Artist Arrested In Paris For Standing Naked With Cock Leashed to His Cock

  On 3/31/2014 at 11:00 PM, solarion said:

he has a right to do this and also the police have a right to arrest him for doing this and also you have a right to say they should not arrest him

lol

I have the left to fuck off this thread.

The thing is art is a social fact. If it doesn't serve a public purpose - any whatsoever - it's not art. The declaration that it's either this or suicide pretty much means "look, this isn't art, put up with my bollocks because I'm an unstable person". However, it is true that devoting oneself to a public cause can be therapeutic - but this is irrelevant to anyone but the suicidal guy, and the public cause is completely absent here anyway.

As it is, the very existence of artists these days threatens the existence of art, because the artist community functions in a pretty much private way, with private ends, be it self-expression, making money, or just replying to something that had been made within the artist community, without actually making any impact on the society this artist community is embedded in. Even "socially conscious art" falls into this, as it usually takes some particular cause up which is localised within a community already, missing that social problems also happen at a more abstract, structural level. Art is made by citizens, not artists.

It's sad that being in the hands of the Church, the Medici or modernist Great Causes was more beneficial to art than having artists be individual, freely associating, agents the democratic way.

  On 3/30/2014 at 11:27 AM, Zephyr_Nova said:

More people should be doing shit like this. Is it great art? Not particularly. Is it a welcome change of pace from a boring tourist trap? Of course! Why does anyone here have a problem with someone being ridiculous for the sake of being ridiculous? Oh no, a silly man has a visible penis. That's going to really fuck up society.

I'd also add this sort of thing can only happen in tourist traps (or more generally any place taken over by decadent upper middle class youths who treat culture as a private community matter) and it's part of why they're so fucking boring.

  On 3/29/2014 at 5:54 PM, StephenG said:

 

  On 3/29/2014 at 5:53 PM, delet... said:

 

  On 3/29/2014 at 5:42 PM, lumpenprol said:

Joyrex self-ban please

 

 

also this thread is a pretty good way to separate the watmm prudes from the sober-minded. AJW and Stephen G seem reasonable.

 

waves mny dick in front of your face whilst boxing your ears. It's art bitc deal with it.

 

 

I think there's a pretty substantial difference between waving a dick right in front of your face which is a violation of personal space, (it's called assault), and what the guy did with his cock (and cock). Stop making two things one!

 

 

Is it just me or is everyones asshole across the planet tightening up like a noose? The level of prudishness is overwhelming sometimes. If you find something distasteful just don't look/listen or whatever. If "artists" don't get the attention they're looking for they'll go away lol.

 

If they're getting attention then there is some sort of appeal to some audience and their performance is justified (probably).

 

you're literally saying that public nudity should be allowed as long as cocks aren't wagged right in front of faces?

why don't you or haven't you ever started a thread asking about why public nudity isn't legal? seems like a bigger discussion to be had than whether or not this guy's thing was art.

so anyone should be allowed to have their dicks etc out in public? not just artists? and not just in paris but anywhere? that include registered sex offenders on a sidewalk in front of school as it's letting out? someone has already said that kids seeing 50yr old dicks does something to the effect of making them into better kids by giving them cool stories to tell, so yeah why not have creepy old perv dudes flashing kids?

jeees everyone is such prudes up in here

You're doing what Delete did. You're making two things one. And again the slippery slope fallacy. Just because this guy had his dick out... it's not a gateway to sexual predators waving flashing young kids.

I don't advocate sexual predators. And nudity and sexuality are two different things. You can't see a naked person without thinking of sex or something?

nonono dude, i'm merely illustrating how you have a complete lack of understanding when it comes to laws.

laws exist for reasons. and you can't just go making exceptions to those laws, or expecting there to be exceptions based on your opinion about this or that person who is breaking the law, and how you think that their illegal act is some great performance of art.

and you're just trying to muddy your position by throwing out words like fallacy and slippery slope instead of clarifying how you feel about public nudity.

either:

a) you think everyone should be allowed to have their cocks out in public

or

b) you think only artists should be allowed to have their cocks out, because they are special, special people

or

c) you can admit that the law exists for a good reason and we can't just go making exceptions based on a whim because who gets to decide what those exceptions should be?

edit- do you even understand what the phrase slippery slope means? because this isn't that at all. the moment you made it legal to be nude in public, pervs would be wagging their dicks at kids, legally. that would be covered by that law. it wouldn't require any further legislation. the moment you make public nudity legal... public nudity is legal.

slippery slope would be if i suggested it would lead to some other thing i disagreed with also being made legal. by saying you think public nudity should be legal, you are already saying that you think showing your cock to kids is ok. it doesn't require us to slide down any slope to arrive at that point. it's already included.

