Abuse: In the name of art
Re: Abuse: In the name of art
No - sorry Fred, from a discussion elsewhere, though the similarities are somewhat striking.....
quis custodiet ipsos custodes
Re: Abuse: In the name of art
Jacques I usually respect your opinion on most things on this forum, but I feel with this issue, yes it is slightly sensationalist but lets be honest about it that is the whole sum of the project ... to court controversy. The whole Child Abuse/Paedophile issue don't really come into this project, surely somebody must have signed model releases in these images and the sensationalist values of your post have been grossly overlooked??
It seems child nudity or near nudity has a lot of forumites very, very jumpy, must be the biggest taboo subject still known to man or woman surely though??
It seems child nudity or near nudity has a lot of forumites very, very jumpy, must be the biggest taboo subject still known to man or woman surely though??
PEOPLE think Stephen Hawking is so clever, but when you ask him a question and he is typing in the answer on his little screen, how do we know he isn't just looking up the answer on the Internet?
Re: Abuse: In the name of art
Fair enough, at least you have an opinion and have thought about it. Would you have a different opinion if a male photographer had taken these images?
quis custodiet ipsos custodes
Re: Abuse: In the name of art
Hi Jacques, yes the male v female thing does open up a fresh can of worms, personally I would say it would not cloud my judgement on these "posed" photographs if it was a male who was taking them ... of course you can guarantee it would have a major factor with some of the pc crowd though - can anybody clarify if their is such thing as a female paedophile as it just seems to be a male disease/thing??
PEOPLE think Stephen Hawking is so clever, but when you ask him a question and he is typing in the answer on his little screen, how do we know he isn't just looking up the answer on the Internet?