Members banned from this thread: The Man


Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 41
Thanks Tree16Thanks

Thread: Child Pornography or art?

  1. #21
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    13,149
    Thanks
    10898

    From
    Here
    "Pornography" is defined as what? Because humans come in a huge selection of varieties, there will always be those with perverted views of what is normal to the vast majority.

    The strange phenomena of modern life is that it has become a strange mix of perversion, puritanism and perverted puritanism. For those with mental anomalies/mutations, or traumatic events in their lives, causing pedophilia, what photo of a child could NOT be considered pornographic in their minds, while all others see a photograph of a child and think of not just bringing their own offspring into the world, but all the diaper changes and bathing, where sexuality NEVER EVER crossed their mind. The very same with men and women who are very animated and personable, grabbing an arm or the wrist of another in a warm and friendly way, sexuality NEVER EVER crossing their mind, but with those they desired a MUTUAL and MUTUALLY consensual relationship with based on sexual attraction.

    Who in this world arrived in it, fully clothed, for fear those delivering them might have pedophile tendencies?

    Human beings, REGARDLESS of gender, NEED to respect one another and NOT cross borders which should be obvious in ANY society that make them CLEAR and UNIVERSAL. In a nation where only SOME are being held accountable and being responsible for their deeds and crossing bounds and others are NOT, the message, the values and the borders are NOT clear and universal.

    Yes, there should definitely be borders that should not be crossed, including pendulums that swing absurdly from one extreme, to the other.

  2. #22
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    61,965
    Thanks
    33629

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by KnotaFrayed View Post
    "Pornography" is defined as what?
    Here's one definition:
    Pornography is the depiction of sexual behavior that is intended to arouse sexual excitement in its audience.

    Pornography has been regulated by the legal standards that govern the concept of Obscenity, which refers to things society may consider disgusting, foul, or immoral, and may include material that is blasphemous. Pornography is limited to depictions of sexual behavior and may not [under US law] be obscene.
    Much of the rest of your post just confuses me. The lines that may or may not be crossed are culturally determined, no?
    Thanks from Leo2

  3. #23
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    13,149
    Thanks
    10898

    From
    Here
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    Here's one definition: Much of the rest of your post just confuses me. The lines that may or may not be crossed are culturally determined, no?
    Yes, they are culturally determined and in this nation we appear to have become more and more inconsistent and subjective in our culture, to the point where we can't decide whether we want one extreme or the other, or some consistent and universal sets of mores and values. For example, much of the Baby Boom generation ushered in the era of "free love" and bra burning. Now the so called "liberals" are calling men who are caught in photos with their hands posed as though they are grasping, a sleeping woman's breasts, to the mat, while "conservatives" are still considering ELECTING men accused of the same or much worse acts, to high offices, AFTER electing one to President and even as they call for the heads of "liberals" that have had allegations made against them. To a child trying to learn what our universal cultural values are, what would you suggest they are finding, when trying to figure out which direction to take and where our values as a whole (universally) lie?

    Photos of dressed or undressed children, do NOT sexually stimulate the vast majority of the human population, culturally or within psychological norms. Anyone who has children, view their naked bodies many thousands of times and do NOT, as some other may, get some sexual stimulation as a result, thus, what some people consider inappropriate photos of children, even fewer consider some sort of sexual stimulation (as mutation in their brain that MOST do NOT have or trauma in their upbringing) and where MOST would think of the same photo as totally natural and never even consider some "sexual" side to it.

    Essentially we have the "moral majority" and the "religious right" moving to deny and protect those accused of sexual misconduct or worse and we have the "liberal" former "sexual liberation" folks, taking people to task without question, for allegations against them. For those trying to learn the ropes of what is culturally right, what is culturally wrong in U.S. society, there is no consistency, a lot of confusion and swings of the pendulum from believing the denials of male sexual misconduct without question to believing accusations and allegations without question and losing sight of the crux of the concern, which is abuse of power, no MATTER whose hands or what gender is granted the "power" to either destroy a life via wrongful sexual acts and holding careers and advancement hostage to ransoms of sex (both powerful males OR females have the same capacity in that regard) OR the "power" to destroy, not just advancement, but an entire career and even a family unit, merely by accusation and allegation, BEFORE full knowledge is assessed, investigated and determined. Suspend someone to prevent the potential that if allegations are legitimate and honest, no one else is subject to the same, fine. Taking all away from someone before full investigation and a day in court, facing their accuser, is NO better than coverups of repeat offenses or giving the offender the benefit of the doubt, without question.