I think you're a touch delusional and I really don't have time to argue my point. Also maybe you're the one with a complete lack of understanding when it comes to laws; I've taken several related courses. Why don't you look up indecent exposure laws in France/Spain/rest of Europe and get back to me.

In most European countries nudity is a fundamental right and is only illegal when an affront to decency is made (IE assault, soliciting, etc).

edit: lol at your false dilemma fallacy there. You should take a critical reasoning or philosophy course and learn how to argue.

  On 4/1/2014 at 2:31 AM, MisterE said:

nonono dude, i'm merely illustrating how you have a complete lack of understanding when it comes to laws.

 

 

ad hominem

  On 4/1/2014 at 2:31 AM, MisterE said:

nonono dude, i'm merely illustrating how you have a complete lack of understanding when it comes to laws.

 

laws exist for reasons. and you can't just go making exceptions to those laws, or expecting there to be exceptions based on your opinion about this or that person who is breaking the law, and how you think that their illegal act is some great performance of art.

 

 

 

edit- do you even understand what the phrase slippery slope means? because this isn't that at all. the moment you made it legal to be nude in public, pervs would be wagging their dicks at kids, legally. that would be covered by that law. it wouldn't require any further legislation. the moment you make public nudity legal... public nudity is legal.

 

slippery slope would be if i suggested it would lead to some other thing i disagreed with also being made legal. by saying you think public nudity should be legal, you are already saying that you think showing your cock to kids is ok. it doesn't require us to slide down any slope to arrive at that point. it's already included.

lol

what you are suggesting is that, because public nudity is tolerated, suddenly pervs are going to wag their dicks in kids faces. That is exactly a slippery slope.

First and foremost, public nudity is already tolerated in many European countries. For the sole reason that many people are self conscious, or in the case of pervs for fear of physical retaliation, people won't just suddenly start waving their dicks in kids faces or even opt to be naked in public.

Just because one person is tolerated to do a certain thing does not mean everyone will start doing it.

here is a wikipedia quote to help you with your understanding of slippery slope

In logic and critical thinking, a slippery slope is a logical device, but is usually known under its fallacious form in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any rational argument or demonstrable mechanism for the inevitability of the event in question.

Phallusy

for fear of physical retaliation? so you think part of justice should include mob justice?

i can't believe that you are trying to explain to ME what a slippery slope is, when you are trying to suggest that public nudity being made legal wouldn't mean that pervs would start showing their dicks to kids, which they already do sometimes, and more would the moment it were made perfectly legal. i never said 'in their faces', that would be you trying to make what i'm saying seem more than it is so it's easier to disagree with.

i'm talking about a guy standing on a sidewalk with a big ass creepy grin, with his dick in his hand, in front of an elementary school every day when it lets out. maybe a bit of drool coming out of his mouth. if public nudity were legal that would be perfectly legal (unless somehow it was covered by an exception but how exactly do you carve out exceptions to prevent people from going to places where there are kids because they want to show kids their dicks? would you say that any place with X amount of kids, you can't be naked within Y amount of meters?)

also you are trying to differentiate between nude and sexual.. does cohen stuffing things up his ass in public count as sexual? if not what does? who would decide that? how could that be defined in a way that would safely exclude all public sexual acts but not exclude the right to just be naked?

I wish you the best in your line of thinking. Have a great night. I have homework to do. cheers

  On 4/1/2014 at 2:36 AM, StephenG said:

I think you're a touch delusional and I really don't have time to argue my point. Also maybe you're the one with a complete lack of understanding when it comes to laws; I've taken several related courses. Why don't you look up indecent exposure laws in France/Spain/rest of Europe and get back to me.

 

In most European countries nudity is a fundamental right and is only illegal when an affront to decency is made (IE assault, soliciting, etc).

 

edit: lol at your false dilemma fallacy there. You should take a critical reasoning or philosophy course and learn how to argue.

This is not true, btw. In Spain it was only legal in Barcelona for a while, and isn't anymore. Even being shirtless at any distance from the beach is illegal (200€ fine IIRC) - and the thing is I hear more people than want this to be actually enforced than the other way around. Personally I find the sight of sweaty Germans an offence to this town's industrial past, whose ethos is still something locals feel very proud about and very confused and ashamed that nobody gives two shits about it and would rather trample it if it makes room for fucking tapas bars.

