GrodsCorp

Of art, bow ties and rock spiders

Thursday 10 July 2008, 11:17 pm

Bridgit Gread

Categories: Arts, Media, Society

Tags: AndrewBolt, BillHenson, pedophiles, RobertNelson

Art critic Robert Nelson received media attention last week when nude photographs of his daughter Olympia (then six, now 11) appeared on the cover of Art Monthly, which was editorialising on the Bill Henson pictures. Nelson and his daughter did a doorstop presser last weekend to speak on the matter. He seemed rational, articulate and informed - but he was wearing a colourful shirt, a bow-tie and talking about nude children. Obviously a weirdo, so enter Andrew Bolt:

We all agree that there is one thing every viewer will instantly notice about Age art critic Robert Nelson in the video below. It is something Nelson clearly hoped would send a message. But the message most viewers in fact would have received in a blink of an eye would be one wholly unfavorable to Nelson and his argument.

Erm, OK, Bolty. Next day, we had this from Bolt: Nelson is exploiting his daughter, he uses the same arguments as pedophiles, there’s a marked difference between his daughter’s pictures and those of Henson because his daughter doesn’t have breasts (what the…??) Overnight, thanks to a Google-happy reader, old Andy had this:

I’ve now found an essay of Nelson’s, predating the controversy, in which he writes about these very pictures and says explicitly they are sexual, and meant to be so. And he explains and lauds them using some of the very arguments used by pedophiles to justify their abuse - that the child was herself excited by her sexuality, eager to explore it, and old enough to consent to what use her elders made of that.

Bolt’s usual modus operandi is to rip decontextualised quotes out of a longer piece, stripping them of their fuller meaning, then glue them back together to create a more misleading and provocative narrative. Lots of axing; plenty of ellipses; a bit of text-shuffling. If you’re skilled you can make Mein Kampf sound like Jane Eyre - or an intelligent and rational essay seem like the rationalisation of … a pedophile?

Below is Nelson’s full article. The text in bold italics was presented by Bolt in his blog:

The sensuality of children is integral to parental fondness. The bond between mother and child is physical; and most of the psychological responses and affections are expressed in a physical way.

In art, however, there are well-grounded taboos against recognizing this essential economy. Centuries of jealous puritanical mores-akin to the suppression of all aspects of childhood-have discouraged the artistic exploration of the sensual delight of children and the enjoyment of their own bodies. Undoubtedly a part of this taboo was the fear of the child’s latent sexuality and its potential for exciting inappropriate and sinful desire. Probably, too, this anxiety was the cause of Lewis Carroll destroying quantities of his photographs of the child Alice Liddell. Carroll may have feared that either the works were-or would be construed as-paedophilic.

In the postwar period of the twentieth century (in which the recognition of child psychology improved and general sexual attitudes were liberalized), fears concerning the free expression of the sensuality of children were compounded by enlightened scruples, legitimate paranoia for the exploitation of children as sex objects.

Yet children know nothing of this and, in spite of parental discouragement, enjoy displaying themselves with theatrical self-consciousness, a sophisticated language of sensual appeal and seductive gestures. For Freud, of course, the child is bristling with sexual impulse, even from babyhood. You could argue that children learn the language of sexual address and narcissism from adults; but no one really knows how deep or superficial their eroticism is. The only source of evidence is children themselves, whose motives in the manifestation of sensual attitude remain inscrutable.

Polixeni Papapetrou’s Play is a suite of photographs taken at the instigation of her two-year old daughter, Olympia. “Mummy, come and photo me”, she would exhort. Frequently this would be a ritual which mother had to perform before an invited adult was scheduled to sit for a portrait. Olympia’s determination to be photographed-and her subsequent satisfaction on seeing the results-set in train a spontaneous exploration of childhood sensuality and a bracing confrontation of the attendant embarrassments.

In the suite of nude photographs, Olympia is seen with a dummy or pacifier. It is a necessary token of her age; otherwise, the spectator could assume that the model is a pre-pubescent Balthusian nymphet. Yet the dummy, itself, is ambiguous; for while it vouches for the child’s infancy (and by implication non-genital sexuality or confinement to an oral phase) it also evokes the perversity of pleasure-sucking, i.e. a sucking for non-nutritious purposes, apparently serving a hedonistic function unrelated to nourishment. Tellingly, then, the outward sign of innocence is potentially the most diabolically sexual.

The works challenge the taboos against the recognition of child sensuality; but they are not a form of erotica. The photographs are stylistically chaste and unromanticized. They document the display in its communicative integrity and invite the instantaneous rush of fondness for the adult-like poses in a tiny child. In the process, however, they do acknowledge that the child has access rights to an erotic language. If the photographs were conceived as erotica, this language would be stylistically induced by the photographer and imposed upon the model. The confronting aspect of this suite is that the sensual language proceeds from the child alone.

