Official - Michael Jackson was scum

[cullennz]

Have you seen the pictures yourself? Can you actually create an argument without the use of Copy and Paste?

These are similar to the described ones and from the same book, what makes you believe that these are sexualized and used for sexual gratification?

Again NSFW labels for all of the below do apply.

http://www.yossimilo.com/artists/sime_joha/images/large-sj-16.jpg

http://journal-files7.foto.ua/uploads/2015/10/Simen-Johan-18.jpg

And how are they and worse than this one... or this one...

Art?

Lol

 

[Fudbucker]

Have you seen the pictures yourself? Can you actually create an argument without the use of Copy and Paste?

These are similar to the described ones and from the same book, what makes you believe that these are sexualized and used for sexual gratification?

Again NSFW labels for all of the below do apply.

http://www.yossimilo.com/artists/sime_joha/images/large-sj-16.jpg

http://journal-files7.foto.ua/uploads/2015/10/Simen-Johan-18.jpg

And how are they and worse than this one... or this one...

I don't want "not safe for work" images on my computer that your own link describes as sexualized young children.

I don't want to see kiddie porn and I don't want to see the artistic version (Sexualized young children). That Jackson had such a book (along with his other pervy behavior) is enough to move the dial for me.

 

[Dipayan]

I don't want "not safe for work" images on my computer that your own link describes as sexualized young children.

I don't want to see kiddie porn and I don't want to see the artistic version (Sexualized young children). That Jackson had such a book (along with his other pervy behavior) is enough to move the dial for me.

I find it fascinating that Simen Johan, whose pictures we are debating, is alive and living in New York, and considered to be an artist of some repute, and NOT a paedophile.

However, a person who owned his work is suggested to have paedophillic tendencies simply because he owned his work.

EDIT: Also, since when did 'naked' automatically come to mean 'sexualized'? I'm not even getting into the fact that most of the images don't even show 'nakedness'.

 

[cullennz]

I find it fascinating that Simen Johan, whose pictures we are debating, is alive and living in New York, and considered to be an artist of some repute, and NOT a paedophile.

However, a person who owned his work is suggested to have paedophillic tendencies simply because he owned his work.

EDIT: Also, since when did 'naked' automatically come to mean 'sexualized'? I'm not even getting into the fact that most of the images don't even show 'nakedness'.

If you can't see sexualisation in that supposed art you live in a different world to me

 

[DragonLady]

If you can't see sexualisation in that supposed art you live in a different world to me

Seriously?

Johan's images make me cringe. There is nothing sexy or stimulating about them.

I assume his goal was to spark debate and discussion about something, but I don't think it was sex or pedophilia.

I'm genuinely confused, and do not understand how they can be interpreted that way.

 

[cullennz]

Seriously?

Johan's images make me cringe. There is nothing sexy or stimulating about them.

I assume his goal was to spark debate and discussion about something, but I don't think it was sex or pedophilia.

I'm genuinely confused, and do not understand how they can be interpreted that way.

I'm not arguing that lots of rich ponsey people find it arty.

I'm just saying to your average person it's exploiting little kids.

You find it arty. Awesome.

 

[DragonLady]

I'm not arguing that lots of rich ponsey people find it arty.

I'm just saying to your average person it's exploiting little kids.

You find it arty. Awesome.

Are you trying to say something to me about me? Your post feels a bit like a personal dig.

Yes; I like art. I draw, I paint, I hang out with artists.

I do not believe I have ever seen any real child porn, so I cannot honestly make any kind of informed comparison.

However, those who have seen genuine child porn, and know what it looks like, evaluated these images and decided they do not fit the legal definition.

I'm satisfied with that, unless/until someone convinces me the definition needs to be changed somehow.

 

[cullennz]

Are you trying to say something to me about me? Your post feels a bit like a personal dig.

Yes; I like art. I draw, I paint, I hang out with artists.

I do not believe I have ever seen any real child porn, so I cannot honestly make any kind of informed comparison.

However, those who have seen genuine child porn, and know what it looks like, evaluated these images and decided they do not fit the legal definition.

I'm satisfied with that, unless/until someone convinces me the definition needs to be changed somehow.

Not at all.

I'm just saying for people buying it as art is laughable.

I'd be surprised if it met most safe filters

 

[cullennz]

Are you trying to say something to me about me? Your post feels a bit like a personal dig.

Yes; I like art. I draw, I paint, I hang out with artists.

I do not believe I have ever seen any real child porn, so I cannot honestly make any kind of informed comparison.

However, those who have seen genuine child porn, and know what it looks like, evaluated these images and decided they do not fit the legal definition.

I'm satisfied with that, unless/until someone convinces me the definition needs to be changed somehow.

Btw

Where are the reports to say experts in child porn thought it was fine?

 

[DragonLady]

I'm just saying for people buying it as art is laughable.

I have no idea how much of it he sells. I would guess his art depicting animals sells pretty well, though they would likely do better if had just stuck to them, as there may be those who don't want to feel their money is supporting his other efforts.

 

[DragonLady]

Where are the reports to say experts in child porn thought it was fine?

