la Marissa temporary administrator
Posts: 57
(12/6/00 17:10) Reply
CensorshipMovement Underway to Clothe Michelangelo's David
(FLORENCE, ITALIA) A group that is against all nude sculpture is trying to get the city of Florence, Italy, to put clothes on the world's most famous statue - Michelangelo's David.
The CFNN (Citizens For No Nudity), has collected over 20,000 signatures from art lovers around the world who would like to see clothes put on the huge marble work of art.
Baker Luffershy, 37, president of the CFNN, says that it is going to be an uphill battle, but one that his group is willing to fight all the way.
"When something has been around for almost 500 years, people get used to it," Luffershy says.
"They forget how pornographic it is, and it becomes difficult to get them to change.
"But we won't quit getting signatures and speaking out. You've got to remember, kids who see it for the first time have
never seen it before. We've got to break the chain somewhere. Eventually we will have a whole generation that has never even seen the nude version."
Luffershy says that clothes - perhaps a pair of gray shorts and a T-shirt or battle vest - will actually improve the sculpture.
"People will be less embarrassed to see it and more people will visit the sculpture, which is what Michelangelo would have wanted. He would be pleased with what we're doing.
"It will be more realistic with clothes anyway. Surely, David didn't fight Goliath in the nude."
***Reposted with persmission of the author: www.fukkit.com
Sound a little far fetched? Well it is, the story above is one of fiction, but how far fetch it is really?
The first time I was confronted with censorship here was when I posted a simple pencil drawing depicting a slave lowering to her knees.
To my surprise, there was a person or two that called it obscene and pornographic in nature. Now please remember. The person/s who stated this were role-players on AOL Gor. One of these women herself played the role of a pleasure slave. I was clearly shocked at the backlash I got and truely saddened because it came from the people it did. So as requested, my little drawing was removed from the board.
What I never understood was why a drawing that consisted of only showing the flesh of the slave was bashed and unsupported like it was. "Children could run across it!" My response simply is to quite using the internet as a babysitter for your children. It surprises me that board/s that support the poetry and writings on how natural the rape of a woman is, is so opposed to just the flesh of a woman being shown.
It still baffles me, but it was not my board, so there was nothing I could do
"Some day people will grow up and realize that the only thing vile about human bodies is the small minds some people have developed within them." - Dick Hein
Not only do I see this type of censorship from a group of people that either role-play or claim the lifestyle. I see censorship of other kinds.
What a better place than a message board for debating, yet I see people afraid to do so. I see boards that censor and remove posts that go against their beliefs. Where does the fear come from?
Why are some people afraid to defend their beliefs by debating them with perhaps those that have views that slightly differ?
The most important question of all is.... What fear drives a person or individuals to try to shut down another's board that slightly rocks the boat. I'm curious. It reeks of underhanded childish deeds and dishonorable acts. Maybe this is just my view on all this.
I would enjoy to hear what others have to say on all this. I may not like or agree with everything that is said, but that is what discussion is all about.
Re: Censorship
The post had really little to do with the drawing i posted up to go with it.
It had to do with a few things really, but my skills at writing or getting those views down the way i wanted, is most likely lacking.
I used the example of my drawing being removed, from a now defunk board, as an example of how small the minds are of some of those who either envelope Gor as a role-player or a lifestyler. But perhaps i used it as too much of an example. =/
My post was brought about by more recent events. A nipple is seen and someone uses that to try their darnest to close this board down. EGads a nipple! Don't men have those too? The question is though. Was it the nipple the problem or just the scapegoat for a underhanded agenda?
I have grown to respect Dean greatly. He's a "man" who speaks his mind and that scares some people. He rocks a boat and that scares people as well. He offers a different view and allows this censorship free arena for open debate to exist and that seems to bother some people.
IF the person or persons involved behind trying to close this board are lifestylers, why the need to go about it in a sneaky fashion? Does that seem honorable? And again i ask, why fear a board that is shunned? Why do some find the need to close down something that allows freedom of speech for various thoughts and ideas to be voiced.
