Is this Art or Child Pornography?
To the parents of the two little girls in the photograph "Klara and Edda Belly Dancing photo" by Nan Goldin (who is well know for her pornographic photography) it would seem innocent and fun (maybe). But for the same photo to be owned by Sir Elton John, who has no connection to the family of the girls, seems very disturbing to me especially as it is now being seen by thousands of people in an exhibit in the UK and over the internet. The photo in question which was seized from an art exhibit by British police because of complaints that the image was indecent has been returned to the singer and no charges will be made. But now that the image is on the internet makes this whole thing seem like the Rules on Child porn are ok under the label of art but are not if owned or produced for other instances, to me there is no difference this image should not be shown. Could this decision by the UK police be a sign that the state allows child porn to be published if it is for the rich nobles like SIR Elton John, but not ok If an ordinary man/women had this photo hanging on his/her wall. I doubt that the Police would not press any charges for the latter.
Why is Sir Elton John being allowed to own this photo? if I was a parent of these two girls I would not of allowed anyone to own this photo.
You decide Art or child Porn
N.B. Some may find this image a bit shocking!!!
Please Note: I would never normally pass on anything like this under any circumstances, but I want to show the hypocrisy of the laws in the UK. I personally find it totally shocking that this image is owned by a complete stranger to the girls and I wanted to make an important point, which I hope I have.
Regards,
Clive
No comments:
Post a Comment