Read Nelson’s work entire then read Bolt’s craftily abridged version - they mean and suggest something altogether different. Nelson is advancing the Freudian theory that children are innately physical, sensual and sexually curious - which few parents would legitimately deny - but he is not for a second suggesting that this should be exploited by adults, whether they be artists, advertising agencies or sexual perverts. Delete the rationalisations and explanations, however, and that may not be so clear.

Not that Bolta is suggesting that Nelson is a pedophile himself … oh no, he would never say that. Although he closes the post by linking to the website and writings of this group - because, you know, that’s who Nelson sounds like.

UPDATE

Nelson’s essay, which was here, has now been removed from his wife’s site. Probably unwise in the circumstances; better to have it remain for the few willing to see Bolt’s snippets in their full context. Then again we don’t know what kind of abuse Nelson and Papapetrou might have been copping from Bolt’s own flying monkeys.

51 Comments

THR (Thursday 10 July 2008, 11:42 pm) #

This is a contemptible post, even by Bolt’s typical gutter-crawling standards.
For over a hundred years, most people, with the exception of the usual cranks, have acknowledged the existence of infantile sexuality. Kids are not merely curious about the most intimate of bodily functions, but are postiively fascinated by them. Kids of both sexes play with their bits from a very early age. Consequently, there’s nothing particularly controversial in essay above (though naturally, some will be squeamish at some of the Freudian terminology used).
We could go even further - the ’sensual’ aspects of child-rearing are absolutely essential to childhood development. If a parent withheld physical contact from an infant, this would be considered child abuse and neglect of a fairly serious nature. Attachment theory (one of the more robust fields in psychology) has clearly established the primacy of touch and physical proximity of a parent in the development of the parent-child bond.

In any case, Edvard Munch beat Henson and Nelson to the punch over a hundred years ago, when these deas were being developed:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=munch+puberty
Bridgit Gread (Friday 11 July 2008, 12:03 am) #

Bolt’s response:

“Freud was on cocaine. And he was of the Left.”
Chuck A. Spear (Friday 11 July 2008, 12:51 am) #

The is a beautiful photo on at my parents house of myself and my two younger sisters at a beach in NSW running into the misty sea — and we are all naked. I think I was about six, one sister four and the other about two. We are about 25 metres away from the lens. And you know what? You can see our bottoms.

My parents are obviously pedophiles. And I am going to write to Andy to tell him how we were all exploited.
Chuck A. Spear (Friday 11 July 2008, 12:54 am) #

Scratch ‘on’. The exhibition hasn’t started yet.
Gregory Carlin (Friday 11 July 2008, 2:16 am) #

A freudian theory is as a smooth tube is to a rifled barrel, psychoanalytical theory as a factor of a coke habit

that doesn’t get a person into the expert witness box these days either. It is like an antigue musket, it’s interesting but what use is it?

Discarded sounds like a polite word. Freud, is also a bit pervy to be respectable.

The real context is that it was Japanese Schoolgirl Monthy, the actual context was Japanese sado-porn.
Gregory Carlin (Friday 11 July 2008, 2:19 am) #

“Freud was on cocaine. And he was of the Left.”

His theories are related to his addiction to drugs, that’s a perfectly valid criticism, I actually thought we were spoofing, some folks on his blog, think Freud is entirely legit?

More fool me, any country with Bill Henson has to be a bit feckin’[ wild.
Bridgit Gread (Friday 11 July 2008, 2:32 am) #

Chuck, were you exploring your latent sexuality as you ran, buttocks quivering, into the foamy brine?

Gregory, I never said that I agree with Freudian psychology; much of it I put in the same box as Scientology and astral travel. But Freud’s idea that children can possess and demonstrate some innate sexual behaviours - even if they have no conscious understanding of their implications - sounds quite valid.

In any event, the post was not about Nelson’s ideas but Bolt’s misrepresentation of them.
David (Friday 11 July 2008, 10:20 am) #

There was some discussion of this on RN last night. Some spokesmouth from some child protection group (or something - she was a lawyer, anyway) said that Nelson’s essay (or perhaps the “abridged” version the Bolta published) made her feel uncomfortable.

Good. That is, after all, the major function of great art.
Dam Buster of Preston (Friday 11 July 2008, 10:27 am) #

I better put the bit of duct tape back onto my copy of Nirvana’s nevermind..