Well my post, again, was a bit long winded. But this time i hope it made a little more sense :)
Ummm....
Yeah, I got the point on the first post. I just thought it was a shame that it was removed from that site, and was commenting that I liked it.
I wasn't trying to detract from the point of your post, just didn't have anything to say about it other than that.
Re: Ummm....
Censorship ..... People are safe, warm, content and happy in their little worlds. When someone comes along and adds a piece to their little world that they, for whatever reason, are not comfortable with, they lash out. The victim of this lashing can be your freedom of sppech and expression.
It was not that your drawing (citing your example) was lewd, or nasty, or dirty. It intruded into their concept of what the world should be.
From my small understanding of the world, we are taught at an early age that the human body is not something of beauty and wonder, it is something horrid and dissgusting. Something to be hidden away behind as many clothes as one can put on one's body, the baggier, the better. Is this why so many develop eating disorders ? Become fat ? To make the physical body as disgusting as we are conditioned to believe it is ?
Where does this come from ? I havent a clue. Take this similar example, if a man looks at a woman, he may be having "dirty" thoughts, or if a man comments on a womans attributes, he is told to "Get his mind out of the gutter".
Why is this ? Why when the human body is concerned is everything "dirty" or "nasty" ? What is wrong with appreciating the beauty of the gentle swell of a breast ? or the soft curve of a womans hips ? or the way her neck decends to meet her shoulder ?
Small minds. Just at work the other day, a female co-worker bent down to pick something up. She was wearing a fairly tight par of jeans and her behind made this almost perfect (in my mind) curve, her thighs and behind made this heart shape that, personally, I find most attractive.
I pointed this out to a male co-worker of mine and his response (a conditioned one I am sure) was to "Get my mind out of the gutter". I looked at him and said with a straight face "That is no where near the gutter, that my friend, is almost a work of art."
We are graced with these amazing biological machines. Designed over millenia with certain attributes which are SUPPOSED to appeal to the opposite sex. Yet from infantcy we are CONDITIONED to view these attributes and their BIOLOGICAL responses as "dirty" or "nasty".
I think I have strayed from the topic, but I think my 2 cents worth might make some people think. That is the most important thing one human being can do for another, to stimulate their brain and make them think for a change, instead of falling back on years of pre-conditioned responses.
Ok, I am dont. And Marissia, the drawing was lovely. You obviously have a talent. That others could not realize that is a tradegy.
the ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 194
(12/14/00 23:32) Reply
Where To Draw The Line?
I have recently stumbled across a ring of child pornography posting boards.
I reported them to the server host, R.C.M.P., and to U.S. Customs.
Censorship? Or responsibility...
There is a difference between censorship, which inhibits the freedom of speech of free willed peoples, when that speech does no harm, and responsibility, which is what you exercised.
The one thing that people, mostly United States Americans, seem not to realize is that with freedom of speech COMES responsibility, such as to not walk into a crowded theatre and shout "FIRE!".
Now we only need to define what is harm, another sticky subject in itself.
Kevien Tiberius Relic
Re: Ummm....
"From my small understanding of the world, we are taught at an early age that the human body is not something of beauty and wonder, it is something horrid and dissgusting. Something to be hidden away behind as many clothes as one can put on one's body, the baggier, the better. Is this why so many develop eating disorders ? Become fat ? To make the physical body as disgusting as we are conditioned to believe it is ?
Where does this come from ? I havent a clue."
It's my opinion that this distressing way of thinking about the human body is the result of religion and puritanism. I am neither young nor anywhere close to perfect... but my body is still beautiful. I am pagan and proud.
Re: Ummm....
"I have recently stumbled across a ring of child pornography posting boards.
I reported them to the server host, R.C.M.P., and to U.S. Customs.
Censorship?"
No one person can say "This is right." or "That is wrong." We must rely on the common sense and decency of thise around us, and the idea that "The majority of the people will be right the majority of the time."
