A US photographer makes an exhibition in russia

is there anyone with fair hair who can pull off a mustache without looking like a weirdo?

>fucked a 14 year old girl while working at her school
>dindu nuffin

Is this dude a skype?

Meh, his photos are not even cute, lewd or interesting. Nothing of value was lost.

The goyims are infected by the jews

...

I think this was the real reason

If you guys could go ahead and kill that sick son of a bitch for us that would be great

if he was in the US and we had these pics we could get him arrested for CP since he is photogreaphing a child under 18 sexually which is illegal even if clothed.

send him to the gulag plz ivan

Lolno, Jack Sturges has already been taken to court, and he won. Art isn't illegal.

Long live loli!

Can i get the photo? is the blonde white girl in hand of nigger underage?

>some guy sprayed works of art with urine and acetone
>others protested
>because they don't think it is right for him to produce art like this

Literally white niggers trying to censor culture.
I bet femen was a part of this.

Hint: it's not portnography if no one is doing sexual things and the genitals aren't visible

BASED
A
S
E
D

>be pedo
>take pictures in black and white
>suddenly artist

[spoiler]definitely don't google 'Sally Mann'[/spoiler]

...

This is not art. This is shit. I'm glad they did it.

It looks like Shit not art

EVERYTIME

>i dislike this
>they should arrest the person who did it

Spoken like a true SJW.
What's next safe spaces?

lel

Nobody arrested him as far as i know.

DAS RITE

>if he was in the US and we had these pics

He was, and with these pics. Art is allowed to do whatever. This is why the whole "videogames are art" debate started, so video games can be politically incorrect and lewd or gory, as its art and thats fine. If they are just toys, they can't be.

>white female
>black male

If they didn't, excuse me.
The comments made it seem like they did or wanted to.

Dang that's a lot of naked little girls.

Come on guys, he's an artist. Does he look like the type of guy who could lurk your 8yo daughter by night ?

How is that even legal ?

And why do I have a feeling my IP is going to be tracked from this point on ?

As i remember, his exibition was attacked by some protestants

If our fanatics who fight for "purity" were not controlled, that photographer would be beaten i'm sure, but police protected him.

>dis is art white boi. what are г gonna do about it?

because a picture of a naked child doesnt have to be cp. a picture of you naked isnt porn,too (in most cases)

...

your threadly reminder that

we wuz pedos n shieeet

Yeah I've noticed that, starting with idiotic Americans, they've extended the definition of "pornography" to include simple nudity.

Pornography literally refers to the photography of SEXUAL acts.

Is that a fucking nude twelve year old white girl on a naked niggers lap?

This guy needs to be executed

Yep. This stuff won't fly here.

Also RARE

I warned you brah

Thank you, but I don't understand how this isn't obviously cp.
I mean some nudity is acceptable if applied appropriately and isn't the main point of the work but this is 100% about the nudity of the child, there's nothing artistic about it.

I hope Russians kill him

Well... it got an emotional reaction out of you, didn't it?

Would you be as pissed if the kid was a nigger too?

This stuff is made to fuck with the likes of Cred Forums not for pedos to masturbate over. (We have anime for that).

This is business and even the most disgusting things can be sold if you name it somehow interesting.

In my opinion your kind should hang

ENGLAND!

It's cows m8.

did someone shoop that guise head bigger?

That's exactly why he is persecuted here. The investigation if there were any CP has just begun, but the exhibition is closed for now.

Why is a nude photo of an adult is not pornography, but a nude photo of a child suddenly is? There aren't even any genitals shown and the poses aren't sexual.

Fuck, that triggers me

In case you people were wondering, it says:

'Make love not war'
'Mix yourselves, protect yourselves'

>dontpostthebelgiumone.jpg

As soon as the same rules apply to everyone else that apply only to non-SJWs, I'll agree with you. Until then I'm more than willing to play them at their own game.

the parents should be publicly shamed

pretty photo

also, the exhibit is doing what it is intended to do

Shit comes around often. Cp is hard to legally define because a lot of pedos will even use children's wear catalogs from department stores as fap material. As a result the definition kind of dubiously extends to any pictures which are deemed to show children in a sexually suggestive manner, even if clothed. It can also depend on who has the image. So a parent in possession of a picture of their child in a swimsuit isn't a problem, that parent selling that image to people who they know are using it as fap material on the Internet would be. The pictures may be 'barely' artistic but they are also pretty clearly sexualising children, the kids may not even be aware (or have lied to) that such images could be used by pedophiles. In this case I think pulling the exhibit was the right thing to do.
The harder cases are shit like lolicon, as no child is directly exploited and nudist pictures, as sexualisation isn't the purpose, this however, looks like a slam dunk. Pedo shit being disguised as art.

Nude photos of children are not pornography either. You can buy books from photographers like David Hamilton that are full of naked teenage girls. It's perfectly legal because it's considered art, not CP.

There is a clause for "art" in our CP law too, so nothing will likely come out of it.

>defending child pornography
epic Cred Forums epic

I hope they throw the """""(((artist)))""""" off a roof on live TV.

>naked child
Pornography
>naked child with a nigger
Art

>japan worried about public shame

i.4cdn.org/h/1474623482872.jpg

Foreigners in Russia are fine! I mean come on!