Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (10153)	10/19/1998 6:56:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<OT> and also maybe offensive. Yes I have heard about that one and another one with a fist. I have no idea why some of these artists feel the need to produce work like this. Same thing with Keith Haring, you know him, he does the cartoon barking dogs etc. except theres this whole body of offensive pornographic stuff. There is a retrospective at the SF Moma right now with Keith Haring.... you could take the kids to see it except for the pornographic stuff which ruins it. That said, dont you think that any retrospective should include these pieces? And whats the problem with that (as long as no tax dollars support it). Do you feel that this stuff should be censored? And if so, next you get the question of what is offensive. Example somebody is going to say that full-frontal male nudes are offensive but female are not. The film industry is like that - explain that one to me. Id rather make my own choices about what is offensive to me and my family vs. what isnt.