Nude Statue Raises Outrage in Seattle
Jeff Jenson
Seattle Answers Challenge Of Naked Art Sculpture
SEATTLE - A dying man left the Seattle Art Museum a million dollars for
a statue.
But not just for any statue. He said the sculpture had to include a
naked man, or, the museum doesn't get the money.
The new statue will be prominently displayed at the Seattle Art
Museum's new sculpture park on the waterfront near where the trolley
will come in.
There are crude sketches that show the sculpture "Father and Son". It
is the work of renowned artist Louise Bourgeois.
The estate of art lover Stu Smailes is paying for the million-dollar
piece.
But his lawyer says Smailes threw a hitch in to his will -- any
sculpture he paid for had to include a nude male.
David Looser
news:1128349775.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.komotv.com/stories/39483.htm
>
> Seattle Answers Challenge Of Naked Art Sculpture
>
>
> SEATTLE - A dying man left the Seattle Art Museum a million dollars for
> a statue.
>
> But not just for any statue. He said the sculpture had to include a
> naked man, or, the museum doesn't get the money.
>
article and I didn't see anything about "outrage".
David.
Las Vegas Hiker
found here:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/243035_robert01.html
--LVBareHiker
Jeff Jenson
Here is the Rest of the Story.
The statue is going to be that of a Naked Man (with a large penis) and
a young Boy (naked) facing each other. They are going to call it
"Father and Son."
Of course while they call it "Father and Son" we really don't know what
the relationship of the Man to the young boy is.
It seems that although it is just supposed to be about the love a
Father has for his son the truth is it is really an attempt to promote
NAMBLA's agenda.
Point is, just because it is nude it doesn't mean that nudists should
rush to its defense. Nude CAN BE LEWD, and nudists must not be tricked
by those who would misuse nudity in this way.
jon...@webtv.net
as offensive to ken schram...writer for the news....he says that the man
reaching for the boy .....could have been a priest reaching for an altar
boy.....and i agree...if this guy has died of aids....the most honorable
thing the museum could do would divert the funds to aids
research.....now let the planet continue in motion......jonZeee
David Looser
>
>
> The statue is going to be that of a Naked Man (with a large penis) and
> a young Boy (naked) facing each other. They are going to call it
> "Father and Son."
>
> Of course while they call it "Father and Son" we really don't know what
> the relationship of the Man to the young boy is.
>
> It seems that although it is just supposed to be about the love a
> Father has for his son the truth is it is really an attempt to promote
> NAMBLA's agenda.
>
So it's not part of "the" story, it's part of "your" story. Isn't it strange
how as soon as anyone tries to create a work of art that has a man and a
child together a few perverted people start seeing it as "peadophilia". The
peadophilia is in those peoples heads, nowhere else.
David.
Jeff Jenson
Richard C. wrote:
> X-No-archive: yes> news:1128349775.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I live in seattle and have not heard of any "outrage".
> They are being silly, however, in the presentation of the statue.
Since you live in Seattle and you are a Nudist you should speak out
against that statue. It would be good for people to see that just
because nudists believe that nudity is ok they are also not
unreasonable and understand that nudity can be misused. Real nudism
isn't about having sex with young boys. It is just about being without
clothes. I think it would show people that Nudists really aren't about
Sex.
Jeff Jenson
Please, join the real world for a moment and understand that people
might have ulterior motives.
This money wasn't donated by a nudist. It was donated by a Homosexual
activist with an agenda. This agenda is that they believe that it is
healthy for young boys to have sex with adult males. They have a
slogan. Sex before eight or it's too late.
I believe simple nudity can be natural and not about sex. But I also
know there is a world out there with people who do associate sex with
nudity and who have a sexually driven agenda.
If nudists would speak out against this it would go a long way in
showing the people that their nudity is non-sexual.
Jeff Jenson
Richard C. wrote:
> X-No-archive: yes
>
> I live in seattle and have not heard of any "outrage".
> They are being silly, however, in the presentation of the statue.
Why does the statue have a big penis?
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Define "big" in this context.
Best wishes,
Bert
--
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
- Robert Anton Wilson
jon...@webtv.net
non-sexual. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeff.....ken
schram ...news writer was outraged/offended....if you scroll down 12
inches you will see it about the pedophilia aspect.....loser you will
see it too if you arent too profoundly ignorant.....jonZeee
Jeff Jenson
> Where do you get that from?
