more statue madness

[Bob S.]

A statue in Kansas City, KS is bringing the usual crazies over the nudity. The statue, a headless, partially nude female statue commenting on the madness of sexting and losing your own identity in the process. An article can be found at the Kansas City Star while a picture can be found at the Kanas Citian

Bob S.

[rickisshy]

We recently received a statue.


http://www.whas11.com/home/Giant-gol...149911335.html

[BinCo]

BOOBS!!! Ahhhhh, protect the children......who......have seen boobs since they were born......

[Bob S.]

The petitioners against the statues managed to get a grand jury to look at the statues to see if they violated the Kansas obscenity laws. The grand jury came back with a quick verdict of no. Sanity rules.

Bob S.


From the Kansas City Star:

JoCo grand jury dismisses obscenity question involving arboretum statue
By TONY RIZZO
The Kansas City Star


After less than a day of deliberation, a Johnson County grand jury late Friday afternoon declined to issue an indictment over a bare-breasted sculpture at the Overland Park Arboretum.The 15-member jury was chosen Friday morning to determine if the bronze sculpture entitled “Accept or Reject” violated the Kansas obscenity law.
Critics of the sculpture had submitted a petition to have a grand jury seated to study the issue.
District Judge Gerald Elliott instructed the jurors that they were to determine if there was probable cause to believe a crime had been committed. If so, they were to issue an indictment known as a true bill. But late Friday afternoon, they notified the court that they had issued a “no true bill” ruling.
Along with its finding, the jury released a written statement: “We sat for one day and viewed the photographs of the statue. We reviewed the Kansas law and found that the sculpture in question did not meet the legal definition of obscenity.”
Phillip Cosby, state director of the American Family Association of Kansas and Missouri that spearheaded the petition drive, said he was incensed by the decision that came without anyone opposed to the sculpture being called to testify.
“Our free and independent court system got hijacked,” he said. “We didn’t get a hearing.”
Cosby was angered that staff from District Attorney Steve Howe’s office had contacted some of his 14 witnesses before the grand jury was seated. Cosby said he believed the district attorney had overstepped his authority.
Overland Park officials, who had refused to move the sculpture after some people complained about it, said they appreciated the jury’s decision.
“We are happy with the ruling from our peers in the case,” said Overland Park Mayor Carl Gerlach. “And we’re extremely happy they found in our behalf in such a timely manner.”
It marked only the fourth time since 1989 that a grand jury has been summoned in Johnson County — but the third time one has been asked to consider what constitutes obscenity.
As rare as grand juries have been in Kansas’ most populous county, indictments stemming from them have been even rarer.
In 2007, a grand jury indicted four businesses for promoting obscenity, but prosecutors later dismissed all four misdemeanor cases.
Unlike the federal court system and states like Missouri where grand juries are a regular part of the judicial machinery, Kansas law only allows for them to be called either by a majority of judges in a court district or by a petition of registered voters. The number of petition signatures needed depends on how many people voted in the previous gubernatorial election.
Cosby said the American Family Association of Kansas and Missouri took on the statue after a Stilwell woman failed to convince Overland Park officials that it was inappropriate, especially for children, and should be moved.
The sculpture by Chinese artist Yu Chang depicts a headless female, her chest exposed, holding a camera at arm’s length and aiming it back at herself.
Overland Park officials have defended the work’s artistic nature. But based on the Stilwell woman’s concerns, they posted a message advising visitors “some pieces include a display of the human body and parental guidance is encouraged.”
Cosby and his group wanted the grand jury to determine if the sculpture violated Kansas statutes of promoting obscenity or promoting obscenity to minors.
Nudity was not the issue, according to Cosby.
An article on his group’s website makes the case that nudity in “serious works of art” is not pornography.
“Although proponents of pornography would like to suggest otherwise, no one seriously believes that the statue of Venus de Milo is pornography,” the article states.
Cosby’s group describes the arboretum sculpture as “a female exposing her fully nude breasts, in an aroused state, portraying with a camera the act of what has become commonly known as ‘sexting’ or the digital manufacture of pornography/obscenity.”
It’s that demonstration of sexting that most troubles the American Family Association.
“Our concern is not about nudity,” he said. “It’s what’s being done by the act of sexting.”
He says that is an illegal and potentially harmful activity if engaged in by minors.
Kansas’ obscenity law is based on standards established by the U.S. Supreme Court.
It defines obscenity as material that “the average person applying contemporary community standards” would find, taken as a whole, “appeals to the prurient interest.”
The law goes on to state: “The average person applying contemporary community standards would find that the material or performance has patently offensive representations or descriptions of: Ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, including sexual intercourse or sodomy; or masturbation, excretory functions, sadomasochistic abuse or lewd exhibition of the genitals; and taken as a whole, a reasonable person would find that the material or performance lacks serious literary, educational, artistic, political or scientific value.”
In 1989, another Johnson County grand jury provided guidelines that prosecutors later used when determining whether to file charges.
That grand jury, which formed after a petition drive by an anti-pornography group, focused on the sale and rental of adult videos.
It returned no indictments but recommended the removal of films that portrayed incest, sexual conduct with minors, bondage, torture, bestiality, rape, fetishes or those “lacking significant story lines or plots.”
Paul Morrison, who worked with that grand jury while serving as Johnson County’s district attorney, said his office applied those guidelines afterward in considering prosecutions under the obscenity law.
“They were 15 people from a cross section of the community who put their heads together and came up with fairly reasonable standards,” said Morrison, now a lawyer in private practice.
In 2007, another grand jury looked at obscenity issues.
Cosby was involved in that petition drive as head of the local chapter of a group called the National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families.
It returned indictments against four businesses for selling adult videos, sex toys and, in one case, adult-themed Halloween costumes. But prosecutors later dismissed the cases.
Jill Barton, a law professor at the University of Miami who wrote a law review article about Cosby and his use of grand jury petitions, said such juries rarely have returned indictments.
But the efforts have had some success in pressuring businesses to remove questionable material, Barton said.


