Sally Mann great photographer or glorified child pornographer?

[paigew]

Btw, our attitude in the US allowed me to make a few bucks with another ridiculous situation.

I had this album that someone offered me a good deal of money for. I started looking around wondering why. It turned out this particular version of the album was getting top dollars in the US because the cover had been banned there

Guess what? Everytime I was in Europe I bought every copies I could get my hands on and sold them back in the US.

This is the album:

333 images (+111): Virgin Killer (album cover), Scorpions, 1976 The...

As you will notice, you can't even see the girl's sex. Pretty poor shot for a pervert. But the cheapest copy I sold went for $300.

wow! that shot is pretty inappropriate. I wouldn't want my daughter posed that way, thats for sure. Looking at more of her photographs my opinion has changed a little. I do not think it is pornography, but yes, some photos are inappropriate.

I am all for nakedness and being natural and I wouldn't think twice if I saw a kid at a pool naked...heck, it would probably be my kid . But yes, posing them in suggestive ways seems to be 'pushing the limit'. A limit that perhaps shouldn't be pushed with children.

Is it any worse than putting small girls in evening dresses... and putting heavy makeup on them, and teaching them to walk down a stage in an adult manner? Many pervs would find this more provocative than just nudity!

Funny you should say this, as I was thinking about responding on how 'pageants' sexualize young girls far more than the photos do.

 

[cgipson1]

wow! that shot is pretty inappropriate. I wouldn't want my daughter posed that way, thats for sure. Looking at more of her photographs my opinion has changed a little. I do not think it is pornography, but yes, some photos are inappropriate.

I am all for nakedness and being natural and I wouldn't think twice if I saw a kid at a pool naked...heck, it would probably be my kid . But yes, posing them in suggestive ways seems to be 'pushing the limit'. A limit that perhaps shouldn't be pushed with children.

Is it any worse than putting small girls in evening dresses... and putting heavy makeup on them, and teaching them to walk down a stage in an adult manner? Many pervs would find this more provocative than just nudity!

Funny you should say this, as I was thinking about responding on how 'pageants' sexualize young girls far more than the photos do.

Great minds, and all that.. right? lol!

 

[c.cloudwalker]

wow! that shot is pretty inappropriate.

WHY?

When this album came out, I was seeing a lot more little sexes of children on the beaches of Europe than you see in this photo because a lot of the kids that age went around nude on the beaches. So, when I saw the cover, my reaction was "cool shot" and nothing more.

Have you ever thought about the fact that your attitude may be part of the problem? By making such a big deal out of it you may very well make the pervs more interested. Do you know that more alcohol was consumed per person during the prohibition years than at any other time in the history of the US?

Make it illegal, more people want it. Make it taboo, more people want it.



For what it's worth: my last few years in the US I rode with a motorcycle club that provided security for abused kids going through the court system so, trust me, I don't have any love for perverts and other kids abusers.

 

[unpopular]

wow! that shot is pretty inappropriate. I wouldn't want my daughter posed that way, thats for sure. Looking at more of her photographs my opinion has changed a little. I do not think it is pornography, but yes, some photos are inappropriate.

I am all for nakedness and being natural and I wouldn't think twice if I saw a kid at a pool naked...heck, it would probably be my kid . But yes, posing them in suggestive ways seems to be 'pushing the limit'. A limit that perhaps shouldn't be pushed with children.

Is it any worse than putting small girls in evening dresses... and putting heavy makeup on them, and teaching them to walk down a stage in an adult manner? Many pervs would find this more provocative than just nudity!

Funny you should say this, as I was thinking about responding on how 'pageants' sexualize young girls far more than the photos do.

I think pageants more dehumanize the girls than sexualize them, turning them into objects.

 

[Natalie]

Nah, those pageants definitely sexualize little girls (along with dehumanizing them). Putting fake boobs, gaudy makeup and skimpy/provocative clothing on small children is definitely sexualizing them.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vt0ABwgcs20/Tm4Ea9qv3hI/AAAAAAAAEVE/HJTds6Uey0E/s1600/ridiculous.png

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_r3b38fRVAtg/TS9uzrvr6hI/AAAAAAAAAZY/30xRQ6NHPYI/s1600/toddlers+tiaras.jpg

Still not pornography, but much more inappropriate than Sally Mann's nude photos.

