Beverly Guhl  Offline Image Upload: On
|
As a woman viewing this image my first impression was that it was of a young, fit woman. I then started reading the first feedback posts and saw how much the guys appreciated this 'sexy' image (thinking it was a woman). Once I realized it was of an 8 year old girl I, like a few of them, was distressed.
I've been an artist all my life, so I do know art, and I'm no prude, but as a mother, even if I took this photo of my daughter (or son) I would not post it on the internet. Art is art to artists only, whereas art (like this) is perceived as socially acceptable child eroticism by perverts--so why supply them? There's so many wonderful things to photograph besides children in a pose that invites a sexual response, so why go there? Unwittingly you're exploiting your own child for someone else's sexual enjoyment, but you're so focused on your own 'art' (and this little WA assignment) you apparently don't get it (btw, you'd be wise to explore why--perhaps you were raised in a home were the 'inappropriate' now seems 'normal' to you? Maybe you're just incredible naive? Or you've been brainwashed into believing child eroticism is OK if you call it 'art' ). One in 3 girls is sexually abused, 1 in 5 boys is sexually abused. It's rampant. If FATHERS won't protect their daughters from the prying eyes of perverts who will?
BTW-- If Fred picks this as a finalist, keep in mind he probably doesn't always read the descriptions or threads!! So, if this is a finalist it does not validate the correctness in posting it, that's a separate issue.
Edited on Nov 12, 2007 at 06:00 PM
|