> How big is big?
http://www.seattleartmuseum.org/PressRoom/prRelease.asp?prID=120
It is kind of the trade mark of the artist.
My question is with all that is going on right now with pedophile why
an art piece that sugggests such an activity?
It is offensive and wrong.
Nudism isn't about having sex with a boy.
Mark
that in no way fits the article. Why do you do such things Jeff?
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1128349775.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.komotv.com/stories/39483.htm
>
> Seattle Answers Challenge Of Naked Art Sculpture
>
>
> SEATTLE - A dying man left the Seattle Art Museum a million dollars for
> a statue.
snip
Jeff Jenson
Jeff Jenson
Jeff Jenson
Does it matter?
Isn't what important is that it is being used by the pro-boy sex
interest groups?
How about all the women who would not be able to go to the park. This
is sexual harrassment!
Jeff Jenson
Richard C. wrote:
> X-No-archive: yes
>
> >
> > The statue is going to be that of a Naked Man (with a large penis)
>
> Where does it say that (large penis)?????
> =========================
>
> > Of course while they call it "Father and Son" we really don't know what
> > the relationship of the Man to the young boy is.
> >
> > It seems that although it is just supposed to be about the love a
> > Father has for his son the truth is it is really an attempt to promote
> > NAMBLA's agenda.
> >
> > http://216.220.97.17
> >
> > Point is, just because it is nude it doesn't mean that nudists should
> > rush to its defense. Nude CAN BE LEWD, and nudists must not be tricked
> > by those who would misuse nudity in this way.
> >
> You are lewd!
The world is lewd. Not everyone has the same mindset as they do in a
nudist park. That is why I perfer nudist parks as opposed to nude
beaches. You can closely monitor behavior at a nudist park.
Jeff Jenson
> I cannot find a refference to a "big penis" in the article.
> Are you sure you saw such a thing?
> ===========================
>
If the statue is large, it is reasonable to think that the penis would
be as well. And then all the gays (and I hear there are lots of them
there) would go to the park to put the stone penis into (well do I need
to go on).
Jeff Jenson
> The statue has nothing to do with sex..........................
> that is in your mind, you pathetic weasel!
It can be easily interpreted as having to do with sex. The reason this
is being made is to promote NAMBLA's agenda.
JD
There is a famous quote on the subject "Honi soit qui mal y pense" - to
translate loosely -"He is evil who thinks it is bad". In other words, the
evil is, as you say, in Jeff's mind. From the description of the sculpture
it is totally inoffensive to any normal person, and I, for one, see no
reason for the rest of us to conduct our lives based on the sick minds of a
few evil minded people. (Jeff keeps seeing evil everywhere)
JD
Mark
> The world is lewd. Not everyone has the same mindset as they do in a
> nudist park. That is why I perfer nudist parks as opposed to nude
> beaches. You can closely monitor behavior at a nudist park.
>
And (praytell I will get NO answer) exactly WHICH nudist park(s) have you
attended that gives you the "preference" over nude beaches?
Mark
>
> How about this one.
>
> http://www.catholicleague.org/05press_releases/quarter%203/050930_seattle%20abc.htm
>
That one doesn't back your claim......and the other one editorializes one
man's prejudices without ANY facts in hand....try again pervert.
Jeff Jenson
The perverts are those who are misusing nudity by this pro NAMBLA
statue.
Jeff Jenson
You are right about the TV guy. He should be fired for his hateful
statements.
But that doesn't mean he isn't right about the statue.
The fact is that the statue, if it doesn't mean to he pro NAMBLA
propeganda can be used for pro-NAMBLA propeganda.
And the gays could use the statue in immoral ways for personal
gratification.
Jeff Jenson
IF the intent of this statue isn't to promote NAMBLA's agenda, that
will be its effect.
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip]
> > >
> > > Why does the statue have a big penis?
> > >
> >
I requested:
> > Define "big" in this context.
>
Jeff replied:
> Does it matter?
>
Not in my opinion.
> Isn't what important is that it is being used by the pro-boy sex
> interest groups?
>
No. There is nothing inherently offensive about a nude boy being in the
presence of a nude man--if there were, nudism would be inherently
offensive. But nudism is not inherently offensive. It is offensive only
to people who have *learned* to be offended by it.