All i keep thinking about is an episode of South Park where one of the mothers constantly screams “Won’t anyone think of the children” as the city builds a wall and then finds out most kids are abused by relatives so they put the kids on the outside of the wall.

All I will say and you can quote me on this:

Andrew Bolt is
a smart and witty person who is in no way
considered an asshole or junk journo.
His columns and articles on his blog are always
well considered
and never include
selective quoting as a means to open debate from
both sides of the political spectrum including
right wings lunatics
and left wing thinkers and more moderate people
is always present.

now just take every second line.
Gregory Carlin (Friday 11 July 2008, 10:33 am) #

Valid is as valid is, let me put it this way, I’m fed up having our real estate, our paintings, our chapels, our Vatican, compared to a child pornography from Oz.

Henson has as much in common with Caravaggio as a flint axe and a wire-guided missile. If we are talking psychiatric, then somebody needs to hand out serious ego-suppressing drugs soon.

That’s what Henson is, a child porn merchant who has to sell his naked kiddie stuff in cow town. As for Japanese Scholgirl Monthly, I am on the record for comparing Henson to the crazed child porn fanatics in Japan.

Bill Henson is a very sick puppy to coin a freudian expression that is still valid.

(Try Heathrow Bill!)

:o))

Henson’s sick filth is banned from more galleries than are prepare to show it, including some on Croggon’s dopey letter.

The mag in question is flagged as child-porn by several police agencies so I’d not buy it mail-order, because it is a lucky dip probable cause door-knock. That’s genuine advice.

Only pro-pedophiles would have it.

Gregory Carlin
Chuck A. Spear (Friday 11 July 2008, 11:00 am) #

Chuck, were you exploring your latent sexuality as you ran, buttocks quivering, into the foamy brine?

Hell yes. I have never felt freer sexually in my life. Now, when I parade myself naked on the beat at Avon Gorge under the dense undergrowth, I can’t help but explore myself and my quivering appendage with others. I just really hope they don’t cut those bushes down.
Bridgit Gread (Friday 11 July 2008, 11:59 am) #

I’m fed up having our real estate, our paintings, our chapels, our Vatican, compared to a child pornography from Oz.

Ah, now a little bit more emerges - Gregory is a Catholic, probably here for World Yoof Day.

Well Gregory, as a matter of priority perhaps Catholics could do better work for the protection of children by looking rigorously and scrupulously inside their own organisation. Best to confront the painful realities of abuse perpetrated against real children by those in the service of the church, before worrying too much about Bill Henson and Caravaggio, don’t you think? First getting one’s own house in order is worthy advice.

Chuck, I hope the sun never beats down on you at Avon Gorge, or your ‘quivering appendage’ will get burnt taste very burnt bad.
Krypto (Friday 11 July 2008, 12:07 pm) #

yasus Chuck, I don’t think even the most ardent critic of kiddy smut dressed up as art is looking to prevent parents from taking perfectly innocent pics of their kids in the nuddy.

Hetty Johnson herself has admitted to owning similar pics.

Surely you can recognise that there is a huge difference between that and publicly displaying images of naked children for the perusal of all and sundry.

Generally we have taboos for a reason, canibalism for instance, is taboo for a number of valid reasons. I’d argue pederasty and child pornography are taboo for similarly valid reasons.
If we are going to start chipping away at various taboos, it shouldn’t come as any great surprise when eventually the cease to be taboo.
They become just another accepted social convention.

Today we laud Bill dickhead as a “wonderful and sensitive artiste” wank wank, tommorrow some suit in an ad agency is using happy snaps of an eight year old girl’s cleaver to sell some lousy product or other and by next week half the seedy pedaphile websites are rated “G” by the office of film and literature classification.

I’d argue that for things like child sexual exploitation, we lift those taboos at our collective peril.
Ross Sharp (Friday 11 July 2008, 12:16 pm) #

Gregory Carlin (Friday 11 July 2008, 10:33 am)

I do so love a good parody. Well done, sir. Your prize is a Robert Mapplethorpe print depicting a rear end getting a thorough rogering with a fist. It’s a limited edition scratch-n-sniff too. Enjoy.
Gregory Carlin (Friday 11 July 2008, 12:32 pm) #

I’m afraid I made a lot more money than Henson and I didn’t do it by being too Catholic, far from it, my career theme was Iggy & the Stooges at the Whisky a Go Go.

Henson’s a child pornographer grafting his own little patch of immunity, there is that level of legitimate comparison in relation to the phenomena of the free pass.

Comparing Henson to Caravaggio, is clearly a form of mental illness, it has to be ,because it is a insane, risible, preposterous, and an impossibly silly idea, it really is.

