Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Whether or not he read the interview - all I can say, is what PC crap...as an artist, the artist - if we accept that this is art - can chose to focus on any communities he wants to focus on. Hey, he didn't include the armless/legless community either, and there's nothing to indicate that he included the bi community - or the transgender-Native American-French Canadian-Polish-Lithuanian community either. But, as Leo points out, the artist did in fact attempt to include lesbians. Damn, this world has gone stark raving nuts.... - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of leo Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 3:28 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] The fine line between art and pornography Adam? Are you sure that you read the interview? Leo On Thursday, December 11, 2003, at 12:55 PM, Adam Bridge wrote: > On 2003-12-11 imagist@imagist.cnc.net (George Lottermoser) > thoughtfully wrote: > >> They're not portraits of an intimate, inherently sexual act. They're >> portraits of individuals, exposed a moment after an inherently sexual >> act. > > Actually this is an example of male-centric art at its worst. It > completely > leaves out the lesbian community and thus should be rejected and > chastised in > the strongest possible terms. > > AB > -- > To unsubscribe, see > http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html