I'll double check, but I'm pretty sure it was in the .pdf linked to last night. I read that whole thing, and searched for most of the books listed (although not the actual porn or the nudist stuff). I wanted to see for myself and make my own judgement.

I've seen other artists do stuff that to me are really pushing the limits, but none of their works were listed as being found in the raid.

 

[cullennz]

I have no idea how much of it he sells. I would guess his art depicting animals sells pretty well, though they would likely do better if had just stuck to them, as there may be those who don't want to feel their money is supporting his other efforts.

I get it.

You think THAT is art.

I don't

Agree to disagree. Night.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Did you tell your son's friend "Look, if you love me you'll sleep in the bed'?

Would you let your son stay at Neverland ranch with MJ?

Quote the whole Bashir statement.... in context. You are being dishonest, and considering that you do this sort of cherry-picking regularly in other threads it makes me believe it is intentional. There was a lot more to even the scene you took that quote from. Plus there's the part that was edited out, as testified to by numerous people.... MJ slept on the floor.

I've probably got a few years on you but that sort of appeal to emotion and indignation doesn't work on me. I can remember, "Sure you want them to have the same restrooms and schools but tell me this, would you want your sister to marry one?" How about, in support of the Fuelair solution for rapists... "What if that was your sister or mother or daughter? You telling me you wouldn't want to kill the guy?"

But I'm going to throw a monkey wrench into the works, on you. If, like the parents of the accusers, my wife and I were present in the house and we both felt comfortable with Michael. Or if we knew him well? Yes, I might agree to it. When Marcello is in Bangkok with us, he share his male cousin Ma Wen's bed. Sixteen year old post-pubescent boy.

And my son's gorgeous. I live in the paedophile capital of the *********** universe. I watch over him like a mother hen, so I'm not some free-love crazy hippie.

But that brings us to the credibility factor. The "what if it was your kid" gambit says that you think the parents were either flesh-peddling their kids or immoral. Those are the parents that were the sources of his major cases. Did the "what if it was your kid" question occur to them before they decided to milk the million dollar goat for money? There's a great deal of evidence showing that it didn't.

 

[cullennz]

Quote the whole Bashir statement.... in context. You are being dishonest, and considering that you do this sort of cherry-picking regularly in other threads it makes me believe it is intentional. There was a lot more to even the scene you took that quote from. Plus there's the part that was edited out, as testified to by numerous people.... MJ slept on the floor.

I've probably got a few years on you but that sort of appeal to emotion and indignation doesn't work on me. I can remember, "Sure you want them to have the same restrooms and schools but tell me this, would you want your sister to marry one?" How about, in support of the Fuelair solution for rapists... "What if that was your sister or mother or daughter? You telling me you wouldn't want to kill the guy?"

But I'm going to throw a monkey wrench into the works, on you. If, like the parents of the accusers, my wife and I were present in the house and we both felt comfortable with Michael. Or if we knew him well? Yes, I might agree to it. When Marcello is in Bangkok with us, he share his male cousin Ma Wen's bed. Sixteen year old post-pubescent boy.

And my son's gorgeous. I live in the paedophile capital of the *********** universe. I watch over him like a mother hen, so I'm not some free-love crazy hippie.

But that brings us to the credibility factor. The "what if it was your kid" gambit says that you think the parents were either flesh-peddling their kids or immoral. Those are the parents that were the sources of his major cases. Did the "what if it was your kid" question occur to them before they decided to milk the million dollar goat for money? There's a great deal of evidence showing that it didn't.

You mean when they realised the supa dupa pop star that manipulated everyone with his fame just turned out to be a kiddy fiddler?

Stupid star struck parents seemed to be his lure

 

[DragonLady]

I get it.

You think THAT is art.

I don't

Agree to disagree. Night.

I fail to understand how my personal tastes fit into the picture at all?

Art is in the eye of the beholder, and it's value in the pocket of the buyer.

Whether or not I would buy a particular work has nothing whatsoever to do with this topic.

 

[cullennz]

This whole thing is ignoring the fact he was a combination drug addicted weirdo who who knows what was going on

 

[cullennz]

I fail to understand how my personal tastes fit into the picture at all?

Art is in the eye of the beholder, and it's value in the pocket of the buyer.

Whether or not I would buy a particular work has nothing whatsoever to do with this topic.

So to him it may not have been art?

 

[Foolmewunz]

Btw

Where are the reports to say experts in child porn thought it was fine?

How about the jury? The trial judge? The prosecution? In a criminal trial that's all the experts you need. Or does "what some guy in NZ has an icky feeling about" trump those sources.

 

[cullennz]

How about the jury? The trial judge? The prosecution? In a criminal trial that's all the experts you need. Or does "what some guy in NZ has an icky feeling about trump those sources".

Ahh cool

Sorry. Forgot

The multi million dollar legal team

 

[Foolmewunz]

This whole thing is ignoring the fact he was a combination drug addicted weirdo who who knows what was going on

This needs to be preserved for posterity. It really is the ne plus ultra of your "case".

Rates right up there with "dudes in dresses".