It also separates out the cow town hicks from the sensibly orientated mainstream. Short summary, Caravaggio, was seriously talented, to the extent, Bill Henson, no get, ever, the keys to the City of Milan.
Bridgit Gread (Friday 11 July 2008, 12:38 pm) #

Surely you can recognise that there is a huge difference between that and publicly displaying images of naked children for the perusal of all and sundry.

There would be a difference - if that was the original intention. But it wasn’t, was it? Both Henson’s images and the Art Monthly cover were only ever intended for the artistic community. Only since they have been picked up by the mainstream media have these pictures ‘done the rounds’; ask yourself, seriously, how many people would have seen Henson’s photographs otherwise?

Generally we have taboos for a reason, canibalism for instance, is taboo for a number of valid reasons. I’d argue pederasty and child pornography are taboo for similarly valid reasons.

And nobody here will argue against that. The issue is whether these images constitute child pornography, and I’m arguing that they do not. Could some dirty old creep construe them as such? Of course they could - as they could consider a K-Mart catalogue for children’s underwear, some school swimming photos or Chuck’s family snaps to be grade A porn. I’m not sure that necessitates restrictions or censorship on all those things, however.

Nobody is chipping away at any taboos; I’m simply trying to inject a little level-headedness into a public debate that seems to have been hijacked by moralists and wowsers.
Gregory Carlin (Friday 11 July 2008, 12:40 pm) #

I gave Beirut a PG, no that’s a lie, I gave a guy on the dock a G, to get me out of there.

That is the way life is, the truth, is asking how much to get the heck out of there.

It’s an art really.

Gregory
Gregory Carlin (Friday 11 July 2008, 12:44 pm) #

“Both Henson’s images and the Art Monthly cover were only ever intended for the artistic community.”

So the Trussed up Japanese schoolgirl, sado-bondage specialist guru par excellance, witha few arrests to his credit, and playboy style pics of naked little girl with jewellery

You are right, very low key stuff. Amazing it got hyped by the wowser media.

Gregory
Krypto (Friday 11 July 2008, 1:09 pm) #

Bridgit I don’t consider myself a moralist or a wowser, I’m not altogether pleased to find myself arguing on the same side as Bolta or this Carlin clown either.
If I’m really pressed, alright I will concede that bill dickhead’s grubby little snaps aren’t strictly pornography, but I would definitely consider them child erotica to coin a phrase (for want of a better term).

As far as I’m concerned, Henson and ugly shirt man are about breaking down distinctions between childhood sexuality (which of course EXISTS, that’s not to say it’s an appropriate theme for artistic exploration) and general society.
Distinctions I would argue strongly exist for very good reason, and which don’t need to be chipped away at.

As I see it, people who might legitimately see a thirteen year old girl in a state of complete or partial nakedness are;

1. a doctor if she’s sick.
2. one of her parents or a sibling living at home if there is no lock on the bathroom door.
3. a sales-person at the training bra shop (when fitting her)
4. and finally (with her consent) her thirteen year old boyfriend (or girlfriend I guess, in fairness)I don’t think thirteen is old enough to be sexually active by any stretch, but it is very difficult to keep children from “molesting” one another if they are absolutely determined to do so.

Beyond that, there aint no-one meant to be seeing kids in the raw.

I reject your argument that “Henson’s images and the Art Monthly cover were only ever intended for the artistic community” if they are displayed in a public place (which they were) they are available to the general public.

I have yet to be refused admission to a gallery or sale of a magazine on the basis that I am not “part of the arts community”.
There is no screening process.
I doubt they’d turn Dennis Ferguson away if he turned up with a glass of chardonnay in one hand and a beluga cracker in the other.
Krypto (Friday 11 July 2008, 2:03 pm) #

BTW I’d like to point out that at thirteen years of age it was utterly impossible to keep me from “molesting” my self, not a mental image worth entertaining, much less depicted on an art gallery wall…yuck!!
Bridgit Gread (Friday 11 July 2008, 2:10 pm) #

Sorry, krypto, I do not concur with most of that.

Art galleries are publicly accessible but they are not public places; a private gallery in Sydney is not Fed Square or Swanston Walk. Art galleries are frequented by people interested in or curious about art, just as jazz clubs are frequented by lovers of jazz and gay bars are frequented by gays. Sure, anyone else can go in but how many do? Dennis Ferguson might well take in interest in Henson’s photograph but he’d have to know about it first - and even if he made it into the gallery with a Pinot Noir and a canape, I reckon he’d probably stand out like a banged thumb.