IMHO if what the statue represents is OK, then the statue is OK.
> How about all the women who would not be able to go to the park. This
> is sexual harrassment!
>
It's OK with me if people who are offended by the statue stay away from
the park.
But in my view, a necessary element of sexual harassment is that the act
be *intended* to harass someone, to offend or embarass them. Otherwise,
I regard it simply as a case of someone being offended or embarassed.
Best wishes,
Bert
If there's anything wrong here, it's in the mind of the proponents of
intergenerational homosexual activity, not in the statue.
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mark wrote:
> > "Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1128368123....@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > How about this one.
> > >
> > > http://www.catholicleague.org/05press_releases/quarter%203/050930_seattle%
> > > 20abc.htm
> > >
> >
> > That one doesn't back your claim......and the other one editorializes one
> > man's prejudices without ANY facts in hand....try again pervert.
>
> You are right about the TV guy. He should be fired for his hateful
> statements.
>
> But that doesn't mean he isn't right about the statue.
>
> The fact is that the statue, if it doesn't mean to he pro NAMBLA
> propeganda can be used for pro-NAMBLA propeganda.
>
And a statue of a barefoot lady can be used for pro-foot-fetish
propaganda. So what?
> And the gays could use the statue in immoral ways for personal
> gratification.
>
Please tell us why it would be immoral for a gay person to be inspired
to pleasure himself by the statue. Who would be harmed?
Best wishes,
Bert
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> IF the intent of this statue isn't to promote NAMBLA's agenda, that
> will be its effect.
>
Please explain how that would work.
Jeff Jenson
Bert Clanton wrote:
> But in my view, a necessary element of sexual harassment is that the act
> be *intended* to harass someone, to offend or embarass them. Otherwise,
> I regard it simply as a case of someone being offended or embarassed.
SORRY.
Sexual Harrassment depends on the person who is being harrassed. IF
they think they are being harrassed then they can take action
regardless of what the intention of the other person is.
It is a matter of LAW!
So this is sexual harrassment.
(You are old aren't you? You haven't had a job in a while have you?)
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Please explain how a statue can advance a point of view.
Jeff Jenson
Bert Clanton wrote:
> In article <1128378632.3...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > IF the intent of this statue isn't to promote NAMBLA's agenda, that
> > will be its effect.
> >
>
> Please explain how that would work.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bert
They can have their rallies at the statue.
Jeff Jenson
Bert Clanton wrote:
>
> Please tell us why it would be immoral for a gay person to be inspired
> to pleasure himself by the statue. Who would be harmed?
For one thing it would be in public.
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
=
> >
> If the statue is large, it is reasonable to think that the penis would
> be as well.
I agree. So?
>And then all the gays (and I hear there are lots of them
> there) would go to the park to put the stone penis into (well do I need
> to go on).
>
I'm personally acquainted with several gay males, and I can assure you
that none of them would do any such thing.
Are you personally acquainted with any gay males? Your posting leads me
to believe that you aren't.
Jeff Jenson
It is a statue that shows a nude adult male embracing a nude little
boy. It is getting the public aclimatized to sexual relations between
men and boys.
And it will happen too. In 25 years or so. Such a sexual relationship
will become acceptable in our society.
And if you are against such a relationship you will be called a bigot.
Jeff Jenson
Bert Clanton wrote:
> In article <1128368702.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
> "Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm personally acquainted with several gay males, and I can assure you
> that none of them would do any such thing.
>
> Are you personally acquainted with any gay males? Your posting leads me
> to believe that you aren't.
>
> Best wishes,
> Bert
>
Sorry Bert, I don't swing that way.
Jeff Jenson
Bert Clanton wrote:
>>
> But in my view, a necessary element of sexual harassment...
WHO THE FUCK CARES WHAT YOUR VIEW IS?
ARE YOU A JUDGE?
ARE YOU A FEDERAL CURCUIT JUDGE?
ARE YOU A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE?
I DIDN'T THINK SO.
I DON'T MAKE THE RULES. THEY DO. AND THEY SAY YOU ARE WRONG.
SO, IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR VIEW IS DOES IT!!!!
Jeff Jenson
Bert Clanton wrote:
>>
> IMHO if what the statue represents is OK, then the statue is OK.
So, if it represents a man/boy sexual relationship then that is ok with
you?
