Elton owns the largest collection of 20th century photography in the world and he has his own gallery. People, including Elton John, say this photo, titled “Klara and Edda Belly-Dancing,” by well known photographer, Nan Goldin, is art. Not child porn, art. Hmm. Sorry, I think it's child porn. I covered up that kids bits because I think it's child porn. I also think it's not even a good photograph, it quite sucks, so calling it art is offensive to me.
A police spokesperson told the Times of London. ‘This item is being assessed, and Northumbria Police, in consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service is investigating the circumstances surrounding it.
Ya think??? Doh, Elton, you jerk, ask that poor little kid if she thinks it's art. Asshole. The offensive piece of shit looks like something some crack whore mom snapped with a polaroid right before she went on Jerry Springer.
20 comments:
And before anyone rags me about art..I have two art degrees and I say that's not art. It's perv crap.
it's not art. that's child pornography plain and simple. the mom should be serving time for indecent exposure of her children. sick.
I have to agree with you!
We've never taken pictures of our childrens privates exposed, we are very protective because you never know! AND we dont want to embarrass them later on.
I cannot believe a loving parent would put that on display, that is PRIVATE!
it leaves me very sad...and rethinking my elton john cd collection....how well do cd's play in the fireplace?
it is not that the picture is private...it should have never been taken...and if it was...then destroyed.
That is just plain wrong. Sadly, I wouldnt put it past Elton to be into that sorta thing & it makes me ill because I've always liked his music.
Elton John is the new Jacko S-C-A-R-Y ! soooo disturbing !
that is definitely not art...that's sick!
Really very sick. Though you can call practically any bullshit "art". Sad.
I have taken better pics than that of a tree! Thats an awful pic. & those kids have no clue their part of some pervs child porn collection. If this was taken & sold, makes me wonder what the he** else pics of these kids have been taken, doing who knows what with who knows who!! This makes me sick. A criminal investigation must happen & possibly removal of those kids from their mother. How old is this pic? Are they still little? Or are they teens now? Gawd, what that brings to mind!!! Somebody help those kids!! Details please. Thx.
I do not know how ANYONE in their right mind would even for one second think this was appropriate let alone art! I would maybe consider the "art card" if the child wasn't laying spread eagle on floor... it's pornographic not matter what they try to call it. The only good thing that has come out of that picture is that it's been able to raise awareness on the child abuse issue.
I get that there are some moms who are maybe incredible naive and think a picture like this is harmless. Maybe all the media attention will make them realize pictures like this only aid the SICK fantasies of some very disturbed individuals and ultimately put children at higher risk.
Vanessa Hudgens is a natural blonde? Who knew?
I agree with you totally DD. It's certainly not art in my eyes. It's sick what people try to get away with these days and what they try to pass off as art. Children shouldn't be presented in such a way in any form.
I agree again, I think it's pornography.
Eliza
Wander where I can pick up a copy of this pic?
O.K. I don't know about UK law on this despite being from the UK (the actual Child Pornography legislation is too vague) but under U.S. law it could be considered child pornography.
Although there is a very legitimate reason for the "pose" (though obviously it's not posed, the bottom child just happened to be positioned like that during the belly dancing), it could count as a sexual pose under U.S. law.
However (though this probably wouldn't matter in the U.S. where they seem to like to stick to the letter of the law rather than common sense), due to the obvious reason for the positioning of the child (they just happened to be like that whilst playing when the photo was taken), it's NOT actually pornographic - it's just kids playing and one just happened to be posed in a way that puts focus on her vagina. Fortunately U.K. judges and prosecutors when it comes to things like this seem have some common sense (shame they don't seem to have any sense in other areas of law though).
P.S. ANY pic of a kid can aid the fantasy of a sick individual. They can always imagine them naked, so them not being naked doesn't make a blind bit of difference
I say it's art, and im from the UK. like PJ said, its just kids playin, I think it's funny as well lol.
What's really sick is all these guys flaming against cchild porn for any picture of nakedness. They just make the confusion between nakedness and porn, and obviously probably never saw how a real child behaves in real life...
I have two degrees in perversion and I say that's not perversion. It's art crap. Duh.
you're fucking retards.
why would a professional photographer with an outstanding career makechild pornography.
and,
the fact you're all getting so shitty about it all is what they were trying to achieve. you dont get upset that children are naked all around the word at any given time. but that a famous guy buys the largest collection of photographs, and one, or two, ok, maybe 3 or four. have
OH NO! a child naked.
photograph caputres people. aduld nudes are jsut oilder naked people.
why not get your thumb out your ass, quit the "dirty disher", which im sure is a big hit with all your friends when you copy what you hear on the news with your sensationalist opinions, and stop advertising what you call child porn more.
I believe if I remember correctly, that a child CAN be permitted under a certain age, by parents to have their naked picture taken (US Law) I'm probably wrong, but regardless... the picture is rather questionable in my opinion... but I believe by defenition with the permission of parents, their children can be photographed naked up to a certain age (not sure what happens after that, or if it is just up to the age of 18/21, depending where you are).... Whether the picture can be considered harmful towards the kids in it, is another story, I'm sure when they are older they'd not want to show off the picture, but at the same time would agree they probably don't remember it...
Post a Comment