# Live in LA and dislike children being tortured for profit?



## pumpkinsmama (Aug 20, 2005)

http://www.paulkopeikingallery.com/a...ions/endtimes/

Quote:

takes place on Saturday, April 22nd from 6:00pm - 9:00pm. The Paul Kopeikin Gallery is located at 6150 Wilshire Boulevard (just west of Fairfax), Los Angeles, CA 90048. For more information please call 323-937-0765 or visit www.paulkopeikingallery.com.
You have to click the link. I cannot describe it in words. Some may think that torture is a little extreme of a word choice, you may be right but it was all I could come up with.


----------



## Christine&men (Jun 4, 2005)

I would not let anybody take pictures like that !!!

Poor kids.


----------



## Mommy Piadosa (Jul 4, 2005)

You know I try to get crying pics of my kiddos- I like the reality and rawness of it. Until I got to the last sentence I was OK with it.

Quote:

At that age, one needs to merely give them a lollipop and then take it away, et voila - pain and agony
That does seem pretty mean.


----------



## mermommy (Aug 16, 2004)

"Greenberg states, "I manipulate my subjects to evoke an emotion to illustrate my personal beliefs."

"I had to learn the hard way that they had to be no older than three because beyond that they just don't cry so easily," Greenberg explains. "At that age, one needs to merely give them a lollipop and then take it away, et voila - pain and agony."
The shoot took place over the past year in Greenberg's Los Angeles studio, during five separate shoots. "

Do you MAKE your children cry to get those pictures? DO you extend their pain for " just the right shot?" DO you make a child stand there and cry - waiting to be comforted to snap several pictures? Please please let the answers be no...

Pretty mean just doesn't begin to cover this. The children in these shots are being driven to heavy sobbing for some woman's " art" . It's complete BS.

You look at this... just look and tell me that this child DESERVES to stand alone in a studio in front of a drop with lights glaring at them and have NOBODY come to help him/her until the shot is right... http://www.paulkopeikingallery.com/a...s.htm?index=20


----------



## DreamsInDigital (Sep 18, 2003)

That is horrible.


----------



## Mommy Piadosa (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mermommy*
Do you MAKE your children cry to get those pictures? DO you extend their pain for " just the right shot?" DO you make a child stand there and cry - waiting to be comforted to snap several pictures? Please please let the answers be no...

Dh takes pictures of their faces while I'm already comforting them- or I've gotten a couple on the floor tantrums when they didn't want comfort- or car seat crying when I couldn't take them out.
Dana


----------



## mermommy (Aug 16, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Madre Piadosa*
Dh takes pictures of their faces while I'm already comforting them- or I've gotten a couple on the floor tantrums when they didn't want comfort- or car seat crying when I couldn't take them out.
Dana

That makes all the difference in the world. This woman couldn't bother with naturally occuring pain - she consciously and intentionally causes children mental anguish so she can take and sell their picture. I would suppose that she wouldn't have found so many crying children topless outside of her studio anyway...


----------



## FreeRangeMama (Nov 22, 2001)

What kind of parents sign their kids up for this anyway? I mean, the artist taking the shots is bad enough, but to sign your own precious child up for this kind of thing is inconceivable to me.


----------



## sunnybear (Nov 18, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mermommy*
"Greenberg states, "I manipulate my subjects to evoke an emotion to illustrate my personal beliefs."

I'm afraid to ask what her personal beliefs are.


----------



## IamCoupongirl (Jan 3, 2003)

Those pictures broke my heart.


----------



## rachelmarie (Mar 21, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IamCoupongirl*
Those pictures broke my heart.

Me, too.


----------



## pumpkinsmama (Aug 20, 2005)

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...=1#post4945446

The News and Current Events thread that sparked this one off.

So, who lives in LA and wants to organize a protest???


----------



## Emmama (Jan 21, 2004)

What can people who don't live in LA do?? This is beyond sick. Nobody in their right mind would torture children, take their picture of it, and call it art.....selling for 4,500.00 a pic.

The woman needs serious help.....so do the parents.


----------



## mama-meg (Nov 30, 2003)

I don't understand why anyone would want evidence of some child's extreme anguish. How horrible would it be to be forced into that state of mind and then, vunerable and alone have someone take your picture. That site is heartbreaking.


----------



## pumpkinsmama (Aug 20, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Emmama*
What can people who don't live in LA do?? This is beyond sick. Nobody in their right mind would torture children, take their picture of it, and call it art.....selling for 4,500.00 a pic.

The woman needs serious help.....so do the parents.

If you follow the link to the News and Current Events thread, some of those mamas are calling and emailing to protest.