To reach Tony Rizzo, call 816-234-4435 or send email to trizzo@kcstar.com
Posted on Sat, Oct. 27, 2012 01:05 AM

[nimrod]

Great news, I am happy to see that some know that female breasts in art is not obscene. Now if those same people could see that the real ones are not...

[NakedGary]

http://www.whas11.com/community/Gian...149911335.html

Louisville residents react to giant, gold David statue




Video

by Maggie Ruper
WHAS11.com
Posted on May 2, 2012 at 6:29 PM
Updated Wednesday, May 2 at 7:00 PM

Gallery SEE ALL 20 PHOTOS »
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WHAS11) -- A golden replica of Michelangelo's David was installed in front of the 21c Museum Hotel on Wednesday. The piece was acquired by the museum from Turkish artist Serkan Ozkaya in 2010. It was commissioned to make the journey from Istanbul to New York and then to Louisville.

"21c is committed to integrating art into everyday life and David on Main Street is certainly a great example of that," said Alice Gray Stites, 21c curator.

Many people stopped on the street to take pictures.

"Well it's definitely something you don't see in Louisville very often," said Jeannie Brown.

"It's pretty neat. It's an exciting thing to have here in town," said George Ruzicka.

"It's huge, it's gaudy, and I'm not a fan," said Janice Cook.

David may not be here permanently, but Stites said it will be in Louisville for a long time.

http://www.whas11.com/community/Gian...149911335.html

[NudePete]

I agree with one of the comments...it is a bit gaudy.

[LumpyPostage]

I would object to any statue that glorifies Facebook behaviour.

[sunnysmile_fl]

Heh-heh-heh...Talk about statue madness...

While once I and a friend of mine were visiting an rather large, local musical instrument store in my city, my friend was somewhat surprised and shocked at the otherwise rather artistic and tasteful, white ceramic statues that were as part of the interior decor of the store. The statues were, of course, all nude. I thought I had heard it all but upon entering the store and venturing along the store's interior mall, my friend exclaimed that he 'couldn't look' at the statues because the were bearing breasts. 'Breasts, for Pete's sake!' I exclaimed. Then I had to stop to wonder what the hell somebody had been telling my friend all his life that would ever make him feel any uneasiness about the sight of a female breast, on a statue of a beautiful woman, at that.

I had to tell my friend that first-of-all, those statues are works of art, they depict what is natural and normal about the human anatomy and in a tasteful and respectful manner and that there is absolutely nothing to be concerned about or feel guilty for.

Folks, this is the year 2012 and at the acknowledgement of my friend having to feel uneasy and even a bit guilty for ever having viewed wonderful works of art that those statues represent, I conclude that we as a society are continue to slip backward into a state of puritanism where people are becoming so afraid of the sight of the human body that they have to feel so guilty that they feel a strong need to go to confession when, as we know, none of that is necessary.

They are just STATUES. They are of the likeness of a healthy human body. PEOPLE have human bodies and all are of God's creation so I ask people of Society who over-react when they encounter natural nudity, what is the problem?

[LumpyPostage]

We don't have a lot of puritans or confessionals around here.