I don’t consider Henson’s photographs to be erotic. Nudity, definitely. Poor photographs, probably (can’t see the artistic merit in them myself, but I know little about art). But erotica? Surely that is defined by sexual activity, come-hither posing, suggestiveness or even just allure. I see none of that in the picture that has caused most of the controversy, and I think anyone who does is grasping at straws.

I do agree to some extent that the privacy of children must be protected - but if you want to discuss blanket bans on full or partial nudity, you need to sweep your telescope across a broader vista than a couple of niche artists. The sexualisation of children in capitalist societies - not for art but for advertising and titilation - is endemic.
THR (Friday 11 July 2008, 2:56 pm) #

Bolt’s response:

“Freud was on cocaine. And he was of the Left.”

Bolt is truly stupid, and is out of his depth discussing anything more complex than Leunig cartoons.
Dam Buster of Preston (Friday 11 July 2008, 3:21 pm) #

As an expert in raising children (well i have two girls) I think that naked kid shots for family isnt that bad. Ok making it erotic and putting on an art gallery wall or magazine cover isnt quite right.

But look at any girls mag, catalogue or whatever and see how girls are sexualised. Fark me am i worried about that in a few years. Not what Henson takes a photo of.
steve (Friday 11 July 2008, 9:46 pm) #

It all sounds very similar to the first Ólympia’ controversy from a few years ago.

http://www.staroilpainting.com/p_9649.htm
Krypto (Saturday 12 July 2008, 4:15 pm) #

Bridgit I suspect we are agreed in goal, less so in the method of achieving it.

I whole-heartedly agree that sexualisation of children occurs in many forms which don’t involve nudity.
A blanket ban on child nudity wouldn’t take that into account, I agree, they are seperate issues, albeit related.

As for the idea that Henson’s pics don’t constitute erotica, well I can assure you they don’t turn me on in the slightest, but I would argue that if you were to compare Henson’s images to images widely regarded as erotic (as opposed to pornographic) such as depicted in publications like “Black & White” magazine, or “Blue” you’ll see that their content, composition, lighting etc is quite similar.

The main difference as I see it is the age of the models and their capacity to give informed consent.

My criticism of Henson (et al) as exploiters of children is not a defence of other exploiters of children such as the parents, modeling and advertising agencies behind the images of an eight year old girl made up and wearing provocative clothing a few years back (sorry, her name escapes me).

Children need to be protected from both I would strongly suggest.
Bridgit Gread (Saturday 12 July 2008, 7:11 pm) #

black+white is not an erotic magazine; its focus is cultural, artistic and photographic. I’ve never heard of the other one you mentioned.

We are not in disagreement about the need to protect children, only about Henson’s photography (well, one photograph in particular). You see it is exploitative and I do not. Perhaps the only true test will be to ask the model, in 10 or 15 years’ time, if she regrets her participation.
Krypto (Saturday 12 July 2008, 8:32 pm) #

Bridgit, I haven’t reached my opinion on the basis of one photo, I’ve been aware of Henson’s work for some time and have seen a number of his images in various art galleries which I have found disturbing.

Would it surprise you to learn that when I’ve voiced concerns to gallery staff I’ve been given decidedly short shrift and treated with that oh-so-delightful “well you don’t understand about art” patronising wank? (which is a joke, without blowing my own bags too much, I’d pit my general knowledge about art against some flat-foot glorified receptionist in an art gallery any day of the week).

I think you’ll find “Black and White” magazine does indeed fit the criteria to be considered erotica as does it’s homo-erotic counterpart “Blue” magazine.
Yes they are photographic/ artistic and cultural magazines, it’s not mutually exclusive with erotica.
I know a few people who read them for their erotic value over and above the artistic content (at least that’s what they told me).

Even if Henson’s models do the whole Edith Piaff “no regrets” routine well into adult life (which some of them seem to be doing) I think there is a fairly clear potential for impressionable young people to be harmed as a direct result of the experience of them being photographed naked and having the images displayed publicly and all that entails.

Waiting until one or more of these kids becomes involved with drugs, prostitution, sexual promiscuity, inability to form intimate relationships or other known problems brought about by child abuse when they grow up is a bit like shutting the gate after the horse has bolted is it not?
Gregory Carlin (Saturday 12 July 2008, 9:49 pm) #

“is not a defence of other exploiters of children such as the parents, modeling and advertising agencies behind the images of an eight year old girl made up and wearing provocative clothing a few years back (sorry, her name escapes me).”

We get tens of thousands of those complaints via IWF and bizarrely via the ACMA et alia, grouping that Oz CB stuff together as it’s hard to understand,

( are the CB on our side?)

One would in ideal circumstances throw something at it, the creepoid modeling stuff.