----------



## Kia74 (Feb 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama*
What kind of parents sign their kids up for this anyway? I mean, the artist taking the shots is bad enough, but to sign your own precious child up for this kind of thing is inconceivable to me.

I agree 100%

Where are all the people who were outraged by Sally Mann's work? BTW Does anyone know what she is doing currently? Now that I have kids her work is even more compelling to me

Take Care


----------



## rozzie'sma (Jul 6, 2005)

I don't understand what kind of parent let's their child be treated like that. It makes my stomach turn. When Rozzie gets hurt all I want to do is hold her, rock her, nurse her. Wow.


----------



## moonrosebud (Dec 6, 2005)

Another quote from Greenburg's website

"I love the raw emotion of children, because it comes close to the anger and helplessness I feel about our current political and social situation."

Seems to me she wouldn't have to go very far out in the world to take pictures of children in real distress - but to manipulate children INTO distress to recreate her own feelings is unforgivable!








:


----------



## hypnohobbit (Feb 16, 2006)

We see enough torture and anguish in the world today.

Let's see some unstoppable smiles or something, let's see unending joy, unhelpable perma-grins.

This is sad, she could've accomplished the same with paintings, too bad that didn't strike her.

http://www.paulkopeikingallery.com/a...ks.htm?index=1

I have never seen my son this sad, poor thing is looking for comfort in himself.

These children look broken and vulnerable standing helplessy forced into these bright lights. Shame someone would want to exploit children.


----------



## InfoisPower (Nov 21, 2001)

This so called artist in my opinion has her head up her arse, to not be able to feel these children's very real pain and anguish. Get her a protocologist's appointment, stat!


----------



## lula (Feb 26, 2003)

Well these pictures show raw emotion all right; the raw emotion of a self-centered "artist" who is willing to exploit kids. I am sorry but taking off a child's shirt giving them a treat, grabbing it away and then taking their picture, WTF!

What is the child to think while the camera is just snapping away?

I for one, wish to show her a little of my raw emotion...but what else can I do to be productive...I will be in LA this weekend maybe a demonstration is in order...I can't even imagine what my 5 year old dd would think if she saw these pictures.


----------



## lioralourie (Aug 22, 2004)

this is twisted, a complete lack of goodness.

it's emotional voyeurism, requiring emotional distancing

plus it celebrates the a certain perverse callousness...of society to suffering, especially children's

my tummy hurts now.


----------



## mijumom (Feb 28, 2004)

I sent an e-mail. How gross. And I love most art, provocative included. That just sucks.


----------



## thunderkitty (Sep 15, 2005)

I thought their were laws about nude photos of children. Walmart won't even develop HOME naked photos after a kid is 1 year old where I live. I mean just home family funny or cute photos, come on, it's okay for this sicko to make thousands for their sadness?! I would have imagined when there are profits involved there would also be additional laws for this kind of stuff. It amazes me that something so innappropriate would be allowed for profits. I for one do NOT think it should be. Now I know the artist is obviously crazy as ever but, now imagine the people BUYING these pictures, what do you think thier motives or intentions will be. I for one think it would end up being someone even sicker then her (starts with ped and ends in phile)







and I would perfer not explain any further, except to say ICK!!!


----------



## moonrosebud (Dec 6, 2005)

thunderkitty- I thought there were laws about nude photos of children. Walmart won't even develop HOME naked photos after a kid is 1 year old where I live.
[/QUOTE said:


> I thought of this too. As a phd student studying human interaction through video (cue disciplines like anthropology and linguistics), there is much discussion about when nudity occurs in natural daily interaction and the appropriateness to show such publically through our research.....we have to get permission from the Board for the Protection of Human Subjects to collect the video in the first place, and permission from the parents and children that participate.
> Does this so-called artist get the permission from the parents of these children??? The mind boggles...
> Having said that, nudity in itself is not a horrible thing, of course. But these pictures of nude children in distress only highlights their vulnerability...
> and borders on a kind of pornography in my opinion.
> ...


----------



## hypnohobbit (Feb 16, 2006)

Quote:

I for one, wish to show her a little of my raw emotion
laughup







:





















-my sentiments exactly!


----------



## hypnohobbit (Feb 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thunderkitty*
I thought their were laws about nude photos of children.

Now I know the artist is obviously crazy as ever but, now imagine the people BUYING these pictures, what do you think thier motives or intentions will be. I for one think it would end up being someone even sicker then her (starts with ped and ends in phile)







and I would perfer not explain any further, except to say ICK!!!