If there is one resource on this planet that we should endeavour with all our might to protect, it is our children. They are the ones charged with the monumental responsibility of caring for this world once we are gone. It is up to us, the adults, to give these inheritors the proper tools to care for not only us, but the world in general. Astrong body and sound mind are just two of the many tools that they will need. Things like child porn, abuse, neglect etc etc etc are working against this idea. How can a person with a screwed up psyche make good sound decisions concering not just themselves, but the world at large ?
Take this example, if you were hired for a job that was fairly complex and intricate, the company hiring you would either train you extensively, or make sure you had the desired knowledge to complete the task.
Why then are we not making sure that todays children have the proper knowledge for the task that lies ahead of them ? Why are we dooming ourselves and our world by not living up to our responsibility of properly training the next generation of caretakers ?
There aremany ills in the world. Somewhere, somethme, we are going to get out heads out of our asses and see what needs to be done and actually DO IT.
Disagree
Respectfully, I disagree with part of your statement. This one -
No one person can say "This is right." or "That is wrong." We must rely on the common sense and decency of
those around us, and the idea that "The majority of the people will be right the majority of the time."
I absolutely disagree with that. The "majority" of people in ancient Mexico thought it was just fine and dandy to sacrifice other human beings to their gods, and that went on for a thousand years.
The "majority" of people in Nazi Germany thought it was ok to slaughter Jews and take their wealth, the "majority" of people in the United States, ( and other countries also, though they all outlawed it long before the U.S. did ) thought it was ok to have black slaves, and that went on for a good long time....
These things were wrong and bad. I can, as an individual, with utmost confidence, judge it to be so.
When it comes down to it, the only true yardstick we have for right and wrong IS the individual. We all have to exercise our responsibility and authority as individual human beings to do no harm whenever possible. That is our ultimate measurement of moral and ethical judgement.
The Judeo-Christian ethic, when not taken to the extremes of madness such as it is in organized religion, has an excellent foundation for individual moral standpoint. Of course, it must be understood correctly, which you rarely find these days. Most people just join an organized religion, and let the "majority" of people in it tell them what is wrong and right, which leads to the incredible insanity of what fern talks of above, and even more incredibly, like the crusades of Europe, the witch hunts of Puritan New England, and the ultimate, the Spanish Inquisitions.
It's all about the responsibility of judging right and wrong FOR YOURSELF, not letting others tell you what is ok, but deciding what does the least harm.
the ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 198
(12/16/00 21:23) Reply
FYI
The sites I reported were not just pictures of naked minors, but contained photos and mpegs of sexual acts (including ejaculation) with kindergarten age children.
The human body is indeed a wonderfull machine and I for one can see the beauty in the naked form, be it adult or child, but I personally draw the line at the aforementioned acts.
You may have noticed that the "whip" gif cartoon has been removed from this site. It was done so at the urging of EZ board because members of a certain "other" site decided it was the only way they could retaliate against me (seeing as how the campaign of email viruses and signing me up to porn sites failed).
These people actually demanded that this site be taken down, since we replaced the cartoon nudity with David and Venus we have not had any complaints against nudity.
Thus censorship can be and has been used to further the advances of a "special" group under the hospice of morality.
the ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 1240
(10/2/06 13:33) Reply
Nude Art at Museum Gets Teacher Fired[This is what is wrong with the United States of America.]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
September 30, 2006
Museum Field Trip Deemed Too Revealing
By RALPH BLUMENTHAL
FRISCO, Tex., Sept. 28 —
Ms. McGee, 51, a popular art teacher with 28 years in the classroom, is out of a job after leading her fifth-grade classes last April through the Dallas Museum of Art. One of her students saw nude art in the museum, and after the child’s parent complained, the teacher was suspended.
Although the tour had been approved by the principal, and the 89 students were accompanied by 4 other teachers, at least 12 parents and a museum docent, Ms. McGee said, she was called to the principal the next day and “bashed.”
She later received a memorandum in which the principal, Nancy Lawson, wrote: “During a study trip that you planned for fifth graders, students were exposed to nude statues and other nude art representations.” It cited additional complaints, which Ms. McGee has challenged.
The school board suspended her with pay on Sept. 22.
