pedobear.org - thats some seriously fucked up shit.
Just saw them talking about this on GFY like it is some kind of mascot of theirs, crazy shit.
Regards,
Lee
Printable View
pedobear.org - thats some seriously fucked up shit.
Just saw them talking about this on GFY like it is some kind of mascot of theirs, crazy shit.
Regards,
Lee
I saw that as well, Didn't go into details, but was disturbingQuote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Whoever did it has a sense of humor... Love the t-shirt that reads "BRB, FBI" with a huge bead of sweat coming out of Pedobear's forehead... I'd say the whole thing is a big joke - and very well done...
OK. That's just dumb.
I dont know personally i dont find anything amusing, jokular or funny about pedophilia, might just be me though.Quote:
Originally Posted by rawTOP
Regards,
Lee
Hmm, I read this thread minutes after receiving a weekly email newsletter from FSC (Free Speech Coalition) that contained an report on the arrest of an Iowa comic book collector. His diverse personal collection contained a few Japanese manga (which sometimes contain "fantasy sex scenarios involving animals or underage subjects").
Quoting the FSC: "... is the first person to be convicted of obscenity under the 2003 Protect Act without being in possession of actual photographic child pornography. The Protect Act prohibits cartoons, drawings, sculptures or paintings depicting minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct, and which lack 'serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.' "
Pedobear isn't funny at all to me, either. However, this thread itself shows that some people do think it's funny who clearly don't promote pedophilia - which is also stated clearly by the Pedobear creators on their website. Somehow we overlook the ugly and even violent humor that's all around us, on TV and our award winning movies, even in greeting cards at your local card shop that mostly sells sentimental junk. Hey, look at what Bugs and RoadRunner did. I don't enjoy the Looney Toon violence are much today, but it's still a part of history, and great art. Maybe it's partly what you get used to? Partly...
OK, freedom of expression is crucial to...being free and not oppressed. But it's also used for oppressive, destructive purposes. I don't think it's f.o.e. (huh, that's a strange pun) when those bigots who research/hunt for gay death announcements and gather "protesters" to show up at the actual cemetery funeral waving "Jesus hates gays" signs and other behavior right next to the grieving family and friends. That said, we in the adult biz rightly use freedom of expression to support what we do. So each situation is different.
The controversy of Pedobear is bigger than the isolated thing it appears to be. It's something that threatens especially artists, and what ideas are allowable in this culture (so that's everyone). For many years, I've looked forward to painting the figure if and when I can afford a model. I used to teach figure drawing...that's art, school....no problem. But what happens if, I plan (and someday I do) on including erotic elements...erect penises, sexual activity in my paintings/drawings. Who decides if it's paintings/drawings, not photographs (so what if it's photographs anyway if it's art?), or has "serious artistic value?" And is comic art not art? Yes if Disney, no if Pedobear?
How about artwork created by an esteemed artist, exhibited in an serious art gallery/museum operating within the academic environment such as the campus of an ivy league university? No problem? If I have my facts right, that exactly describes Mapplethorpe's exhibition in the eighties that prompted conservatives to force the NEA to deny grants to any individual artist (what the NEA was made for). I'm not sure but I think it still stands like this. I saw that exhibit. I couldn't find what was so horrible. Flowers, nudes, two guys in leather (one sitting, one standing). Then I found some small photos laying flat in cases high enough off the ground to escape a child's view. Still nothing THAT controversial. He did a well done, beautiful full body frontal nude portrait of a young boy. One of the greatest portraits in photography (and art in general) in any museum or gallery I've ever seen to this day. I dare any art critic or academician to challenge that. If Mapplethorpe were alive and made that same photograph today, I wonder if he'd be arrested, do jail time, or how many museums and galleries would show it.
Oh, by the way, museums in the US and around the world already show paintings with suggested sexual activity among underage persons in their permanent collections. Often the paintings are representations of mythological characters and stories, but not always. They're in the sections of the museums with the big old fashioned paintings people bring their families to see after going to church on Sunday.
blabbermouth me, again...forgot to say that the paintings I would like to make are of adult sexuality...not underage.
But I also think there is valid artistic content in depicting underage nude people, as mentioned in my tome on Mapplethorpe....and "old" masterpieces. Just not ready to tackle that in this environment. When I was a kid, you could paint nudes of children...a lot of women did. Now artists in the know are afraid.
yes thats a weird thing on gfy they dont seem to mind about tstuff like this