Wow, you are a man ahead of his time (unfortunately).
Jeff Jenson
> So you made that part up!
> And then you tried to give a link that proved it was a "large penis".
> There was NOTHING on that link that said any such thing.
>
> Your agenda is clear...................................
Would you support the statue even if it had a large penis?
Mental_Monster
Gift to bring first outdoor nude to city
By Sheila Farr - Seattle Times art critic
September 28, 2005
In January, the citizens of Seattle found out they had received a gift.
In his will, the late Stu Smailes, a retired computer analyst for
Safeco and fan of the arts, left about $1 million to the city. He
wanted to commission a new public fountain. And he wanted the artwork
to include at least one realistic nude male figure.
The Mayor's Office of Arts and Cultural Affairs accepted the gift -
then handed it off to the Seattle Art Museum. Seattle has no nude
sculptures in its outdoor art collection The question was raised: Could
this be some kind of joke?
If it was, it has been beautifully turned around: The city has a new
public fountain in the works. This week, with the complexities of
Smailes' will and probate settled, SAM announced that his bequest will
fund a commission called "Father and Son" by acclaimed New York artist
Louise Bourgeois. The 15-foot-high stainless-steel fountain will be
installed next summer for the opening of SAM's Olympic Sculpture Park
on the Seattle waterfront. Bourgeois has also donated six functional
granite benches to the park from her surreal "Eye Benches" series of
1996-97.
In Bourgeois' proposal for the sculpture, the life-sized figures face
each other but are obscured from each other by a cloak of falling water
that, at hourly intervals, will shift to reveal first one figure, then
the other, at the ringing of a bell. The artist described the figures
as "held in the air on a column which will serve as a feed to create
the two mounds of gushing water that will hide the naked figures. The
boy's hand reaches up and out to embrace the father. The father in turn
reaches out to embrace his son."
Bourgeois, 94, is an almost legendary figure in the art world: canny,
bold, utterly original. A native of France, she dropped her study of
mathematics at the Sorbonne to attend the École des Beaux-Arts in
Paris and went on to other art schools and apprenticeships. She moved
to the United States in 1938 with her husband, art historian Robert
Goldwater, and turned from painting to sculpture. She represented the
United States at the Venice Biennale in 1993, and in 1999 received the
Gold Lion Prize in Venice, awarded to a living master of contemporary
art.
Over the decades, she has produced an eclectic array of sculptures and
installations, many based on the human form, but not all realistically
rendered. Bourgeois doesn't have a reputation for decorative art. Her
sculptures can be unsettling. They are known for a strong foundation in
ideas or metaphors, a tendency to look deep into the psyche. "Father
and Son" is no exception.
"Nudity in this work is a symbol of emotional nakedness," said SAM's
outgoing chief curator Lisa Corrin in a prepared statement. "[T]he two
figures stand before each other but cannot touch; they try to see each
other, but never see eye to eye; they are separated by bell jars of
cascading water, which prevents any contact between them."
Corrin says the theme of mother and child is a classic for artists, but
"Father and Son" is especially relevant today, with fathers playing a
more active role in their children's lives.
Source:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/artsentertainment/2002525194_fountain28m.html
Jeff Jenson wrote:
> David Looser wrote:
> > "Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1128349775.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > > http://www.komotv.com/stories/39483.htm
> > >
> > > Seattle Answers Challenge Of Naked Art Sculpture
> > >
> > >
> > > SEATTLE - A dying man left the Seattle Art Museum a million dollars for
> > > a statue.
> > >
> > > But not just for any statue. He said the sculpture had to include a
> > > naked man, or, the museum doesn't get the money.
> > >
> > Interesting story, but where does the "outrage" come from. I've read the
> > article and I didn't see anything about "outrage".
> >
> > David.
>
> Here is the Rest of the Story.
>
> The statue is going to be that of a Naked Man (with a large penis) and
> a young Boy (naked) facing each other. They are going to call it
> "Father and Son."
>
> Of course while they call it "Father and Son" we really don't know what
> the relationship of the Man to the young boy is.
>
> It seems that although it is just supposed to be about the love a
> Father has for his son the truth is it is really an attempt to promote
> NAMBLA's agenda.