    The "power" is the power to destroy, whether it is via an untoward sexual misconduct with impunity or by a not fully investigated and not fully vetted allegation or accusation.

    What I am saying is, America, as a culture, seems to have some serious problems in recent decades (and in other eras) with extreme swings of the pendulum, instead of intelligent, thoughtful moderation. How is it possible we went from decades of giving one gender the vast bulk of any benefit of any doubt when it came to these sorts of issues and "complicity" involved MANY of both genders for a variety of reasons.....to what appears to be a total shift to giving the opposite gender the same sort of benefit of the doubt, instead of discussing and addressing the issue, that NO one, MALE OR FEMALE should be destroyed by another's power to unjustly destroy them, via, as already mentioned, the use of sex as a form of "ransom" in exchange for a career advancement or a career by itself. NOR should ANYONE, MALE OR FEMALE be able to be destroyed by the power and abuse of that power, to accuse, WITHOUT society/culture, facing up to the STARK REALITY, of the POWERS that can be abused at BOTH ends of the issue. UNTIL we culturally/as a society agree to some sort of universal recognition of those powers and that the issue REQUIRES painful revelations, regardless of what side of the issue one might find themselves on, be it the VICTIM of sexual misconduct OR charged with allegations of sexual misconduct, it would seem UNJUST to simply take the word of ANYONE, be it in denial of their acts or in the accusation of others, WITHOUT what will INEVITABLY BE, painful revelations as the result of bringing charges or trying to deny them, no matter which side of the issue one is on. Society/a culture, cannot simply shift the burden of proof of guilt or innocence from one side of an issue to another, without running into the same basic problem which is the potential abuse of power and inequitable accountability for some level of solid proof. Yes, it is absolutely and inarguably horrific to be sexually/physically assaulted against one's desire and will, but there are many levels of what could be considered unwanted "sexual" advances and "misconduct" and to treat them all the same, without question, does NOT seem just or fair or any more just or fair than trying to claim a woman that has been raped has suffered no more harm to her than a woman who someone tried to kiss, without her consent. Do Americans REALLY need to have the differences explained to them? Yet, we appear to have gone from decades, if not centuries or millennia of "siding" with males, to now, apparently unquestionably siding with female with in essence a similar premise, that if you don't automatically take any and every woman at her word, then you are still in the archaic and male pig zone and guilty of "mot believing women". My take is, why should we believe ANYONE, without further investigation and sure evidence of proof, beyond mere finger pointing, hand raising or, on the other side of the coin, denial of one's actions or one's condemnation of the victims? Neither is fair. What is fair is an interest in the truth and nothing, BUT the truth, regardless of which side the truth comes down in favor of, or against. We seem to have an affinity for knee jerk reactions in the opposite direction of where we formerly headed, once enough momentum has been provided to push the pendulum to the opposite extreme. Yes, the pendulum NEEDED to be moved, from the extreme of where it was, but not to another extreme. THAT is not a problem solved, but a problem shifted from one place, to another.

    This should NOT simply be a "let's believe A, without a doubt" to now, let's believe B without a doubt, because NEITHER is fair and just and to do so is simply shifting the crux of the problem to the other side of the pole and does NOT solve the problem of abuse of power, even if the power is a different one.

    With regard to children, I grew up with friends and family where children (when we were those children) running around naked was never an issue, thought of as "perverted" or ever considered abusive, exploitative or troll bait for pedophiles. Europeans in general have far less "Puritan/Victorian" attitudes when it comes to the "clothes" we all entered the world in. That does NOT mean they have no problems with pedophilia or child abuse or child molestation, they just do not see the naked human body as pornographic, nor seem to have sex on the mind 24/7 or when in the presence of people without being totally covered up. CULTURALLY there are differences. Here, we can't seem to figure out as a society or culture, whether we are related to any group of people connected by prudish beliefs be they religious or societal/cultural, whether we're the opposite or whether we lie somewhere in the middle where mutual respect amongst humans and personal human borders is primary more and value, not unequal gender empowerment or shifts of that empowerment from one to the other, without addressing the abuse of power in the hands of ANY gender.

