it don't appeal as porn in anyway to me if it turns u on or you find a naked 13 yr old girl disgusting or even worse arousing you are a d1ckhead |
|
By: urbaniteshaz
23/05/2008
2:52 pm Yahoo! Profile:
urbaniteshaz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| You might see us as do gooders and prudes, but this cannot be dissmissed as "Art" it is indecent. At 12 yrs old a girl is not emotionally or socially developed enugh to know she is being exploited. My question is Why on earth does this creep feel the need to photograph kiddeis in the nude, hello! ROCK SPIDER if he truly considered nudity art then he would photograph adults. obviously he likes photgraphing his child subjects and hides behind his profession and dismisses it as art. What rot throw him in jail in general population and let them decide if it's art. |
|
By: rozina23
23/05/2008
2:56 pm Yahoo! Profile:
rozina23 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I saw an exhibition of his ten years ago....it creeped me out |
|
By: codswal
23/05/2008
2:57 pm Yahoo! Profile:
codswal Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Every family album contains porno filth then
god this thread has certainly got you going....hasnt it....antango....
I dont know of tooooo many parents who have their 13 year old daughter posing in a come hither fashion naked for the world to lust after.......but obviously you do and you obviously approve....which is your choice....
why call people names because they have different and dare I say it higher standards than you
Yes unfortunately paedos do get a lust for pictures of kiddy winkies naked...even if the ones you know ...dont...
you are of course saying..that should the paedophile community get together....all wear beards and floppy hats....and say its an art exhibition.....their definition of art......being no different to Mr Hensons definition..........then its okay to peruse pictures of naked children......
well you had better tell the law makers there is no such thing as child pornography......and while your at it...tell the aboriginal community that its healthy to have 13 year old girls posing for naked pictures.. |
|