>
> http://216.220.97.17
>
> Point is, just because it is nude it doesn't mean that nudists should
> rush to its defense. Nude CAN BE LEWD, and nudists must not be tricked
> by those who would misuse nudity in this way.
-T.
<jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Does it matter?
>
>Isn't what important is that it is being used by the pro-boy sex
>interest groups?
>
>How about all the women who would not be able to go to the park. This
>is sexual harrassment!
1. I've followed what links I coould on this. No mention is made of a
large penis.
2. I find nothing by the pro-boy-sex outfit championing this
particular art work.
3. What makes you think that a sculpted penis in a piece of art
constitutes harrasment to women or anybody else?
-T.
When the man said alcohol, tobacco and firearms, I just assumed he was making a delivery.
Jeff Jenson
Richard C. wrote:
> X-No-archive: yes
>
> I plan on having my picture take nude at the statue.
So you believe that men should have sex with little boys? You are
SICK. Just because it will be acceptable for men to have sex with
little boys in a generation doesn't make you any less sick.
And by the way, TODAY IT'S ILLEGAL. If you try to get away with it
today you will still be arrested and you will go to jail.
Jeff Jenson
it the boys father or his lover?
Jeff Jenson
> losing it are we?
This country is going down the drain.
Look at who Bush appointed for Supreme Court.
Bush is a liberal and a creep.
Mental_Monster
Richard C. wrote:
> X-No-archive: yes
>
> "Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1128385512....@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> >
> losing it are we?
Actually Jeffy-Boy lost it a long time ago.
>From what I've seen of the articles and drawings of the statue there is
no Sexual or NAMBLA connection.
MM
-T.
<jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>If the statue is large, it is reasonable to think that the penis would
>be as well. And then all the gays (and I hear there are lots of them
>there) would go to the park to put the stone penis into (well do I need
>to go on).
Jeff? You just made the list. You are definately putting way too much
Jack Daniels on your Cracko Puffs. I thought, perhaps that you were
simply immature. Young folks sometimes tend to see things in black and
white rather than shades of grey. You simply see shit that ain't
there. Either that or you're making it up out of the whole cloth.
Whichever, don't matter to me. I'm not going to invest any time in it
any more.
Jeff Jenson
-T. wrote:
> 3. What makes you think that a sculpted penis in a piece of art
> constitutes harrasment to women or anybody else?
Because it offends them.
That's all it takes under the law.
Mental_Monster
Jeffy-boy right now I would support it if the statue was one giant
Penis just because it would piss you off.
MM
Jeff Jenson
Richard C. wrote:
> X-No-archive: yes
>
>
> > It is a statue that shows a nude adult male embracing a nude little
> > boy. It is getting the public aclimatized to sexual relations between
> > men and boys.
> >
> It shows NO such thing!
>
So this gay guy gave this money from the goodness of his heart to have
a million dollar statue of a nude guy. Why?
Why a nude guy?
Well, he was Gay, need I say anymore.
It is just a way for gays to get off on art and have their lifestyle
become more accepted in our society as "Normal".
-T.
From http://www.komotv.com/kenschram/story.asp?ID=39502
"It's in a park. A public park right on the Seattle waterfront.
Esoteric museum officials can tout the work as representing the
vulnerable nature of a father and son all they want.
But a naked guy reaching for a naked kid has far more sordid
interpretations in this day and age.
The sculpture might as well be called the priest and the altar boy.
Now, if you think I'm wrong, just some uptight prude, let me know:
But if you think I'm right, then let the Seattle Art Museum know at
webm...@seattleartmuseum.org "
I obliged the guy and told him he was an uptight prude. Sent a note to
the museum telling them the statue sounded like a nice addition to
their community.
Jeff Jenson
I would have wrote the guy saying that he is a hateful KKK member for
attacking Catholics like he did. He should lose his job for what he
did!!!
But he is right about the statue.
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bert Clanton wrote:
> > In article <1128368702.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> > I'm personally acquainted with several gay males, and I can assure you
> > that none of them would do any such thing.
> >
> > Are you personally acquainted with any gay males? Your posting leads me
> > to believe that you aren't.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Bert
> >
> Sorry Bert, I don't swing that way.
>
I too am enthusiastically heterosexual. But since I'm not also
homophobic, I have several gay friends. If you want to talk about gay
men, I suggest that you get to know a few of them.
