Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Now we are asking museums to remove art??

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Now we are asking museums to remove art??

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/nyc-museu...230117969.html


    SO a painting done by a woman will make it right? Its a painting of some young woman and god forbid her panties are showing. Would it be better without them?
    It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years and we must stop it.
    Bill Clinton 1995, State of the Union Address

    "When they go low - we go High" great motto - too bad it was a sack of bullshit. DNC election mantra
    Tags: None
  • #2
    And we've tried to ban books, movies, and countless other cultural items that may have offended someone over the centuries. Absolutely nothing new here...the Museum refused, case closed.
    "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."
    - Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)

    "Your shitty future continues to offend me."
    -Warren Ellis

    Comment

    • #3
      Originally posted by baldgriff View Post
      https://www.yahoo.com/news/nyc-museu...230117969.html


      SO a painting done by a woman will make it right? Its a painting of some young woman and god forbid her panties are showing. Would it be better without them?
      You, and it seems almost every commenter on the article you posted, is ignoring why some are calling for this paintings removal. It isn't about a young women showing her panties. The article claims this painter focuses specifically on pubescent aged subjects--the age range Roy Moore preys upon. So, if we accept that this is a painting depicting an underaged girl, then it is a very different debate than if the painting is of a young woman, as you indicate. A sexualized depiction of a young woman is different from one of an underaged girl, right? Or maybe you are arguing it isn't? Or that the image isn't sexualized?

      All that said, if the article didn't point out who painted this and the how that painter focused on pubescent-aged subjects, I would have not thought the painting was of someone underaged. Her face is almost gaunt and makes her look like she is in her 20s or older imo. But then again, any time I see a high school yearbook photo from the 50s or earlier, I think those kids look to be in their 30s. I guess all the smoking aged folks back in the day.
      Last edited by Sour Masher; 12-06-2017, 11:32 AM.

      Comment

      • #4
        Google Mapplethorpe if you want real art controversy

        Comment

        Previous template Next
        Working...
        X