By: mojonikus1
23/05/2008
4:30 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mojonikus1 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
WELL IT SEEMS THE MAJORITY OF AUSTRALIANS ARE PARANOID NEGATIVE HUMANS........IVE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT BUT THIS STORY FURTHER ENHANCES THE STATEMENT
And Kevin Rudd saying the photos are disgusting...really, has he watched AUSTRALIAS GOT TALENT latelly...talk about disgusting and humiliating for the little children of this country.......a few little INNOCENT pics of naked youths is hardly worth talking about compared to overexploiting television programs or stupid little teenie magazines |
|
By: longweekend58
23/05/2008
4:30 pm Yahoo! Profile:
longweekend58 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<I have also known of paedephiles to become excited of pictures of young kids in underwear from catalogues as well.>
so do we ban underwear models under 18? |
|
By: nick.darcy666
23/05/2008
4:31 pm Yahoo! Profile:
nick.darcy666 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Yez want fotos. Yez can have some photos of me bashing 12 year old girls for sipping me alcopop! |
|
By: chocfudge_baby
23/05/2008
4:33 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chocfudge_baby Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"so do we ban underwear models under 18?"
Do you really need underwear models for under 18 year olds? I mean.. underwear is underwear, you know what it looks like. |
|
By: emucorp
23/05/2008
4:33 pm Yahoo! Profile:
emucorp Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Well excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse meeeeeeee."
'scused. ;-> |
|
By: cheeky_dee_au
23/05/2008
4:34 pm Yahoo! Profile:
cheeky_dee_au Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"I have also known of paedephiles to become excited of pictures of young kids in underwear from catalogues as well."
See, that is a point right there that I believe has already been lightly touched on.
If they are getting excited over underwear catalogues, then obviously the problem is with them and not the content. Of course they are going to be turned on by naked art with children too.
That is not anything to do with the artist.
If that were the case, there would be a lot of out of work catalogue photographers and photoshoppers, and one less way for me to know when to hit k-mart to get cheap knickers. |
|
By: nick.darcy666
23/05/2008
4:34 pm Yahoo! Profile:
nick.darcy666 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
underwear is underwear, you know what it looks like.
It needs to be punched. Like everyone on this thread. |
|
By: longweekend58
23/05/2008
4:34 pm Yahoo! Profile:
longweekend58 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<Do you really need underwear models for under 18 year olds? I mean.. underwear is underwear, you know what it looks like.>
methinks you miss the point. |
|
By: longweekend58
23/05/2008
4:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
longweekend58 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<See, that is a point right there that I believe has already been lightly touched on.
If they are getting excited over underwear catalogues, then obviously the problem is with them and not the content. Of course they are going to be turned on by naked art with children too.
That is not anything to do with the artist.
If that were the case, there would be a lot of out of work catalogue photographers and photoshoppers, and one less way for me to know when to hit k-mart to get cheap knickers.>
Some people (apparently) get real excited by spaghetti! That doesnt make me want to make spaghetti a restricted purchase to 18+ only. |
|
By: mr_rekshun
23/05/2008
4:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mr_rekshun Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
>>I think nude photos of children who are in puberty is morally and ethically wrong. I have also known of paedephiles to become excited of pictures of young kids in underwear from catalogues as well.>>
And yet underwear catalogues aren't considered child porn. Go figure. |
|
By: lktlch
23/05/2008
4:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
lktlch Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| The silly, imature and uneducated rant of someone with no creative tallent and to much time on there hand. Art comes in all forms. And I can see most people see a naked child. She's a teenager who is old enough to make decisions. Lets also not forget that for most 12/13yo its the age they experience there first sexual encounter. And for all the little minds... maybe see it as it is. The art of the human body. Next you'll all be calling dads changing nappy's and bathing there kids paedophile's! Grow Up!! |
|
By: chocfudge_baby
23/05/2008
4:37 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chocfudge_baby Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I didn't miss the point at all. You made a stupid comment. I made a stupid comment. Stupidity all round, it's on the house! |
|
By: nick.darcy666
23/05/2008
4:38 pm Yahoo! Profile:
nick.darcy666 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Some people (apparently) get real excited by spaghetti!