Best wishes,
Bert
--
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
- Robert Anton Wilson
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> So this gay guy gave this money from the goodness of his heart to have
> a million dollar statue of a nude guy. Why?
>
Because he liked statues of nude guys? I like statues of nude guys, and
I'm fervently heterosexual. (I also like statues of nude women.)
> Why a nude guy?
>
Why not?
> Well, he was Gay, need I say anymore.
>
Do we know for sure that he was gay? And why should we care?
> It is just a way for gays to get off on art and have their lifestyle
> become more accepted in our society as "Normal".
>
News for you: there's no such thing as "their lifestyle", any more than
there's a "straight lifestyle". Again, get to know a few gay guys
personally.
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bert Clanton wrote:
> > In article <1128378632.3...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > IF the intent of this statue isn't to promote NAMBLA's agenda, that
> > > will be its effect.
> > >
> >
> > Please explain how that would work.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Bert
>
> They can have their rallies at the statue.
>
I'm asking you how the *statue* promotes NAMBLA's agenda, not what
people do at the statue.
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> So you believe that men should have sex with little boys? You are
> SICK.
I favor the "two year" rule, which says that kids shouldn't have sex
with people more than two years older or younger than themselves.
> Just because it will be acceptable for men to have sex with
> little boys in a generation doesn't make you any less sick.
>
I doubt very much that it will be acceptable for men to have sex with
little boys in a generation.
> And by the way, TODAY IT'S ILLEGAL. If you try to get away with it
> today you will still be arrested and you will go to jail.
>
But I don't try to get away with it, nor do I know anyone, gay or
straight, who does. More news for you: the vast, vast majority of gay
men are not pedophiles.
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bert Clanton wrote:
>
> >
> > Please tell us why it would be immoral for a gay person to be inspired
> > to pleasure himself by the statue. Who would be harmed?
>
> For one thing it would be in public.
>
Why would it be in public?
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bert Clanton wrote:
> >>
> > IMHO if what the statue represents is OK, then the statue is OK.
>
> So, if it represents a man/boy sexual relationship then that is ok with
> you?
>
> Wow, you are a man ahead of his time (unfortunately).
>
What I wrote, as you can see if you'll look just above, is that *if*
what the statue represents is OK, then the statue itself is OK. In my
view, as I've expressed it before, intergenerational sex is not OK.
Hence, in my view, a statue representing intergenerational sex is not
OK. But the statue in question doesn't represent intergenerational sex.
Hence it may still be OK.
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bert Clanton wrote:
> >>
> > But in my view, a necessary element of sexual harassment...
>
> WHO THE FUCK CARES WHAT YOUR VIEW IS?
>
I do. Most of my friends do. My wife does.
> ARE YOU A JUDGE?
No. I'm a recovering computer programmer.
>
> ARE YOU A FEDERAL CURCUIT JUDGE?
>
> ARE YOU A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE?
>
No, and no.
> I DIDN'T THINK SO.
>
> I DON'T MAKE THE RULES. THEY DO. AND THEY SAY YOU ARE WRONG.
>
I'm not aware that any judge knows what my beliefs are. And I don't
care. I happen to live in a free country--at least so far.
> SO, IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR VIEW IS DOES IT!!!!
>
Sure it does.
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> This country is going down the drain.
>
I happen to agree with you about that. But for almost the opposite of
the reasons you propose.
> Look at who Bush appointed for Supreme Court.
>
I think that he did surprisingly well.
> Bush is a liberal and a creep.
>
Bush is a conservative ideologue of average intelligence.
Bert Clanton
"Jeff Jenson" <jeffjenson...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bert Clanton wrote:
> > But in my view, a necessary element of sexual harassment is that the act
> > be *intended* to harass someone, to offend or embarass them. Otherwise,
> > I regard it simply as a case of someone being offended or embarassed.
>
>
> SORRY.
>
> Sexual Harrassment depends on the person who is being harrassed. IF
> they think they are being harrassed then they can take action
> regardless of what the intention of the other person is.
>
Which is unfortunately true to some extent.
>
> So this is sexual harrassment.
>
> (You are old aren't you? You haven't had a job in a while have you?)
>
I am 76 years old. I've been retired since 1990. Your point is?
Jeff Jenson
> > "The father in turn reaches out to embrace his son." But of course is
> > it the boys father or his lover?
> >
> But they don NOT embrace..................