In a newsletter e-mailed to parents this week, the principal and Rick Reedy, superintendent of the Frisco Independent School District, said that Ms. McGee had been denied transfer to another school in the district, that her annual contract would not be renewed and that a replacement had been interviewed.
The episode has dumbfounded and exasperated many in and out of this mushrooming exurb, where nearly two dozen new schools have been built in the last decade and computers outnumber students three to one.
A representative of the Texas State Teachers Association, which has sprung to Ms. McGee’s defense, calls it “the first ‘nudity-in-a-museum case’ we have seen.”
“Teachers get in trouble for a variety of reasons,” said the association’s general counsel, Kevin Lungwitz, “but I’ve never heard of a teacher getting in trouble for taking her kiddoes on an approved trip to an art museum.”
John R. Lane, director of the museum, said he had no information on why Ms. McGee had been disciplined.
“I think you can walk into the Dallas Museum of Art and see nothing that would cause concern,” Mr. Lane said.
Over the past decade, more than half a million students, including about a thousand from other Frisco schools, have toured the museum’s collection of 26,000 works spanning 5,000 years, he said, “without a single complaint.”One school recently did cancel a scheduled visit, he said. He did not have its name.
The uproar has swamped Frisco school switchboards and prompted some Dallas-area television stations to broadcast images of statues from the museum with areas of the anatomy blacked [/u]
Ms. Lawson and Mr. Reedy did not return calls. A spokeswoman for the school district referred questions to the school board’s lawyer, Randy Gibbs. Mr. Gibbs said, “there was a parent who complained, relating the complaint of a child,” but he said he did not know details.
In the May 18 memorandum to Ms. McGee, Ms. Lawson faulted her for not displaying enough student art and for “wearing flip-flops” to work; Ms. McGee said she was wearing Via Spiga brand sandals. In citing the students’ exposure to nude art, Ms. Lawson also said “time was not used wisely for learning during the trip,” adding that parents and teachers had complained and that Ms. McGee should have toured the route by herself first. But Ms. McGee said she did exactly that.
In the latest of several statements, the district contended that the trip had been poorly planned. But Mr. Gibbs, the district’s lawyer, acknowledged that Ms. Lawson had approved it.
Ms. McGee and her lawyer, Rogge Dunn, who are exploring legal action, say that her past job evaluations had been consistently superior until the museum trip and only turned negative afterward. They have copies of evaluations that bear out the assertion.
Retracing her route this week through the museum’s European and contemporary galleries, Ms. McGee passed the marble torso of a Greek youth from a funerary relief, circa 330 B.C.; its label reads, “his nude body has the radiant purity of an athlete in his prime.” She passed sculptor Auguste Rodin’s tormented “Shade;” Aristide Maillol’s “Flora,” with her clingy sheer garment; and Jean Arp’s “Star in a Dream.”
None, Ms. McGee said, seemed offensive.
“This is very painful and getting more so,” she said, her eyes moistening. “I’m so into art. I look at it for its value, what each civilization has left behind.”
School officials have not named the child who complained or any particular artwork at issue, although Ms. McGee said her puzzlement was compounded when Ms. Lawson referred at times to “an abstract nude sculpture.”
Ms. McGee, a fifth-generation Texan who has a grown daughter, won a monthly teacher award in 2004 from a local newspaper. She said the loss of her $57,600-a-year job could jeopardize her mortgage and compound her health problems, including a heart ailment.
Some parents have come to Ms. McGee’s defense. Joan Grande said her 11-year-old daughter, Olivia, attended the museum tour.
“She enjoyed the day very much,” Ms. Grande said. “She did mention some nude art but she didn’t make a big deal of it and neither did I.” She said that if Ms. McGee’s job ratings were high before the incident, “something isn’t right” about the suspension.
Another parent, Maijken Kozcara, said Ms. McGee had taught her children effectively.
“I thought she was the greatest,” Ms. Kozcara said. But “knowing Texas, the way things work here” she said of the teacher’s suspension, “I wasn’t really amazed. I was like, ‘Yeah, right.’ ”
It was pleasing to hear.
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies 