*if* the FBI people existed, basically they don’t. for every police officer working CP anywhere, there is an FBI counterpart, the USA makes up over 50 of the global total.

OZ et autre white commonealth cop dudes tend to want our peple to do hi-tech and training stuff, so the AFP are likely to sub-office in DC rather than London.

In a way as we talk amongst ourselves in hotels or whatever, our struggle is suffering from Gallipoli, Singapore, Limey European Union entry, because the most natural coalition has broken down

I suppose Kim Philby can be added to the list of Brit inbred defects. Add to that, the Brits are a pack of obfusating bastards,

Closeness to the Brits from a USA point of view is a poisoned chalice, they know too many of our secrets, like FBI parallel CIA/NSA stuff.

What do you say to a Brit special branch person who is aware that you’re sucking the Canadian or Oz legation? Darn it their MI5 cronies may eve have helped.

So what you get is a round table with everybody tagging off their free passes, the most obvious thing at the moment is (Brit) pedophile teachers running wild in the USA.

They don’t fucking warn us, they hide the ‘histories’ they ’skim’ the images of own-country victims (our kids), so they’re left in danger.

So we have a five year old beauty contest in Florida, yeah, sure, there’s something there that can go to jail if one can make the time, because we know we’ll find something else.

So, it is not just Oz, it is all messed up, capitalism, when it isn’t watched will always produce pornography to sell stuff, to put on bus shelters, it just will.

In that respect, to be candid, Oz is the worst. I refer to naked youngsters ( hotel tub) surrounded by empty Moet bottles. That was a 16 and a 15 if memory serves.

There are a dozen or so pro-pedophile technicals for every FBI guy in the USA working the same gig. In Oz, tey might have your guys hammered 50/1.

In Britain, maybe 120 to 1. It really is that bad, the only good news, is for the first time, their general opo is less smart than the FBI types, usually the pro-pedos are smarter than our people.

A mass demographic, has evened that out, at one point, I could hold six or 7 files of folks I knew, from Cambridge, Amsterdam, and all of them were smarter than me, that’s depressing.

I was top three in my country re: post high school scholarships. I’m not that dumb.
Gregory Carlin (Saturday 12 July 2008, 10:00 pm) #

“I reject your argument that “Henson’s images and the Art Monthly cover were only ever intended for the artistic community” if they are displayed in a public place (which they were) they are available to the general public.”

The left pro-pedophiles were arriving at the Oz issue before the gallery was raided, I picked up upon it fro the porn sector in Budapest.

The police hadn’t visited anything at that point. I only knew of Henson fro our SOA 2003 lobbying (in London)

I mean ultra-left radicals, the people who will operate death camps if they ever get another country, the Pol Pot types on meth

I don’t mean the hard left pedophiles who targeted the Labor party. I mean the trot-style sexual radicals. They also hang with the COC sub-culture.
Gregory Carlin (Saturday 12 July 2008, 10:13 pm) #

“I’m not altogether pleased to find myself arguing on the same side as Bolta or this Carlin clown either.”

You Oz folks are so like Texas. YOu need to get out more, I made more money than Henson in the media arts, he’ll need a few decades to catch up or a hit album or two in the USA or whatever.

Cate might be ahead of me in the cash stakes. I made a lot of money in show biz.

Gregory
Gregory Carlin (Saturday 12 July 2008, 10:21 pm) #

“Art galleries are frequented by people interested in or curious about art, just as jazz clubs are frequented by lovers of jazz and gay bars are frequented by gays. ”

Jazz and Gay bars is my area, both attract pedophiles in hordes, show biz is full of them, a mea culpa, even I got fooled, Gary Glitter being the more obvious example of that.

I thought he was a really nice bloke, and at the time, when I was releasing his records, I was still smarting from the GLF stuff in London. I really hated the pro-pedophiles.

The entire COC sub-culture ( in Holland) was porn, prostitution, narcotics, gay-bars, and that left-field arts thing.

There were a few nice jazz clubs in London, but mby the 1970s, it was all looking terribly icky. AS or the gay thing, that was astraight fight between pro and anti-pedophiles

The latter won.

Gregory Carlin
Krypto (Saturday 12 July 2008, 11:21 pm) #

oh dear, you’re not at all well are you Gregory?
Bruce (Saturday 12 July 2008, 11:21 pm) #

Gregory, you may actually have something valid to say underneath what seems like phobic, dada poetry, although I doubt it addresses the post in question directly. Bridgit’s post is about the nature of the pictures in question and Bolt’s distortion of a critique of them for political gain, not about supposed intel on an international leftist pedophillia conspiracy (which even forgetting the dadaism, seems very LaRouche).
Gregory Carlin (Saturday 12 July 2008, 11:55 pm) #

Your real world credentials might need a revision.