> It clearly states it is his father.
> Why do you insist on making things into what they are not?
I took the first part as a quote. The nude man reaches out to embrace
the nude boy.
You may say it is innocent, but a naked guy reaching for a naked kid
has far more sordid interpretations in this day and age than just
father and son.
And the guy who gave the money was gay. This is so obviously an attempt
to promote the gay agenda. To promote man/boy sex.
Nude isn't Lewd. But Lewd people use Nude Images to serve their sick
sexual desires. Nudist clubs understand that there are people out there
like that. That is why they carefully monitor the behavior of the
people there.
Nudists should come out against this sick attempt to promote pedophile.
Just like they should come out against all those videos that call
themselves nudists but are actually made for a pedophile audience.
Nudists can't afford to be naive.
northwoods_nu...@yahoo.com
>WHO THE FUCK CARES WHAT YOUR VIEW IS?
Who the fuck cares what your views are either?????? But that doesn't
stop *you* from posting them!!!!!!!
>ARE YOU A JUDGE?
No, TIPOOT!
>ARE YOU A FEDERAL CURCUIT JUDGE?
What's a curcuit??????
>ARE YOU A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE?
No,TIPOOT!
>I DIDN'T THINK SO.
I didn't think you were capable of thinking. Well, at least not
rationally anyway.
>I DON'T MAKE THE RULES.
Thank God for that!!!!!!!
>THEY DO.
Jeffy boy, please don't impose your Fascist wishes on the rest of us!
Judges *do not* make the rules (or at least they shouldn't.) It's not
their job to *make* the rules. Their job is to *interpret* the rules!
Better take a remedial Civics class Jeff!
>AND THEY SAY YOU ARE WRONG.
Wrong about what?????
>SO, IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR VIEW IS DOES IT!!!!
Oh, yes because you're superior, and only your views count.
Dan
northwoods_nu...@yahoo.com
>statue.-Jeff Jenson
Uh,Jeff, how do you know NAMBLA supports it?????? Do you frequently
surf (or should I say "cruise") the NAMBLA website?????? Are you member
of NAMBLA???????
Come on Jeff, fess up, how is it that you're such an expert on
NAMBLA?????
Dan
David Looser
>> >
>> >
>> > The statue is going to be that of a Naked Man (with a large penis) and
>> > a young Boy (naked) facing each other. They are going to call it
>> > "Father and Son."
>> >
>> > Of course while they call it "Father and Son" we really don't know what
>> > the relationship of the Man to the young boy is.
>> >
>> > It seems that although it is just supposed to be about the love a
>> > Father has for his son the truth is it is really an attempt to promote
>> > NAMBLA's agenda.
>> >
>> Who wrote the above? - you?
>>
>> So it's not part of "the" story, it's part of "your" story. Isn't it
>> strange
>> how as soon as anyone tries to create a work of art that has a man and a
>> child together a few perverted people start seeing it as "peadophilia".
>> The
>> peadophilia is in those peoples heads, nowhere else.
>>
>> David.
>
> Please, join the real world for a moment and understand that people
> might have ulterior motives.
>
Unlike you I've been a member of the real world for a long time. Your posts
here tell me that you, on the other hand, live in your own little world of
hate and prejudice.
> This money wasn't donated by a nudist.
Who ever said that it was?
It was donated by a Homosexual
> activist with an agenda. This agenda is that they believe that it is
> healthy for young boys to have sex with adult males. They have a
> slogan. Sex before eight or it's too late.
>
So where does it say that that was his agenda? I think you are confusing
gays with paedophiles. Very fews gays are paedophiles and very few
paedophiles are gay.
> I believe simple nudity can be natural and not about sex.
Do you? so why do you post all the garbage that you do?
But I also
> know there is a world out there with people who do associate sex with
> nudity and who have a sexually driven agenda.
So we just give in to them do we?
>
> If nudists would speak out against this it would go a long way in
> showing the people that their nudity is non-sexual.
>
How would it show that since the statue is non-sexual?
David.
David Looser
news:25230-434...@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net...
> If nudists would speak out against this it would go a long way in
> showing the people that their nudity is ...in the perfect world....
> non-sexual. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeff.....ken
> schram ...news writer was outraged/offended....if you scroll down 12
> inches you will see it about the pedophilia aspect.....loser you will
> see it too if you arent too profoundly ignorant.....jonZeee
>
I found Ken Schram's bit after I'd posted. So he'someone else who can't see
nudity without thinking of sex. That makes three of you.
