Okay, maybe I have only circumstantial evidence that the Kansas Family would be revolted, but if broadminded Salon is concerned that his work would be "mistaken" for pedophilia, I figured it might be a safe bet that less broadminded people might also make that same "mistake."
That Salon is a nest of leftists is hardly an opinion unique to myself. I usually only went near it to read Camille Paglia, and because two cartoonists I like, Carol Lay and Keith Knight, display their wares there. Camille ain't been there since last June, so that just leaves the cartoons.
Salon is rapidly going out of business, and has converted large sections of its site to payers only. No problem there. Rush Limbaugh does the same thing.
One of Salon's big draws is the sex section, with most of it pay only. Okay, no problem there either. It's a free country, there is at least a thin veneer of social relevance, sex certainly sells, and a pay-only site is safe from the kiddies (if your 10-year-old has a credit card, you already have problems.)
Still, it is a sex site. I don't see a lot of references here to photography as art. I certainly do not see a lot of examples of landscape work. I looked in vain for Ansel Adams.
So perhaps I may be excused for my cynicism about Salon's motivations in presenting Sturges' work with nude children on top of a column of other articles including "Male Nudes Now," "Love Motel," "Naked Men," "The Accidental Pornographer," and of course that ever-popular toast of the fine art world, the late Robert Mapplethorpe.
A casual observer might almost think they were not showcasing the artistic merits of Sturges' work in exactly the light he might want it presented, but going for some quick cash by appealing to the prurient interests of pedophiles.
And don't even get me started on child beauty pageants. There is something deeply sick about doing this to kids that is almost as bad as pedophilia, and probably screws kids up almost as much. And if those traditional Southern matrons don't like it, they can jump down a well.



Nauseous yet?
Off Topic » in reply to Flying monkeys
Re: Flying monkeys