There were ICFI elements openly campaigning for Henson, one only has to be good to get recruited

why do you think the PIE/GLF people were hired at a premium by political psrties?

The latter were really good at political organization and the former ( Trots) basically view family, faith, coupledom, as problems.

It’s Lenin’s ‘useful fools’ concept, I’ve no doubt, it’s temporary support.

It is not unusual to find far-left groups and pedophiles in the same room/conference.

If it has a demographic, it will usually have organized politics. I’m not claiming to be an expert on Oz, but pedophiles generally do quite well in BRitish & Dutch politics.

In NZ, they’ve clipped the odd job as well.

It is not that difficult to spot them, kiddies and strange sex stuff being the best indicators.
Gregory Carlin (Sunday 13 July 2008, 12:05 am) #

I art is illegal in London how can it be art?

(answer that)

Henson was the model for SOA 2003

It’s not (London traded) art. As for Japanese Schoolgirl Monthly, te entire mag is prohibited from UK import.

So if ya can find a Henson kiddie in civilized climes, let me know.

Even Croggon’s gallery list is questionable.

Best

Gregory
Krypto (Sunday 13 July 2008, 12:11 am) #

extreme leftist organisations like the Catholic church you mean Gregory?

I’ve been pretty courteous up to this point, you clearly are unwell.
I’d urge you to seek genuine professional help it can’t be much fun to be engulfed in a paranoid conspiracy theory delusion.

Let me guess, the mental health system is part of the same international conspiracy of pedaphiles?

Get help before you hurt someone or yourself.
Gregory Carlin (Sunday 13 July 2008, 12:24 am) #

The PIE/GLF was kickstarted with Catholic cash in Edinburgh. That’s how they got premises.

The leftist component was London, with the GLF people. As recently as 2007 a leading pedophile & key figure) had a political prize named after him. He had Catholic & Labor Party links etc. So why can’t it sit together?

http://www.christianvoice.org.uk/Press/press029.html

Doesn’t mean the Vatican told them to do it.

I’m a pro-Vatican lobbyist. I am opposed to that kind of thing because it is damaging. My ‘politcal’ loyalty is to the Pope, I (usually) pay useful lip-service to US patrons

But not if it conflicts with Vatican policy. having said that I’m not fussy about who my friends are in the USA so long as they’re sound on Vatican issues.

I also see Texas in Oz, because I do understand Texas. You are in dialogue with yourselves.

It’s the same, it’s like talking about the death penalty, Texas doesn’t listen and doesn’t know, it eshews foreign input.

Gregory
Krypto (Sunday 13 July 2008, 12:27 am) #

for now the third time, get professional help before you hurt someone or yourself.
Gregory Carlin (Sunday 13 July 2008, 12:32 am) #

“Let me guess, the mental health system is part of the same international conspiracy of pedaphiles?”

It’s not a conspiracy, they often voted openly at their conferences, some of them were unquestionably mentally ill. The greater number were political activists directed towards policies.

‘The NVSH has lost most of its members, going down from 200.000 in the late sixties to 1400 now’

In Holland they’ve their glory days in the rear-view mirror.

‘The NWHK’s successor, the Society for Integration of Homophiles COC began to support similar goals. These organizations also suggested more radical objectives such as the abolition of marriage, of coupledom and gender and sexual dichotomy. In the language of those times, Zeldenrust-Noordanus stated “homosexuality does not exist”, meaning there was no separate homo- or heterosexual identity. Both organizations supported erotic diversity including pedophilia, sadomasochism and exhibitionism.’

http://www2.fmg.uva.nl/gl/radsex.html

The internet essentially delivered a new demographic, but not one which was as clever. Pro-pedophiles also lose control of some of their orgs. They also borrow or hijack orgs if they can.

They would take over scouting orgs if they could.

They just want to win.

Its politics.

Gregory
Bridgit Gread (Sunday 13 July 2008, 12:33 am) #

I think Gregory is the love-child of e.e.cummings and Robert Fisk.
Gregory Carlin (Sunday 13 July 2008, 12:44 am) #

I’m a lower-case person.

e.e. cummings
1894-1962
The poet and painter, who made art
of commas and parentheses,
lived here for the last forty years
of his life. He characterized himself
as “an author of pictures,
a draughtsman of words.”

http://www.gvsu.edu/english/cummings/caps2.html
Krypto (Sunday 13 July 2008, 2:37 pm) #

OK well you’ve rejected my professional opinion Gregory, let me offer a personal one.