 

[ann]

I am all for nakedness and being natural and I wouldn't think twice if I saw a kid at a pool naked

The liberal mind is truly a mental disorder.

Surely you jest.

 

[unpopular]

wait. fake boobs??

that is sick.

 

[unpopular]

The liberal mind is truly a mental disorder.

But many of these are posed, and posed in a very specific way.they are not candid photos of children being children who happen to be naked children.


They are not posed as children would pose and behave, these images do not instill innocence.

I have to agree with this.

HA! You agree with a communist!

 

[Overread]

wait. fake boobs??

that is sick.

I recall reading or watching a short bit on the TV (it was around a year ago) about how with some of these child model/beauty competitions the most competative parents would actually have plastic surgery performed on their children in order to improve their scores and that this kind of medical adjustment (within those circles) was not considered abnormal.
From what I recall it wasn't just nip/tucks but also heading toward adding silicone to certain areas (as far as I recall - I might be wrong on the specifics)

 

[paigew]

wow! that shot is pretty inappropriate.

WHY?

You have to be kidding me; seriously, you can't see how this would/could be inappropriate? Lets pretend the broken glass or whatever isn't there...If it was a grown woman it would be x rated. That pose is a sexual pose. Just because its a child doesn't make it un-sexual. The photo was done to make a statement, push buttons, whatever. Children weren't meant to be sexual.

When this album came out, I was seeing a lot more little sexes of children on the beaches of Europe than you see in this photo because a lot of the kids that age went around nude on the beaches. So, when I saw the cover, my reaction was "cool shot" and nothing more.

Have you ever thought about the fact that your attitude may be part of the problem? By making such a big deal out of it you may very well make the pervs more interested. Do you know that more alcohol was consumed per person during the prohibition years than at any other time in the history of the US?

Make it illegal, more people want it. Make it taboo, more people want it.

It is sad that a photo of me breastfeeding my son can be flagged on fb for being inappropriate, yet a naked young girl (as in that album cover) sitting back in a sultry/sexual pose with only a crack covering her most private parts is seen as totally acceptable. I do not think my attitude is a problem. I am a hippie and totally into being natural. But that is not natural. I do not think bodies should be hidden or that nakedness is shameful. But asking a child to open his/her legs like that for the camera (POSING) is not appropriate. Naked kid photos should convey childlike feelings/innocence, not sex.

And what does prohibition have to do with naked children?

 

[mwcfarms]

This is a topic that falls under the politics, religion no-no in my opinion. Too many people with different opinions and strong minds leads to run around arguments. Get out there and shoot some pictures people!

 

[unpopular]

This is a topic that falls under the politics, religion no-no in my opinion. Too many people with different opinions and strong minds leads to run around arguments. Get out there and shoot some pictures people!

nope. these topics are the very fundamentals of contemporary art. if you're not thinking about art you're just making snapshots.

 

[mwcfarms]

I think you missed my point unpopular.

 

[MTVision]

Nah, those pageants definitely sexualize little girls (along with dehumanizing them). Putting fake boobs, gaudy makeup and skimpy/provocative clothing on small children is definitely sexualizing them.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vt0ABwgcs20/Tm4Ea9qv3hI/AAAAAAAAEVE/HJTds6Uey0E/s1600/ridiculous.png

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_r3b38fRVAtg/TS9uzrvr6hI/AAAAAAAAAZY/30xRQ6NHPYI/s1600/toddlers%2Btiaras.jpg

Still not pornography, but much more inappropriate than Sally Mann's nude photos.

Like that TV show Toddlers and Tiaras! Don't think it's appropriate for young young girls to dress up like Daisy Duke or Julia Roberts hooker character in Pretty Women!

 

[cgipson1]

This is a topic that falls under the politics, religion no-no in my opinion. Too many people with different opinions and strong minds leads to run around arguments. Get out there and shoot some pictures people!

Neither Nudity or ART should ever fall under either Religion or Politics.. that is the problem. Just as Religion should never be bedfellows with Politics....

as Cloudwalker and I pointed out.. the narrow minded outlook on Nudity is usually based on religious propaganda that seems be integrated into many American's from childhood on. It is almost strictly an American viewpoint.. although many Islamic countries have similar taboos.. again, based on religion, rather then logic and free thought. (Cloudwalker.. I apologize if that is not what you meant!)