Little Girls and Stuff

[missi]

ok, this is my fav topic so I go first  

Starting with something obvious

* * * * *

EDIT by Suzanne, 21 April 2007, 00:31:

For the duration of several hours, none of the images were visible anymore. I must assume that they have been removed by either the thread opener or the host (ImageShack) or that the bandwidth limit for the images has exceeded. I'm therefore hereby removing the broken image tags as well as a text link that I consider inappropriate.

* * * * *

[ro_G]

I think Sally Mann would take grave exception to the photos of her kids being posted in an erotica forum.

[ro_G]

as do i, now that i think of it, seen as i have used them in the past for artwork representing innocence and childhood freedom. the pictures represent a lot of things, but none of them erotic.

[Suzanne]

Hmm.. to be honest, that's not really what I had in mind when you suggested a thread about "little girls and stuff". I was thinking of less nudity and maybe something a little more in praise of the magic of childhood - or "innocence" as ro_G put it... Basically something that we could easily put in the "Eyecandy" section without thinking twice. I hope you can understand that, missi. If you don't remove some of the more "critical" pictures from that thread and change the title, I'll do it myself tomorrow so that it's ready to be moved to the "Eyecandy" section without sending out mixed signals or offending anyone.

[missi]

Oh I can understand if someone gets offended (I don't agree, but I can understand). I'm sorry, maybe I misunderstood and thought I was in a different ambient ^^
Nevermind, you can delete it, evidently it's not the right place/forum to talk about it.
Anyway I want to explain why I thought this could have been the right place: I don't think the message of some art the people in here like is much different from the one I meant, you should get it, I don't need to make examples.

but, you are the boss! ^^

I'll keep a low profile since now

It's not the first time someone gets offended for my interests, but I don't mean to offend anyone!  

[Suzanne]

I guess I just don't like to see those photographs in the "Erotica" section. I'm sure you meant well, but it's the sheer act of labelling such photography as "erotica" which leads to misunderstandings. And I'm glad about the way ro_G naturally responded to that post - the pictures speak per se, but Sally Mann definitely didn't intend them as "erotica". I think that a while ago, ro_G chose rightly by adding a Mann photograph to the "Fairies & Tales..." thread. Even though that's in the "Erotica" section too, it's a thread where innocence meets a sweet kind of "seduction" - maybe that's where you should add some of the pictures you had in mind. I'll wait with deleting this thread so that you can move some of them. Thanks for understanding this decision.

[flinders]

I agree with Suzanne and Ro.  The images are excellent, but associating them with "erotic" is creepy.  

Western society needs to have a more informed discussion about the sexuality of young children and teenagers rather than just pretending it doesn't exist.  But that sexuality really isn't for the consumption of adults.

[missi]

I'm sorry, but I don't agree with you.
Anyway this is not the right place to talk about my reasons and I won't do it.

I am fully conscious of the fact that sally mann's intentions were not to shoot erotic photographs (I should have done better to post some jock sturges, maybe), but that actually was my intent instead, and i'm surprised seeing how much you got resented for something you see every day in the works of tb first, and of a plenty of other artists.  
but i obviously respect your ideas, and I would like you to do the same with mine.

therefore please, suzanne, don't ask me to move this thread in the eye candy section and make it become a sort of topic about faeries, because this not what i mean to do.  
i don't like manipulation and misunderstanding of other people's messages, and at least I have been clear in this.
unfortunately in the case of this kind of art, the line between innocence and a certain allusion to some other things is very thin, but this wanted to be more a topic in the robert matzneff style and less in the lucile hadzihalilovic one (to say it clear)

if one day I'll want to open a thread about the beauty of the innocence I will do it, and i actually will be wanting to do it, but I won't be changing my ideas because they are "uncomfortable" or offensive according to you, this thread was born with a purpose and for the same one it will die, as it happens very often thanks to fabulous censorship.

[Evanescent Dreams]

The main problem with this is that it is illegal in the majority of countries to portray 'erotic' images/photos/etc of children. As owner of this site, Suzanne could be held responsible for not removing these images/topic and could be forced to do anything from bringing down the site, paying fine and even to going to jail (although it probably wouldn’t happen in this case).