It strikes me as implausible that anyone with any kind of “insider” knowledge on matters of state and national security as you claim would go blabbing about it on some random blog, here’s what I think.

At some point in your life you had some kind of acces to information not generally privvy to the general public, possibly the stress of the job, the climate of secrecy and possibly some personal difficulties weighed on you a bit too heavily and you lost the plot.

Either way, you strike me as paranoid, delusional, grandiose and in all probability, very unstable and dangerous.

I’m being as straight with you as I can be, you need to see a doctor.
If you continue on as you are you’re probably going to hurt some completely innocent person or yourself and then you won’t have a choice about it, you’ll find yourself in a secure hospital or behind bars.
You need help, I advise you in the strongest possible terms to get it before it’s too late.
Ray Dixon (Sunday 13 July 2008, 7:14 pm) #

I think he’s just having you on Krypto. Gregory sounds like a cross between Andrew Landeryou & Sam Kekovich (who are possibly the same person).
Krypto (Sunday 13 July 2008, 8:26 pm) #

in which case my assesment of him/ them as mentally unwell stands.
Bridgit Gread (Sunday 13 July 2008, 8:31 pm) #

I think he’s just having you on Krypto. Gregory sounds like a cross between Andrew Landeryou & Sam Kekovich

The spokesman for Australian lamb and the consumer of 8 percent of Australia’s chickens.
Krypto (Sunday 13 July 2008, 11:40 pm) #

“waiter, I believe I’ll have the pinot noir, and 8 percent of Australia’s chickens please”

“very good Sir”
Gregory Carlin (Monday 14 July 2008, 2:01 am) #

Ace Magazine/Without Sanctuary “Lynching was as popular as baseball. That’s what was so horrendous about it. … Kentucky newspaper archives indicates 353 people were lynched in Kentucky. …

Sub-demographic organization is selling postcards or related meetings later. Pedophilia (tofay) is more extensive than KKK activities were then.

The UN is more likely to employ me than anybody else here (in my professional opinion).

I’ve noted peophile linked groups publish media articles in Oz over the last few weeks. They’re not hiding in bnkers, least of all in Oz, they’re winning there, as per Japan.

The ‘insider’ info on pedophilia is that they’re organized generally at least to to the same extent, informally if you like, as other large demographic interests, such as football and baseball.

( it is worth noting that they’re still going strong, and have defeated all attempts FBI etc. to even slightly curb their activities)

Where is the lynching? Get the picnic basket.

At a loose ‘level, such as Operation Centurion, that without overt direction, the average hidden-away little net-nook, in Croatia, hijacked of course, will get enough hits to give a tally that would be respectable for BBC/CNN.

The KKK as per picnic, could only do 20,000, teched-up pedophiles can do millions.

A higher level of organization applies to those Oz elements, who know each other, work in the same schools etc. as a sub-catoray to the ‘unplanned’ mass of millions of transactions activities.

It is being mainstreamed.

Gregory
Gregory Carlin (Monday 14 July 2008, 2:08 am) #

“It strikes me as implausible that anyone with any kind of “insider” knowledge on matters of state and national security as you claim would go blabbing about it on some random blog, here’s what I think.”

I’m employed by a govt. sponsored program. You could work that out from Canadian & US newspapers etc. Not to mention the UN related stuff.

I might also point out that your smart cops need hand-holding in ad hoc offices in DC, they’re not smart enough to do it themselves

The Canadians are doing a lot better at policing self-sufficency. Your cops are also ’skimming’ which is against the rules.

That relates to your ‘iffy’ teachers. One may find them banned from working our summer camps soon enough.

Insider tip for you.

Gregory
Bruce (Monday 14 July 2008, 2:11 pm) #

That relates to your ‘iffy’ teachers. One may find them banned from working our summer camps soon enough.

Insider tip for you.

Do you have the lotto numbers for this week?
Krypto (Monday 14 July 2008, 3:27 pm) #

don’t be silly, pedaphiles rig the draw, they’d change it before your lucky numbers came up Bruce.
Gregory Carlin (Tuesday 15 July 2008, 12:59 am) #

They were good at making money. I was pretty good at boo koo cash myself, one successful album after another year after year. It kept me in attitude.

The pedophiles eventually lost out to the eastern-bloc criminals, bikers etc. They were not able to hold (in Amsterdam) what they gained.

But any mass interest will organize itself as a factor of being a mass interest. So for example, the fed govt. had to prohibit lynching postacards via the US mail.

That thing, emulated baseball. Oz had to send it’s political peophiles to London to find their initial footing.

However, you are doing ok now, you’ve enough child fetish sickos of your own to populate a major city.

Gregory