Also, isn't it in Paris that this guy is getting arrested?

your idea of slippery slope is that if you made something legal, it's absurd to think that people would then do it.

so i don't think i'm missing out on any enlightenment due to your bailing on our dialogue. obviously you can't explain how public nudity being legal wouldn't result in pervs everywhere coming out of the woodwork to show their cocks to kids, while being fully within their rights under the law. maybe because you know it would.

but hey you got some 'intellectual cred' points by posting in support of an 'artist' who's art seems to revolve around pure shock value.

like oh look at me i think it was brilliant when that lady puked on gaga, i must be intellectuaizzle. we are so special and def better than those plebs who dont get art, aren't we?

  On 4/1/2014 at 3:08 AM, poblequadrat said:

 

  On 4/1/2014 at 2:36 AM, StephenG said:

I think you're a touch delusional and I really don't have time to argue my point. Also maybe you're the one with a complete lack of understanding when it comes to laws; I've taken several related courses. Why don't you look up indecent exposure laws in France/Spain/rest of Europe and get back to me.

 

In most European countries nudity is a fundamental right and is only illegal when an affront to decency is made (IE assault, soliciting, etc).

 

edit: lol at your false dilemma fallacy there. You should take a critical reasoning or philosophy course and learn how to argue.

 

This is not true, btw. In Spain it was only legal in Barcelona for a while, and isn't anymore. Even being shirtless at any distance from the beach is illegal (200€ fine IIRC) - and the thing is I hear more people than want this to be actually enforced than the other way around. Personally I find the sight of sweaty Germans an offence to this town's industrial past, whose ethos is still something locals feel very proud about and very confused and ashamed that nobody gives two shits about it and would rather trample it if it makes room for fucking tapas bars.

 

Also, isn't it in Paris that this guy is getting arrested?

 

yes it is true in spain.

While it is often accepted in western countries that a naked human body is not in itself indecent, the circumstances of its exposure, and any offence caused to others, may be deemed offensive or disorderly.^{[citation needed]} That principle is reflected in depiction of the human form in art of various forms. This is the position, for example, in Germany^[1] and Spain,

Nudity is a fundamental right in Spain and is only illegal when it is an affront to decency. This is open to wide interpretation under the law.

seriously though I have to bounce I've got an accounting project due. It's been nice talking to both of you I hope you have a good night. I hope I haven't somehow personally offended you MisterE as that was not my intention. (wags dick in your face lol jk)

cheers

  On 4/1/2014 at 3:10 AM, StephenG said:

 

  On 4/1/2014 at 3:08 AM, poblequadrat said:

 

  On 4/1/2014 at 2:36 AM, StephenG said:

I think you're a touch delusional and I really don't have time to argue my point. Also maybe you're the one with a complete lack of understanding when it comes to laws; I've taken several related courses. Why don't you look up indecent exposure laws in France/Spain/rest of Europe and get back to me.

 

In most European countries nudity is a fundamental right and is only illegal when an affront to decency is made (IE assault, soliciting, etc).

 

edit: lol at your false dilemma fallacy there. You should take a critical reasoning or philosophy course and learn how to argue.

 

This is not true, btw. In Spain it was only legal in Barcelona for a while, and isn't anymore. Even being shirtless at any distance from the beach is illegal (200€ fine IIRC) - and the thing is I hear more people than want this to be actually enforced than the other way around. Personally I find the sight of sweaty Germans an offence to this town's industrial past, whose ethos is still something locals feel very proud about and very confused and ashamed that nobody gives two shits about it and would rather trample it if it makes room for fucking tapas bars.

 

Also, isn't it in Paris that this guy is getting arrested?

 

 

yes it is true in spain.

 

While it is often accepted in western countries that a naked human body is not in itself indecent, the circumstances of its exposure, and any offence caused to others, may be deemed offensive or disorderly.^{[citation needed]} That principle is reflected in depiction of the human form in art of various forms. This is the position, for example, in Germany^[1] and Spain,

 

Nudity is a fundamental right in Spain and is only illegal when it is an affront to decency. This is open to wide interpretation under the law.

 

No, it's not true. All towns have a "civism law" and the only one that didn't forbid nudity was Barcelona's, but isn't anymore. I remember because there used to be an old guy who walked around the old town naked, and all the papers used his image when the new law forbidding nudity got passed. How can being naked be legal if you get fined for being shirtless? (I'm 100% sure this is an actual law in Barcelona.)

