By: kjm96
8/07/2008
6:08 pm Yahoo! Profile:
kjm96 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| buzz - because a piece of work has shown in public without comment does not automatically make it acceptable. |
|
By: amazonia61
8/07/2008
6:10 pm Yahoo! Profile:
amazonia61 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Neither with incident"
People have been objecting to Hensons "art" for years.
I read a critical university review of his work back in 2004.
Just because it didn't make the national news is no reason to assume total acceptance of his work.
Furthermore, the current image was intentionally put in the public domain to induce debate and controversy. It has nothing to do with Hetty Johnson.
I don't think it is moral or ethical to use the image of a naked child intentionally to make a point or increase sales of a magazine. Art or not, it's reprehensible. |
|
By: kjm96
8/07/2008
6:11 pm Yahoo! Profile:
kjm96 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| amazonia61 - i am sick of this being an argument of either the art work is fantastic or its pornographic. I am with you on this - whilst it is not pornographic nor is it acceptable. |
|
By: amazonia61
8/07/2008
6:12 pm Yahoo! Profile:
amazonia61 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
While we're on the subject of Hetty Johnson.... she is currently speaking as an advocate of paedophile Ferguson, asking the public to let him live in peace in their community.
Therefore, I feel that your criticisms of her are unwarranted. I do not believe her motive is based on any "witch hunt" at all. |
|
By: amazonia61
8/07/2008
6:13 pm Yahoo! Profile:
amazonia61 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"it is not pornographic nor is it acceptable."
I agree. |
|
By: markus5006
8/07/2008
6:13 pm Yahoo! Profile:
markus5006 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Yeah, but NEVER before in the pages of history have images been able to be reproduced and transmitted with such ease."
totally irrelevant.. |
|
By: buzzanddidj
8/07/2008
6:14 pm Yahoo! Profile:
buzzanddidj Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
'I hardly think all the pedos flocked to Le Louvre to masturbate publicly over Botocelli cherubs.
We live in modern times with modern technology and modern problems. It's time the laws caught up.'
By: amazonia61
So you would close down internet sights that display Botticelli paintings, as the next phase ?
Or are 'the photos' OK if they are only displayed in the Louvre ?
. |
|
By: amazonia61
8/07/2008
6:15 pm Yahoo! Profile:
amazonia61 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"totally irrelevant.."
No. it isn't.
Huge international paedophile rings have been able to flourish due to the internet. The ease of which images can be transmitted and shared is very much relevant here.
Please explain how you think it is not relevant? |
|
By: amazonia61
8/07/2008
6:18 pm Yahoo! Profile:
amazonia61 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"So you would close down internet sights that display Botticelli paintings, as the next phase ?"
Firstly, the Botticelli cherubs, while naked are not realistic impressions of children.
Secondly, they do not depict children that are alive and living in the community today.
Photography gives a realistic image of a living child who must live with the attention that comes from the viewing of the image by millions of people for the rest of her life.
It can make the child the target of a paedophile in real time, not centuries after the fact.
This, I feel is the difference.
The answer, therefore, is no... Botticelli's cherubs should not be removed from display. |
|
By: patticake16142
8/07/2008
6:35 pm Yahoo! Profile:
patticake16142 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Meanwhile, Buzz and all the other advocates of these photos have not answered the question:
If this was their child, would they want her image displayed for everyone to see, in the name of art? Would they want it to get into the hands of people such as Dennis Ferguson and others, in the name of 'art'?
Please, answer the question, Buzz, and all the others who are supporting the freedom of expression in art. |
|
By: waterbank
8/07/2008
6:42 pm Yahoo! Profile:
waterbank Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
what a croc
It's not about fear.
It's about reasonable behaviour.
It's about common sense
------------------------- ------------------------- --
If its not about fear then what are you worried about.
europeans would have no problem at all with this.
Australia is ruled by the fear of pedo's |
|
By: waterbank
8/07/2008
6:45 pm Yahoo! Profile:
waterbank Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
If this was their child, would they want her image displayed for everyone to see, in the name of art? Would they want it to get into the hands of people such as Dennis Ferguson and others, in the name of 'art'?
------------------------- ------------------------- -----
Yes because the picture itself can do no harm.
