By: darkhall67
23/05/2008
5:18 pm Yahoo! Profile:
darkhall67 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
lol. No you should of said whose braddrew. That would of been more credible. lol >>
-----------------
I dont get it. |
|
By: buzzanddidj
23/05/2008
5:19 pm Yahoo! Profile:
buzzanddidj Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
'Obviously you have not been to places of art like Italy and France and England to see the naked statues and the famous paintings... depicting naked adults and children.
Go into some of the most well known historical palaces in Britain... the rooms are graced with invaluable works of art depicting naked adults and children... all on public view.
Why have they not been confiscated by the police?'
By: new_horizens
Hey new,
Remember this
In 1966 Graham Kennedy protested about the censorship of a replica of Michelangelo's David then making a tour of David Jones stores. In Melbourne, the statue could only be displayed with a large fig leaf shielding the genitals from the more sensitive shoppers. Kennedy reacted by displaying his own replica, sans fig leaf, on his In Melbourne Tonight show, challenging Victoria's chief secretary to an on-air debate. "I cannot see us getting into trouble," he told his audience. "Mr Meagher cannot seize all the TV sets."
http://www.smh.com.au/news/TV--Radio/Crude-lewd-ru de--and-awfully-naughty/2005/05/25/1116950754511.h tml
. |
|
By: emucorp
23/05/2008
5:20 pm Yahoo! Profile:
emucorp Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| My last word ... the issue of law rests on the word "indecent" which is not defined in the Act. So that's the debate. Ciao. |
|
By: longweekend58
23/05/2008
5:22 pm Yahoo! Profile:
longweekend58 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<I'm afraid i am not that way inclined, as for statues, they usually dont have that much in the way of detail and are usually not of a living or acutal person>
LOL have you actually SEEN a statue??? |
|
By: ripfelix
23/05/2008
5:23 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ripfelix Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Rekshun, Intent. Quite hard to prove, as an artist it is often to shock. If that was his intent, then he suceeded.
If art is something that excites the senses, then all porn is "art". there has to be more to it than that. Is one mans "art" another mans "porn" and vice-versa. If so then who polices this contradiction? The public, the media, the courts or the Prime minister? |
|
By: plotrick1
23/05/2008
5:23 pm Yahoo! Profile:
plotrick1 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
*My last word ... the issue of law rests on the word "indecent" which is not defined in the Act. So that's the debate. Ciao.*
Unhelpful. So it goes. Later. |
|
By: darkhall67
23/05/2008
5:25 pm Yahoo! Profile:
darkhall67 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Before everyone goes can someone tell me who Nathan Hindmarsh is? |
|
By: plotrick1
23/05/2008
5:27 pm Yahoo! Profile:
plotrick1 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| He's a rugby league player. A slippery, slimy eel. |
|
By: buzzanddidj
23/05/2008
5:27 pm Yahoo! Profile:
buzzanddidj Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Nathan Hindmarsh to honour his father's dying wish
27/03/2008 8:59:38 AM
Nathan Hindmarsh will honour his father's dying wish at Parramatta Stadium on Friday night.
Bill Hindmarsh lost his battle with cancer yesterday.
It was his wish that Nathan take his place in the Eels line up against the Newcastle Knights.
The courageous second rower will honour his dad by taking to the field for the round three NRL clash |
|
By: plotrick1
23/05/2008
5:28 pm Yahoo! Profile:
plotrick1 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
*A slippery, slimy eel.*
By which I mean he plays for the Eels football club. In the context of this thread, I thought I should clarify that. |
|
By: longweekend58
23/05/2008
5:28 pm Yahoo! Profile:
longweekend58 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| seems the artists IS to be charged over 20 photos - indecent publication. If the DPP dont throw it out, the courts will. it is ridiculous in the extreme. |
|
By: ripfelix
23/05/2008
5:29 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ripfelix Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| But whats the relevance of him to this post, and his supposed information re the girls parental consent? |
|
By: andrew.dinham
23/05/2008
5:29 pm Yahoo! Profile:
andrew.dinham Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I don't think the photos fit the definition of pornography - at least what the media has published. There is a distinct line between porn (designed to arouse) and nudity and I don't think these photos cross that line. I think we should celebrate the beauty of the nakedness of the human body. |
|
By: cheeky_dee_au
23/05/2008
5:29 pm Yahoo! Profile:
cheeky_dee_au Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
http://nathanhindmarsh.bigblog.com.au/index.do
thanks to google (not read, so hopefully helpful). |
|
By: ripfelix
23/05/2008
5:31 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ripfelix Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"I think we should celebrate the beauty of the nakedness of the human body."