What is legal in Spain is showing your willy on TV or on mainstream books, if it's not in an indecent way (this guy wouldn't fly unless it was late at night.) As you know, there are countries where depicting genitalia is illegal even in porn (Japan's infamous for this).

Anyway, I'm not too interested in the naked debate, more in the pseudo-art thing!

  On 4/1/2014 at 3:18 AM, poblequadrat said:

 

  On 4/1/2014 at 3:10 AM, StephenG said:

 

  On 4/1/2014 at 3:08 AM, poblequadrat said:

 

  On 4/1/2014 at 2:36 AM, StephenG said:

I think you're a touch delusional and I really don't have time to argue my point. Also maybe you're the one with a complete lack of understanding when it comes to laws; I've taken several related courses. Why don't you look up indecent exposure laws in France/Spain/rest of Europe and get back to me.

 

In most European countries nudity is a fundamental right and is only illegal when an affront to decency is made (IE assault, soliciting, etc).

 

edit: lol at your false dilemma fallacy there. You should take a critical reasoning or philosophy course and learn how to argue.

 

This is not true, btw. In Spain it was only legal in Barcelona for a while, and isn't anymore. Even being shirtless at any distance from the beach is illegal (200€ fine IIRC) - and the thing is I hear more people than want this to be actually enforced than the other way around. Personally I find the sight of sweaty Germans an offence to this town's industrial past, whose ethos is still something locals feel very proud about and very confused and ashamed that nobody gives two shits about it and would rather trample it if it makes room for fucking tapas bars.

 

Also, isn't it in Paris that this guy is getting arrested?

 

 

yes it is true in spain.

 

While it is often accepted in western countries that a naked human body is not in itself indecent, the circumstances of its exposure, and any offence caused to others, may be deemed offensive or disorderly.^{[citation needed]} That principle is reflected in depiction of the human form in art of various forms. This is the position, for example, in Germany^[1] and Spain,

 

Nudity is a fundamental right in Spain and is only illegal when it is an affront to decency. This is open to wide interpretation under the law.

 

 

No, it's not true. All towns have a "civism law" and the only one that didn't forbid nudity was Barcelona's, but isn't anymore. I remember because there used to be an old guy who walked around the old town naked, and all the papers used his image when the new law forbidding nudity got passed. How can being naked be legal if you get fined for being shirtless (I'm 100% sure this is an actual law in Barcelona.)

 

What is legal in Spain is showing your willy on TV or on mainstream books, if it's not in an indecent way (this guy wouldn't fly unless it was late at night.)

 

Anyway, I'm not too interested in the naked debate, more in the pseudo-art thing!

 

Yes you are correct, per se..... That's why I said it's open to wide interpretation. What is considered an affront to decency depends on common practice in the area. Walking around downtown naked? Not commonly accepted = illegal. Should a specific area (business, beach, club, hotel) establish a common practice of allowing nudity, it is fully legal. This is in contrast to countries such as Canada/US where public nudity is explicitly illegal except under very strict and regulated circumstances (strip clubs etc). It still stands that nudity is a fundamental right in Spain.

the human body is terrible and evil and should be covered up, unless your a super hot naked woman presented in a tasteful academic context.

  On 4/1/2014 at 3:10 AM, MisterE said:

obviously you can't explain how public nudity being legal wouldn't result in pervs everywhere coming out of the woodwork to show their cocks to kids, while being fully within their rights under the law.

If nudity were legal everywhere pervs would gain nothing from "show[ing] their cocks to kids" because they'd be showing them something everyone sees all the time. it would no longer be obscene, and the mere state of being naked would no longer be sexual. Of course, this is not the world we live in because ridiculous laws and subsequent taboos emerged over time, and now everything is stupid. The end.

  On 4/1/2014 at 3:42 AM, Zephyr_Nova said:

 

  On 4/1/2014 at 3:10 AM, MisterE said:

obviously you can't explain how public nudity being legal wouldn't result in pervs everywhere coming out of the woodwork to show their cocks to kids, while being fully within their rights under the law.

 

If nudity were legal everywhere pervs would gain nothing from "show[ing] their cocks to kids" because they'd be showing them something everyone sees all the time. it would no longer be obscene, and the mere state of being naked would no longer be sexual. Of course, this is not the world we live in because ridiculous laws and subsequent taboos emerged over time, and now everything is stupid. The end.

 

Precisely!!!

  On 3/29/2014 at 6:05 PM, delet... said:

i don't give a shit about dicks or tits or whatever btw

HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT DELET HATES COCKS

haha, penises