It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Inappropriate photos in art gallery seized by police.

page: 12
6
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2008 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Text




posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 06:10 AM
link   
all pics of adolescents should be banned for distributing due to increasing number of sexual predators at large



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 01:00 PM
link   
show me young naked girls



posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 04:00 AM
link   
And why not. After all, the Cambodian Prime Minister's solution to his nephews firing handguns in karaoke parlours was to close the karaoke parlours...



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 10:03 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 20 2008 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Text Black



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 05:29 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 07:27 AM
link   
Um, I'm no artist, in fact I failed every art class I was forced to take.(School requirements) but dang.

Look at a museum. You'll see nude children in paintings, sculptures, so forth. I guess Leo and Raphael and so forth were pervert pedos huh?

Anyways, I say if its art its art. Whether its nude teens or a sculpture made from Cheerios.(Heard of this, never saw it, and they used all kinds of cereal not just Cheerios)

Would I consider Cheerios made to look like say, The Virgin Mary art? Not really. More like a Catholic Summer Camp craft. But people who do it say it is and again I failed art.



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 07:33 AM
link   
Also, nudity is not sexual.

As been stated by several people pictures of babies in the bath tub or whatever. Or hell, watch America's Funniest Home Videos. A lot of them are naked babies in the tub or other place doing something funny. I guess AFHV and Bob Saget are pedos.

All you prudes need to realize Adam and Eve were naked. Was it evil, naughty, hell fire and brimstone? No, they were just naked. Unless you believe Adam and Eve are going to hell for being naked...



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 11:44 PM
link   
I THINK IF TRUE EXPESSIONISM WAS AT HEART THEN THERE SHOULD'NT BE AN ISSUE UNLESS THEY WERE PORNAGRAGHIC OR SEXUAL IN NATURE. :



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 09:35 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 09:51 AM
link   




The courts are absolutely not the place to conduct a public debate about what is art and what is exploitation, let alone child pornography. Particularly if the photos do not depict the children in "sexual" poses and especially when many medieval/renaissance paintings depict naked children.



So you are saying that child pornography did not exist before the invention of cameras? Just because naked children are in a painting, does not mean some pervert was not getting off on it. I do not believe in "artistic" nudes of children under 18. I was really taken aback by the member who called a thirteen year old a young adult. That is exactly what perverts tell themselves. It is what the organization called the National Man Boy Love Association tells it's members. We need to protect children from exploitation by people who have no problem manipulating them for profit, as well as sexual gratification. "Artistic" photographers included.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 12:02 PM
link   
can the gallery administrator can tell what is the essence of the youngsters nude photos there? we can say it's art for art sake, but is it so?

___________
nude-posters.com...



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 07:32 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by groingrinder
 


Absolutely we need to protect children from exploitation.

We also need to protect artists from intimidation.

One poster may have described thirteen-year olds as young adults, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't in the piece you quoted. Some societies do class thirteen as adulthood. But those tend to be the same societies where 25 is already passed middle-aged.

When I was thirteen I was already deluding myself with the thought that I was approaching maturity. Teenagers usually do classify themselves as being more mature than adults give them credit for.

As for NAMBLA, yeah, I agree. They are a bunch of sick deleted-expletives who will use any and all possible arguments to justify what they do. But their use of an argument to justify something shouldn't lead to the knee-jerk response of banning everything that could possibly be tarred with the same brush.

Mr Snuffleuppicus was "outed" because some "well-meaning" and "responsible" "community leaders" thought an imaginary character on Sesame Street promoted behaviour that paedophiles could use to influence their victims to actively hide the crime on their behalf.

The fact is that people's reactions to art (or films, books etc) is always, for better or worse, a reflection on themselves and their attitudes.

As it happens, this particular episode is not exactly a new phenomenon in Australia.

Adrian Lynne's adaptation of Lolita was banned by various state Ministers for Culture without them ever having viewed the filmv in question. Which isn't just ignorant, it's active stupidity of a rather spectacular and self-evident kind.

But then, ignorance and government position go hand in hand.



posted on Sep, 13 2008 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


I am posting sa reply, I love looking at 12 year old girls naked. They to me look better and feel so good and you know it. Stop lying to your self. As long as you don't hurt the girl lick her pussy and feel her butt.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 02:59 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 03:45 AM
link   



posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 07:06 PM
link   




top topics



 
6
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join