| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jasper Janssen writes:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2000 01:41:20 GMT, John Neal <johnneal@uswest.net>
> wrote:
> > Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
>
> > > a whole different definition of what constitutes "child pornography". Some
> > > people in this country (USA) believe a simple nude constitutes child
> > > pornography.
> >
> > ??? A nude "child pornography"? You need a child in there somewhere!
>
> A nude _child_. Duh.
>
> Jasper
there are nude chidren in brian froud's work. ( the stunning "fairies",
"lady cottington's pressed fairie book", good fairies; bad fairies", etc.)
anyone who would consider these paintings child pornography is themselves
morally decayed. julia margret cammeron was one of the earliest art
photographers (victorian). her subject? nude children in sometimes
evocative poses.
chid pornography and art have _absolutely_ nothing to do with each other!
jean bennet ramsey is an example of child pornography. being paraded across
a stage fully dressed as a 18-year old hooker... well, it sure ain't art!
beauty is in the eye of the beholder. so is perversion.
later ~ craig~
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