    I don't know whether this helps clarify or confuses you more, but in my opinion, I am not all for any specific side as all sides are imperfect and in many cases, have equal capacities for "good" or evil" and we all have "cons", for any of the "pros" we might possess. In the weighing, some of us may have pros that outweigh the cons or cons that outweigh the pros, but for any of us to think we're without both, seems to be quite dishonest and delusional.

    There seems a LOT of sorting out of our values before ANY of them are going to be meaningful, be something we can hold all people accountable for, withOUT empowering more abuse of power or merely shifting it from one place to another. We then might be able to teach children a consistent and universal set of values that are humanity, NOT gender, politically, racially or religious based, and certainly not hypocrisy based as our culture seems to have filled itself with in this era.
    Last edited by KnotaFrayed; 6th December 2017 at 10:19 PM.
    Thanks from Leo2 and syrenn

  4. #24
    Veteran Member HenryPorter's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    19,665
    Thanks
    10240

    From
    N48 51.489 E2 17.67119
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallie Knoetze View Post
    This is an interesting case. Looking at some of this artists other works, he is a serious pervert. This one is suggestive, the model is underaged. But the painting is exactly what are is supposed to be, thought provoking and capturing a moment.

    https://www.usatoday.com/videos/news...lifetopstories

    Comments?
    What does Roy Moore say?

  5. #25
    Sally Sitter Paris's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,702
    Thanks
    2793

    From
    EU


    It's porn unless the model wears a veil covering her body parts.

    And get rid of the cat, please!
    Last edited by Paris; 6th December 2017 at 11:37 PM.

  6. #26
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    9,380
    Thanks
    9310

    From
    Home
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    It's a tough one ... but what classical art museum doesn't have a dozen paintings with naked baby cherubs floating around?
    I don't think it's that tough at all. This kind of phony "aghast" at seeing underwear is a bit absurd. It encourages people to believe that images (and books) are dangerous and will cause people do bad things. The only way to protect people from these dangerous things is to ban them. It encourages people to think that an image is sexualizing a girl, when really it is the viewer that interprets it that way.

    It's a nice painting by a very talented artist. This is probably the most controversial painting he has ever done, and in my opinion it's pretty tame. When I think that 20 years ago people were shitting their pants over Robert Mappelthorpe, and now we've become so prudish as to be up in arms over this, it's kind of shameful. However, it's not the first time he has painted something similar, albeit in a slightly different style.




  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    10,332
    Thanks
    2691

    From
    California
    Mr. Stan,

    Actually, this artist is known for provocative paintings of young girls. A few actually show pedophilia.

    I think that is the issue, not so much this painting.

  8. #28
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    9,380
    Thanks
    9310

    From
    Home
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallie Knoetze View Post
    Mr. Stan,

    Actually, this artist is known for provocative paintings of young girls. A few actually show pedophilia.

    I think that is the issue, not so much this painting.

    By "most controversial" I just meant that this is the biggest controversy. In less sensitive days, those paintings were known as nudes. I'm not aware of any that depict pedophilia, but then again, I don't really follow his work closely.

    I think we're leading to a time when doctors won't be able to examine people with their clothing off because it is too sexually provocative.

  9. #29
    SWED Missle Command Champion johnflesh's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    19,101
    Thanks
    9288

    From
    Colorado
    It's neither art nor pornography. It's a tool for debate so that we can redraw the line between good and bad - over and over and over again.

  10. #30
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    32,945
    Thanks
    6868

    From
    A Month Away
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister B View Post
    I have a comment. Are you employed by Vigilink? Because when I clicked that link that's where it took me.
    It's an advertisement before you get to USA Today content. If you are a subscriber it doesn't come up.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Las Vegas shooters brother arrested for child pornography
    By bajisima in forum Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 25th October 2017, 04:04 PM
  2. Huge child pornography ring busted
    By bajisima in forum Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 22nd May 2014, 08:35 AM
  3. Michigan Town Split on Child Pornography Charges
    By TennesseeRain in forum Current Events
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 8th March 2011, 05:09 PM
  4. MTV Worried 'Skins' May Violate Child Pornography Laws
    By TennesseeRain in forum Current Events
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 22nd January 2011, 08:30 PM
  5. Former ACLU Chapter President Arrested for Child Pornography
    By Soylentgreen in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 5th June 2007, 12:33 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed