The blood on my hands covered the holes
NYTimes said:County prosecutors said the charge was based on a Texas law that makes it illegal to “knowingly promote” material that depicts the genitals or the pubic area of a child, clothed or partially clothed, and “which appeals to the prurient interest in sex and has no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.”
This law sounds pretty flimsy.
How is this not art or politics?
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
NYTimes said:County prosecutors said the charge was based on a Texas law that makes it illegal to “knowingly promote” material that depicts the genitals or the pubic area of a child, clothed or partially clothed, and “which appeals to the prurient interest in sex and has no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.”This law sounds pretty flimsy.
How is this not art or politics?
The key word here is value. An 1700s painting of daily life with children skinny dipping in a river is art. A 2020 film of 11 year olds emulating strippers is just 11 year olds emulating strippers. Vulgar with 0 artistic value.
The blood on my hands covered the holes
NYTimes said:County prosecutors said the charge was based on a Texas law that makes it illegal to “knowingly promote” material that depicts the genitals or the pubic area of a child, clothed or partially clothed, and “which appeals to the prurient interest in sex and has no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.”This law sounds pretty flimsy.
How is this not art or politics?The key word here is value. An 1700s painting of daily life with children skinny dipping in a river is art. A 2020 film of 11 year olds emulating strippers is just 11 year olds emulating strippers. Vulgar with 0 artistic value.
It makes a commentary on how sex, dance, and the music industry is portrayed by adults vs children, aiming to show a separation between them and how far it can go through showing how the adult's forceful reactions towards it actually promotes it. Through the use of jarring ideas and imagery, it's triggered a response from it's viewers to the point of drawing attention towards itself.
How is this not of artistic and political value? It's not porn, did you even see any of it?
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
last edit on
10/9/2020 1:34:58 AM
NYTimes said:County prosecutors said the charge was based on a Texas law that makes it illegal to “knowingly promote” material that depicts the genitals or the pubic area of a child, clothed or partially clothed, and “which appeals to the prurient interest in sex and has no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.”This law sounds pretty flimsy.
How is this not art or politics?The key word here is value. An 1700s painting of daily life with children skinny dipping in a river is art. A 2020 film of 11 year olds emulating strippers is just 11 year olds emulating strippers. Vulgar with 0 artistic value.
It makes a commentary on how sex, dance, and the music industry is portrayed by adults vs children, aiming to show a separation between them and how far it can go through showing how the adult's forceful reactions towards it actually promotes it. Through the use of jarring ideas and imagery, it's triggered a response from it's viewers to the point of drawing attention towards itself.
How is this not of artistic and political value? It's not porn, did you even see any of it?
I saw enough to know it is porn. This points could have all been made without filming actual children rubbing their crotches and humping the ground in a doggystyle position.
The blood on my hands covered the holes
It wouldn't have inspired you this much if it hadn't, and not everything featuring subject matter of a sexual nature is pornographic.
Well a litteral grand jury agrees with me. You've been spending too much time with Jim.
The blood on my hands covered the holes
It wouldn't have inspired you this much if it hadn't, and not everything featuring subject matter of a sexual nature is pornographic.
Well a litteral grand jury agrees with me. You've been spending too much time with Jim.
I don't think you understand the purpose of art. It's not just making pretty things and then selling it commercial, it's meant to evoke a response.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
last edit on
10/9/2020 6:36:27 PM