The beauty and innocence of children can be portrayed through their nudity without necessarily being erotic.

[missi]

The main problem with this is that it is illegal in the majority of countries to portray 'erotic' images/photos/etc of children. As owner of this site, Suzanne could be held responsible for not removing these images/topic and could be forced to do anything from bringing down the site, paying fine and even to going to jail (although it probably wouldn’t happen in this case).

The beauty and innocence of children can be portrayed through their nudity without necessarily being erotic.

Yes, this is the main problem (i think this is the only problem actually), and there would have been no problem if someone told me "please, do not post this kind of stuff because i don't want to run the risk to have to bring down the site". and i understand it very well, as i've been banned severel times from myspace for posting the most troublesome artists, and i am so, so tired of censorhip. even if sites/forums (even if very very few) where you can post any kind of art, also the most extreme, troublesome, still exist.
But here the question was different, was more something like "we don't like this stuff, change it". and i wont change it because i'll remain coherent with myself and with the art i like.
simply i thought i could post anything here, while it's not like this, so stop it, i got it.

[Suzanne]

But here the question was different, was more something like "we don't like this stuff, change it".

Errm... I'm sorry.. but that's a terrible simplification of what some of us were saying about the matter, missi. It was precisely NOT - as you suggest - a moody aesthetic decision for me to ask you to remove some of the content. On the contrary, I and my co-admin LoTekk, were thinking AHEAD of the possible consequences for us and for this forum. This is not about censorship, it's about being responsible as an administratrix. If you'd run a forum over many years and got attached to its diverse and inspiring content, you'd do the same in order to keep it legally accessible and (relatively) safe for its members.

I hope you can understand my reasons - if not, I'm willing to explain them to you in depth privately via PM et al.. Moreover, I really wish that this won't affect your activity on this forum which is deeply appreciated by me. You've made some great and very fitting contributions and I'd be sad to see you go just because of a misunderstanding / "wrong" contextualisation of an image.  

EDIT: All the images were broken. The image tags have been removed by me, the opening post has been edited accordingly and moved to the "Suggestions & News" forum.

[LoTekk]

I'm sorry for not posting earlier in this thread, but actually I was probably the first to PM Suzanne about it's existence --- including my concerns this thread could really get her in trouble.

As it has been said here before: This is not about censorship, this is about avoiding legal consequences for Suzanne and for this board. Your simplification is indeed deeply unfair, actually I admired Suzanne for how graciously she reacted by not simply editing your post (like I would have done if she would have been unavailable) but by giving you the opportunity to change the thread's focus.

Let's also not forget your original idea for a "thread about little girls and stuff" came up in the "Eyecandy" section, right after a series of fully dressed little girls --- so I guess nobody really expect you to post pictures of naked children in the "Erotica" section.

Oh, and one more thing: flinders -- your post is probably the single most intelligent statement in conjunction with this whole "child porn" discussion, thank you very much!

[ro_G]

i think missi's heart was in the right place - just her post was in the wrong forum.

a friend of mine asked permission for one of Mann's images once for a sleeve. She point blank refused. Even after he sent her lyrics for the song she felt it didn't match the tone of her work.

The lyrics were

Sprawled out over the windfall of this the bloated browning month
Apple bruises on my thighs and the flush from your yawning smile
Fasten your teeth on my soul and we shall roll andflow for ever more

You in your cotton dress, you in your innocence
Life screams its fury from your eyes, all jaded and alive
                         
My feet are in the water waiting for the tide to come
The whisper in the corner does its best to make me numb
My ear to your cage, your pulse in my hand
Eyeing up the child, fingering the dead,
Swallowing your flow, Your teeth on my neck,
Coil me full of hate and bend me out of shape
 
Death is just down the hallway
When I fall I hear him ask
How many rooms have you entered?
How many rooms have you passed?
 
How much darker does it get?     (x2)

Copyright - Dale Grundle/Catchers - from "Cotton Dress"