Yeah, and what of it? Some of us get excited by sitting in a ditch in our underpants. I get excited when I punch someone. |
|
By: cheeky_dee_au
23/05/2008
4:38 pm Yahoo! Profile:
cheeky_dee_au Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"It needs to be punched. Like everyone on this thread."
Always one that has something really worthy to add.
Thank you.
Really.
Your intelligence is incredible. |
|
By: haveabanditday
23/05/2008
4:39 pm Yahoo! Profile:
haveabanditday Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
having nude pictures on display in public is alot different to changing nappies - get it right.
This whole thing is a disgrace made by a perverted artist and supported by a perverted gallery. The police should act accordingly |
|
By: mojonikus1
23/05/2008
4:39 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mojonikus1 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| couldnt have said it better myself....but lets wait for the news and current affairs programs to milk this pathetic story to get a few people talking at the dinner table tonight and just wait for the little 10 second comment from the pro pics side, blink and u will miss |
|
By: nick.darcy666
23/05/2008
4:40 pm Yahoo! Profile:
nick.darcy666 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Your intelligence is incredible.
Ditto your courage. Take a cyber swipe -- <<BIFF>>
*D'Arcy blows his fist a cowboy blowing the barrel of a smoking .45. |
|
By: longweekend58
23/05/2008
4:40 pm Yahoo! Profile:
longweekend58 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<I didn't miss the point at all. You made a stupid comment. I made a stupid comment. Stupidity all round, it's on the house!>
not really. I made a comment you simply didnt understand. Its about DRAWING A LINE. maybe such difficult concepts are too much for you. |
|
By: longweekend58
23/05/2008
4:41 pm Yahoo! Profile:
longweekend58 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<having nude pictures on display in public is alot different to changing nappies - get it right.>
Only by degree. AND THAT is the point. |
|
By: mojonikus1
23/05/2008
4:41 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mojonikus1 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| and i refer to iktlch comment |
|
By: plotrick1
23/05/2008
4:41 pm Yahoo! Profile:
plotrick1 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
*Ditto your courage. Take a cyber swipe -- <<BIFF>>
*D'Arcy blows his fist a cowboy blowing the barrel of a smoking .45.*
I have my doubts. The real D'Arcy would have actually punched his computer into about a zillion tiny pieces, unable to distinguish cyber rage from real rage. |
|
By: nick.darcy666
23/05/2008
4:42 pm Yahoo! Profile:
nick.darcy666 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
have my doubts. The real D'Arcy would have actually punched his computer into about a zillion tiny pieces, unable to distinguish cyber rage from real rage.
Who said I didn't? |
|
By: mr_rekshun
23/05/2008
4:44 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mr_rekshun Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I believe the issue that the pictures may arouse rock spiders is completely different from the isue of child exploitation.
If it is a case of arousing paedophiles, then should we also ban any item or object that can be misused by a criminal? That covers a pretty wide variety of things, and forces our own freedom to choose to be informed by a vast minority of criminals.
The issue of exploitation is greyer... and it is quite obvious from this thread is based on personal opinions about art and morality.
Like I said in the other thread - Art is subjective, so to find the images disturbing or offensive is not wrong. Although I think to call them pornography is ignorant.
As to whether the child is being exploited - many have posited that she is too young to know either way. Her parents are obviously in on the whole thing, so they obviously felt it was non-exploitative. Are they wrong? |
|
By: plotrick1
23/05/2008
4:44 pm |
Message deleted. |
|
By: bitbyte8
23/05/2008
4:45 pm Yahoo! Profile:
bitbyte8 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| are there any parents with children of their own here? |
|