Perverts lament as he is caught with photos of young topless girls at the beach. |
|
By: longweekend58
23/05/2008
5:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
longweekend58 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<Perverts lament as he is caught with photos of young topless girls at the beach.>
ok to look but dont photograph??? |
|
By: ripfelix
23/05/2008
5:39 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ripfelix Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Just looking is OK, taking the image home for redistribution or sexual gratification is not.
Small box steal soul. |
|
By: reneebuswell
23/05/2008
5:44 pm Yahoo! Profile:
reneebuswell Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| it is very obvious to me and the rest of us that you get of on this by the way photo albums are private not on display for all to see the parents of this young girl have alot to answer for this child is merely not old enough to make a decision that can impact the rest of her life. I for one would not condone anyone to take a naked picture of my children and display it as art you obviously do not have children. |
|
By: jofrankly
23/05/2008
5:46 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jofrankly Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
'I HOPE MR HENSON SUES MR RUDD FOR DEFAMATION.'
as far as I know Rudd said what he thought of the work - how is that defamatory?
Thats the role of art innit - to get people to discuss...well its happening...
You chase controversy ( and despite reports this is not the first time Hensons work has caused debate) you might just get it.
Artists are not immune from the laws of the rest of society.
This insistence that the great tastemakers of our society ('artists' curators and gallery directors) are the ones that decide what is and isnt art and therefore what is and isnt above the law is what should be being debated. |
|
By: andrew.dinham
23/05/2008
5:47 pm Yahoo! Profile:
andrew.dinham Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"I think we should celebrate the beauty of the nakedness of the human body."
Perverts lament as he is caught with photos of young topless girls at the beach.
------------------------
Has the photographer in question been caught doing this? If so, then he should be charged with suitable offences, but I have not heard this was the case? |
|
By: longweekend58
23/05/2008
5:47 pm Yahoo! Profile:
longweekend58 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| It is the province of the small mind to attach evil motives to someone who disagrees with you. |
|
By: cheeky_dee_au
23/05/2008
5:48 pm Yahoo! Profile:
cheeky_dee_au Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"it is very obvious to me and the rest of us that you get of on this by the way photo albums are private not on display for all to see the parents of this young girl have alot to answer for this child is merely not old enough to make a decision that can impact the rest of her life. I for one would not condone anyone to take a naked picture of my children and display it as art you obviously do not have children."
Punctuation helps us to understand what it is you are trying to say.
Speaking personally, and as a mother, I do not get off on the idea of a 13 year old being depicted in a pornographic way.
Without seeing the pictures I can not say if I find the pictures pornographic.
I can say though that again, nudity is not necessarily sexual. |
|
By: ripfelix
23/05/2008
5:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ripfelix Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Has the photographer in question been caught doing this? If so, then he should be charged with suitable offences, but I have not heard this was the case?"
No he knowingly, solicited the services of a minor, enticed her to remove her clothes, posed her for illegal photographs, all for personal gain. Not a hell of a lot different than the pervert really. |
|
By: ripfelix
23/05/2008
5:53 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ripfelix Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"It is the province of the small mind to attach evil motives to someone who disagrees with you.'
Comment was not directed at anyone long weekend. Generalisation of common defense only.
If any offence taken, it was not intended. |
|
By: john_barr2003
23/05/2008
5:54 pm Yahoo! Profile:
john_barr2003 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Tolouse Le Trec said to a woman who objected to one of his paintings. "Madam, get your filthy mind off my clean painting".
This whole debate hinges on that. Some people see filth in every thing about the human body. Most see the beauty and purity of the human form, especially the young male or female form depicted as purity and innocence.
So, I say to the Politically Correct and the Rabid Feminists. Get your filthy mind off his clean Photos. |
|
