Brooke Shields photo censored (37)

fwuffy kittes anyone?

loveless vessels we vow solo love we see love solve loss else we see love sow woe selves we woo we lose losses we leavee we owe we sell loose vows so we love less well so low so level wolves evolve

what do you think needs to be said?

concupiscent cunt

loveless vessels we vow solo love we see love solve loss else we see love sow woe selves we woo we lose losses we leavee we owe we sell loose vows so we love less well so low so level wolves evolve

cunts

concupiscent cunt

It's the classic "freedom of expression vs. protection of the vulnerable" argument.

I personally believe that the taking of that photograph was probably (I say "probably", because I have not seen the image in question and therefore cannot "know") an act of abuse against Brooke Shields.

Yet is the "crime" in the taking of the photograph? Or in the displaying of the photograph? Or in the viewing of the photograph? Or in ownership of the photograph? ... Or, indeed, is there any crime at all?

Assuming that it is indeed a highly sexualised image of a 10-year-old girl then I find the idea of that image profoundly disturbing. As a photographer I would never take such a picture, as an adult responsible for the welfare of a 10-year-old girl I would never have allowed it to be taken, as a gallery owner I would never display it and if the photograph came into my possession it would be immediately destroyed.

Yet can I feel sure enough about the rights and wrongs of the matter to criticize the Tate Modern for making a decision different to the one I would have made in its place?

No, I'm not that sure - but I do find myself wishing this image had never existed so that the question would never have arisen.

Toak

FEMALE, BONDAGE-FRIENDLY MODEL SOUGHT. I am seeking to update my "How To" shibari bondage pictures (see my profile pics, the clothed blonde tied in red and black) with a model more "enthusiastic" about BDSM, and who is happy to be photographed nude. MEMO ME if this is you.

Sign the Consenting Adult Action Network's statement

Its a 10 year old girl! it doesnt even have a bdsm slant and even if it did it would still be a 10 year old child!

look at this.

Cant even train 12 year olds to be dommes these days. Bloody laws, eh?

Edited 1 Oct 09, 3:48 AM by MrDelphian

What the fuck is wrong with you? Why do you think a photo of a naked ten year old, heavily made up in make up (which alone is disturbing enough, let alone being naked) has to do with BDSM? Its not like its an innocent picture of say yanno, the usual one every parent has of their kids naked in the bath. Shes stood there, pouting and made up like an adult.

Its threads like this that make me ashamed I have any connection to BDSM.

I can't believe I've no control
It's all deranged - Bowie
"Computer games don't affect kids. I mean if Pacman affected our generation, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music."

Meeeeow!

I can't believe I've no control
It's all deranged - Bowie
"Computer games don't affect kids. I mean if Pacman affected our generation, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music."