I dont give a rats a ss what Dennis does when he looks at a picture of my child. But let him try touch them...thats different |
|
By: waterbank
8/07/2008
6:46 pm Yahoo! Profile:
waterbank Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Dont allow society to be ruled by a hand full of sick fools.... |
|
By: markus5006
8/07/2008
6:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
markus5006 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Photography gives a realistic image of a living child who must live with the attention that comes from the viewing of the image by millions of people for the rest of her life."
we can thank the media for the millions of people who saw this picture...
unless youre a subscriber to this monthly art magazine (with federal funding no less) you wouldnt have even known the picture existed..
so why dont you blame the media?
no sicko is going to subscribe to an art monthly to hopefully find a pic of a naked child.. get a grip.. |
|
By: markus5006
8/07/2008
6:51 pm Yahoo! Profile:
markus5006 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| you freaks will be burning books next.. |
|
By: buzzanddidj
8/07/2008
6:52 pm Yahoo! Profile:
buzzanddidj Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
'Dont allow society to be ruled by a hand full of sick fools....'
"As freedoms are cast away and our future plans are dominated by fear, it's clear to see that the terrorists have won"
-Author unknown
. |
|
By: aprilhud123
8/07/2008
6:55 pm Yahoo! Profile:
aprilhud123 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
If its not about fear then what are you worried about.
europeans would have no problem at all with this.
waterbank
You are deluded, in Europe children are their parent’s full responsibility until they are
16 years old, and there is a curfew ranging from 1 year old to 16 years old in place; and any hint of a problem or the child seen as being neglected; and it is the parents that are in trouble; and
There in no such thing as a juvenile court, after 16 years old they are treated as adults.
A very different lifestyle and laws from here. |
|
By: buzzanddidj
8/07/2008
6:59 pm Yahoo! Profile:
buzzanddidj Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
'The tragedy of our day is the climate of fear in which we live, and fear breeds repression'
-Adlai Stevenson, 1952 |
|
By: markus5006
8/07/2008
7:02 pm Yahoo! Profile:
markus5006 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Huge international paedophile rings have been able to flourish due to the internet. The ease of which images can be transmitted and shared is very much relevant here.
Please explain how you think it is not relevant?"
perhaps because child PORN rings peddle child PORN
of which neither this (the art monthly pic) or the henson photos were..
the Australian Classification Board rated the Henson photos as G and PG... if you have a problem with that take it up with the ACB..
I dont know who made you the "expert on art" but these images are NOT child pronography...
to compare the two is a rather long bow to draw..
child porn is illegal and always will be.. this isnt child porn..
hows that for relevancy? |
|
By: lefowlerau
8/07/2008
7:04 pm Yahoo! Profile:
lefowlerau Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
So, let me get this straight. The reason this photo is not to be distributed is that some paedophile might get hold of it and be aroused (I'm not going to repeat amazonia's rather tawdry description)?
So, that's it?
Just a question.
When did we as a society hand our moral compass over to the paedophiles? I must have missed this. |
|
By: lefowlerau
8/07/2008
7:06 pm Yahoo! Profile:
lefowlerau Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"sometimes a cigar is just a smoke"
Sigmund Freud |
|
By: markus5006
8/07/2008
7:07 pm Yahoo! Profile:
markus5006 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"So, let me get this straight. The reason this photo is not to be distributed is that some paedophile might get hold of it and be aroused (I'm not going to repeat amazonia's rather tawdry description)?"
apparently..
well then the only solution.. burqhas... for every child!! |
|
By: markus5006
8/07/2008
7:07 pm Yahoo! Profile:
markus5006 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"My Mr President what a large cigar"
Monica Lewinsky |
|
By: greatgranswisdom
8/07/2008
7:10 pm Yahoo! Profile:
greatgranswisdom Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<<<Maybe there's just a lot of people out there who harbour secret fantasies of rooting children, huh?>>>
This sentence..... disgusting as it sounds to me .....actually may have some massive relevance to justify its inclusion here.
It's justified, as it lays cards directly on the table.
And these are the cards I see.
What if we could somehow persuade the immediate family of the 10 million plus children who will be sexually abused tonight, to look at one of these photos and.....you know......and LEAVE THE CHILDREN ALONE.
Would this not be a good thing? |
|
By: dazedlady2003
8/07/2008
7:40 pm Yahoo! Profile:
dazedlady2003 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"it is not pornographic nor is it acceptable."
I agree.
------------------------- ------------------------- ----------
correct. correct. correct. |
|
