Danm

--
If you Dream it you can do it !!!!!!!

Well, in a nutshell, I think that a piece of art shouldn't have a free pass concerning the laws about content just because it qualifies as "art."
You can create whatever kind of art you want, but you have to pay the consequences. If your art is controversial and shocking, it should be obvious why it upsets people. If your art contains illegal images, then it's a crime.

--
"The only foe more dangerous than an unseen enemy is an unknown enemy." ~ Master Shan

If it contains illegal images, then it is a crime, yes. But if someone is in posession of such images (child porn, stuff, etc.) and is trying to pass them off as art, then it shouldn't be considered art in the first place. That person trying to say it is art is either mentally ill, trying to evade the long arm of the law, or both. However, if the art in question is a recreation of those things, such as a painting of a nude child or a murder, rather than the actual thing, then it shouldn't be considered a crime.

You do bring up some good points, though.

--
Follow me on FaceBook! [link]

"You gotta be genuine; that's the name of this game. If you're real, you got nothin' to worry about. But if you're synthetic, startin' tomorrow, your balls come off."

Depends on where you are, really. The laws there and such.

--
_{I'm taking Commissions! Help feed the starving artist}

FAQ #81: How can I make links to other deviants, deviations, or websites?

While this may be true for some countries, it's kind of an outdated thought process, censoring art and whatnot. I've always lived in a society where the freedom to say, do, or in this case, create anything artistically I want without criminal penalty, and I personally will always be grateful for this.

--
Follow me on FaceBook! [link]

"You gotta be genuine; that's the name of this game. If you're real, you got nothin' to worry about. But if you're synthetic, startin' tomorrow, your balls come off."

I agree! ^_^

--
Chosei Anno

Yeah, yeah, yeah "God Bless America" land that has the freedom to let it's kids become incredibly stupid and unhealthy for the good of- well, our enemies who'll have an easier time blowing us up when the day finally comes that our top scientists can't compare with their 7th graders.

And drawing child porn/pedophilia might not be illegal yet- but that doesn't make it right. Maybe it'll give the sickos an outlet so they don't have to go molesting children, or maybe it'll be the gateway drug that introduces them to the wonderful world of child porn and they find they like it and go looking for pictures of real children and then for actual children. I still don't think of porn as art, because if somebody says you should be censoring a picture- they're either way too uptight or you need to get your head out of the gutter.

--
_{I'm taking Commissions! Help feed the starving artist}

FAQ #81: How can I make links to other deviants, deviations, or websites?

I think you should read some of the other comments in regards to the child porn thing. A lot of pervs who draw lolicon (drawings of kids) like to use 'it's art' as an excuse to escape the law, which they can do because, as gross and morally wrong as it is, it's really not hurting anyone. The idea of it being a "gateway drug" is a bit debatable because it could go either way; it could make things worse or it could kill the problem at the source and satisfy said sicko's obsession.

I think you may be missing the point a bit. The statement "Art is not a crime" isn't said to protect perverts and such. It's said to protect legit artists who put content in their art others may find questionable/offensive. The artist who draws a naked child for artistic purposes is not a pedophile the same way that he is not a murderer for drawing someone getting killed.

As for your other comments about America, I think you may be reading into a stereotype or two. I will agree with you in that there are more idiots walking around than I feel comfortable with, there are also plenty of smart people in our country making differences, whether it be in a laboratory or on a battlefield. I respect your opinion, but please, leave it in your journal and not here. Thanks.

--
Follow me on FaceBook! [link]

"You gotta be genuine; that's the name of this game. If you're real, you got nothin' to worry about. But if you're synthetic, startin' tomorrow, your balls come off."

Thank you! ^_^

--
Follow me on FaceBook! [link]

"You gotta be genuine; that's the name of this game. If you're real, you got nothin' to worry about. But if you're synthetic, startin' tomorrow, your balls come off."

Please read my comments before agreeing with me so as to bite my head off. I actually pointed out that it might satisfy the obsession FIRST. But it's hard to tell. Some serial killers started out killing animals- that didn't stop them from moving onto bigger and badder things.

You pointed out teruchan. He draws himself as a bunny with underwear on his head and often found looking up girl's skirts or being snuggled between their breasts, and a lot of them look pretty young- some are obviously kids. How is he not an example of a pervert? I'm not saying he's bad or wrong or that it isn't art or that he shouldn't do it- but you're saying "I'm not trying to protect perverts" and specifically mentioning someone that's at least a bit of a perv.

Pedpohillic images aren't just "The kid's nekkid", it's also showing a child in a way that's clearly sexual or intended to arouse. If you're drawing a kid that's obviously sexual in nature, even if they're fully clothed, that's at least pedophilia. And lolicon isn't drawing kids- it's drawing them in sexual poses, etc. It's "drawing kids" in the same way that bestial pictures or furry porn is "Drawing animals". Yes, you can draw something naked without it being sexual- but most of what people object to are pretty dagg sexual.

--
_{I'm taking Commissions! Help feed the starving artist}

FAQ #81: How can I make links to other deviants, deviations, or websites?