Ken Schram's piece shows just how screwed up the world is getting. The piece
is called "Father & Son" and the main point is that there is no contact
between them. But, shock! horror! they are *naked*. So it must be all about
paedophilia. You three have minds like sewers, you really do.
David.
Mark
>
>
> It can be easily interpreted as having to do with sex. The reason this
> is being made is to promote NAMBLA's agenda.
>
Excuse me ........ but the man didn't design the statue.....it was designed
by a female artist
Marsketa
So the artist is in fact female? And she is not a gay homosexual male
paedophile as Jeff portrayed it. Jeff you are such a liar!
>>"Nudity in this work is a symbol of emotional nakedness," said SAM's
outgoing chief curator Lisa Corrin in a prepared statement. "[T]he two
figures stand before each other but cannot touch; they try to see each
other, but never see eye to eye; they are separated by bell jars of
cascading water, which prevents any contact between them."
So the evil that you suggest Jeff is all in your evil twisted litlle
mind!
Personally I think the statue will be a great addition in a city which
needs something like this. In Europe male nude statues are seen on any
street corner and every museum or art gallery.
Marsketa
Marsketa
doesn't surprise me that a gay man donated the money because a lot of
homosexual men have great taste and interest in art and a knowledge of
European works. Whereas you Jeff are an ignorant disgusting creature
whose mind is full of evil imaginings. You should travel a bit I think
and broaden your knowledge of the world
Marsketa
Marsketa
Marsketa
to the art galleries and look at statues of nude males. Your comment
are so stupid sometimes!
Marsketa
Marsketa
Marsketa
Marsketa
anybody but you.
The man (whether his penis is big or small) does NOT have an erection
and the concept is that the man and boy cannot touch or see each other
so how can this represent a sexual man/boy relationship? You really
have lost it big time Jeff. Perhaps you should share a padded cell with
JonZ?
Marsketa
Marsketa
Florence to see Michaelangelo's "David".
The nude body is not offensive whether it is male or female. And
certainly women cannot be afraid of a nude statue.
Marsketa
Marsketa
If the statue portrayed an adult male having sex with a boy then THAT
would be offensive. But the statue described does not portray any
sexual act between the adult male and the boy nor does the title.
>>Nudism isn't about having sex with a boy.
It certainly isn't. BUT this statue isn't about nudism nor is it about
an adult male having sex with a boy.
The statue is neither offensive nor wrong because it doesn't suggest
sexual activity to normal intelligent and rational people. I think the
intended symbolism is very clever. Often there is a barrier between
father and son getting close emotionally.
Marsketa
Marsketa
How big is big?
>It is kind of the trade mark of the artist.
Perhaps her model has a big penis?
Anyway it will be a refreshing change from staues of nude males with
rather small penises! LOL
Marsketa
One-Eyed Willy
pissed at them because they kicked him out when they saw the kid he
brought to meetings using the little girls room and calling him Daddy.
Marsketa
And would the statue support a large penis? <G>
Marsketa
Marsketa
a million dollar statue of a nude guy. Why?
He probably wanted to educate you ignorant "red neck" religious bigots
about real art as per the rest of the world ie what is common in
Europe.
Marsketa
jon...@webtv.net
and totally boring when a thread such as this one portrays ol lady biker
moma s ...queers..whores and whore mongers and butt fucking queer
pedophiles.and of course nudist giving their full support for public
square statues of a naked man and boy...touting that the nakedness
contributes to the unhealthy relations between father and son.....wonder
what the statue of a naked woman and little girl portray .....so these
sick wackos think the cure to societies mental problems is the exposure
of the naked crotch for all to see.....sure would be interesting to be
at a cowboys football game and see ol man cummings a hobbling out across
the field naked and see those players start using him as a
football....he he......cummings let us know when you gonna do it.....he
he.....jonZeee
jon...@webtv.net
====================================== cummings......Christians are not
pathological liars like you ..that deny little Moppets was a part of
nudist and nudist camp life....i purchased a copy from Jerry the
original owner of shrangri la in az....where they had them on
display....as a matter of fact there was spread on two little girls
there at that camp......in one of the issues......jonZeee