Australian art gallery raided (NSFW)

Fuck me it's child porn in only the same way National Geographic carried Tribal P0rn.

If you can beat off to those photo's you'd probably be able to crack one off to the trainer bra section in club books.

oh stop being a hysterical twat, it's a link to a mainstream mass circulation newspaper website ffs, what next you want a fucking big warning if I send you to the Boots site and they have half naked kids on their Pampers adverts?

Still good to see our placement year journalist taking up the real issue of freedom of expression

you think that's child porn? You think your fellow journalists at that newspaper are child porn peddlers?

You're an unthinking muppet.

the issue of freedom of expression, the increasingly victorian attitude towards childrens bodies that infact only sublimates the paedophile perspective isn't of issue to a libertarian board. You don't think it's not useful to actually know what the image is we are discussing?

There's nothing fucking creepy about it beyond whatever we bring to it, which of course is probably what the artist was trying to say.

Yeah to be honest I'm not really seeing what the big fuss is - this is NOT the same as child porn
I'd say, yeah the image isn't work-safe, but only in the way that

I'd agree that it's a creepy image to me, but I didn't find it nauseating in the way that I imagine I'd find actual CP - but lots of "art" is creepy - that does not make it child-porn.

I don't think there's any sort of equivalence between this dude and Hakim Bey - it doesn't appear this guy is advocating adult-child relationships or any sick shit like that. I'd imagine the reaction his art is getting is akin to Chris Morris' with "paedogeddon". I mean I don't anything about Benson, maybe he IS a sick fuck, but there's nothing in that article that actually suggests so.

I don't see how the image is creepy at all, it's a picture of a 13 year old girl on the cusp of becoming a woman and it conveys a kind of stark honest ambiguity in fall of the shadows and especially the lighting around the hips.

To see it as creepy or pornographic is much more damning of the viewer than the image.

It's that GDID has zero understanding of the complex topic of paedophilia and therefore has to resort to macho hysteria over it. I'm really glad to that his trolling's been shot down by everyone else. Obviously it's not porn, although the artist is aware of its shock value.

Absolutely. It's a tender and sensitive image that bears no relationship to pornography other than the girl is naked. The most obscene aspect of this story is the prudishness of the complainants.

Actually youse both are but in this particular incident you've made epic fail.

John Terry sends his solidarity.

Does this mean that GDID and Alan will be getting sympathetic letters from Gordon Brown?

I think it's a beautifully shot photograph. He's a silly sausage though, "ooh naked children, how controversial!". twat.

well the fact there is such a controversy does kind of stand in his defence.

no.

For the record, where was it that Hakim Bey argued for pedophilia? Not that I don't believe it, but I'd like to know which article/book he argued for it?

Libcom article on Hakbim Bey: http://libcom.org/library/paedophilia-and-american-anarchism-the-other-side-of-hakim-bey

also google: Loving Boys Semiotext(e)

This is like when that newsreader got arrested and that artist for having naked picturees of children and then the newspapers printed the pictures.

So how do people feel about Paul Goodman then, who himself has written about his views on pederasty (notably in the book Parent's Day, which still takes the cake for the most devastating assessment on love, of both the right and wrong kind, I've ever read)?

I get the feeling people like Hakim Bey take advantage of the fact that there is an overt sensationalism towards teenage sexuality and sexual exploration amongst consenting people of that age group and use it as a cover to argue things that are not quite the same as others.

you mean the ambiguity of pedestry sliding into sophistist nonsense, aye they do.

"Well if the age of consent is 14 in Spain and 16 in the UK it shows the age of consent is arbitrary nonsense and as such it's fair enough for me to shag that little slut on the swings".

Actually I remember watching that lame-ass movie "The History Boys" and was shocked to see, essentially, an argument lifted from Paul Goodman when the one teacher gets caught fondling some of the 16/17 year old students genitals that "teaching is an erotic act", which I'm sure, with changing some words, could be used to argue for all sorts of sexual harassment ("Being a boss is an erotic act!").

problem is, NSFW is very similar to NSW (New South Wales), a region of Australia. it certainly confused me anyway

See i really liked the history boys but i think the way you've seen it kinda sums up what was wrong with the film adaptation. The original ending in the play is one that espouses a lot more misery than the film adaptation, also Posner becoming ''a teacher'' at the end of the film (he doesn't become this in the play at all) kind of devalues the fact that hector throughout the play hates his job and his life to the point whee he screams at his class that he ''hates this place''. Thus the arguement that ''teaching is an erotic art'' being espoused by hector could only be treated as an absurdity