You are sooo right! What are these people thinking exploiting their children! And then what happens to their naked crying pictures? Isn't that exactly what those sick perverts mentioned above *like* to see? What happens if a local pedo gets ahold of one of these photos and then sees the child in the grocery store, or at the park? They are all pretty local right? How sick!

I pray these children will not suffer any more from these photos!


----------



## Celtain (Mar 10, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FreeRangeMama*
What kind of parents sign their kids up for this anyway? I mean, the artist taking the shots is bad enough, but to sign your own precious child up for this kind of thing is inconceivable to me.

Exactly!!!! Where does this person get her models? What kind of parent would allow this to happen to their child???


----------



## Lisalee2 (Dec 12, 2001)

OMG. Horrible. I live in LA and wonder if anyone is planning a demonstration.


----------



## thunderkitty (Sep 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lisalee2*
OMG. Horrible. I live in LA and wonder if anyone is planning a demonstration.

You can always start one yourelf.







It only takes one motivated person to start a good demonstration.


----------



## folaboye (May 21, 2004)

OMG! I checked the link now not a good sight at all. It's horrible!

Something needs to be done on it.


----------



## Finch (Mar 4, 2005)

Please do something. I live on the east coast, but those pictures made me physically ill to look at. It's abusive and horrible. It's glorifying child abuse. It makes me nauseous.


----------



## nikisager (Oct 25, 2005)

The worst part is, going by as red as these poor little ones faces are, they had to cry for quite a while to get the shot they wanted.......


----------



## nikisager (Oct 25, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Celtain*
Exactly!!!! Where does this person get her models? What kind of parent would allow this to happen to their child???










*It is scarey what people will do to there kids for money...*


----------



## Greensleeves (Aug 4, 2004)

I don't think this is art in any way, shape or form. I think when children, helpless trusting children, are being made to suffer it is not art. The thing is, I think this lady would be very pleased with all the debate this is causing and the publicity she could potentially get. She will point to all of it and say, see, that is art because I am raising strong emotions in people. (Of course, one should ask, why did she not use adults who actually did care about the "issues" and have real feelings and emotions they could display about them?)

Anyway, my point is that a protest would attract more attention to this lady, get more people stirred up, give her tons of free publicity, and possibly more people would buy this "art" _because_ it has caused all this controversy.







:


----------



## thunderkitty (Sep 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Greensleeves*
(Of course, one should ask, why did she not use adults who actually did care about the "issues" and have real feelings and emotions they could display about them?)

If you read her website she sort of matter of factly states how "portraits are under three years old. I had to learn the hard way that they had to be no older than three because beyond that they just don't cry so easily" and then goes on to say "At that age, one needs to merely give them a lollipop and then take it away, et voila - pain and agony."

Why doesn't she pick on someone her own size,ay? They aren't easy enough to aggravate what a great excuse.


----------



## BeeandOwlsMum (Jul 11, 2002)

There is a thread discussing this in N&CE. This thread should be about ways to take action against what this photog is doing.







If you wish to discuss, head on over to N&CE.


----------



## pumpkinsmama (Aug 20, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pumpkinsmama*
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...=1#post4945446

The News and Current Events thread that sparked this one off.

So, who lives in LA and wants to organize a protest???
















Just reposting the link for anyone who wants it!


----------



## TigerTail (Dec 22, 2002)

and what snippy snide little titles- 'shock' & 'awe', 'nucular- sic' (really? me not know that, me not bright like artist), 'grand old party', 'four more years', 'rapture' etc. how about one called 'chimpy w hitler' (or did i miss that one)?

i am not a republican (to say the least- though i am a christian), but how offensive- she tortured children as a political/anti-religious statement.

i don't respect this kind of 'rhetoric'. argue with me, explain, tell me your pov; but this is cruel & immature, & i would like to take away all her candy (and take her picture).


----------



## mijumom (Feb 28, 2004)

I actually got a reponse from the gallery owner when I sent him an email. He accused me of having a "Rebublican view of art".








It was so fun informing him that I am a liberal crunchy bush-hater who loves all art, even provocative art but that I was so distracted by the knowledge that the production of this contrived "art" entailed tormenting young children that I couldn't even have an experience of it as art. If you want to exhibit two adults defecating on eachother, go for it but don't mess with children!!!!

He didn't respond this time.


----------



## TigerTail (Dec 22, 2002)

you didn't fit into his box, miju. people get uncomfortable when their stereotypes are challenged. you thought bush is an a-hole, but yet disparaged her 'art'? does not compute.

(that is my proplem with the coopting of the word 'liberal'; by definition he should be willing to open his mind to your pov! well, there are stupid attitudes on all sides of the political spectrum.)


----------



## mijumom (Feb 28, 2004)

My point was that I'm the furthest thing from a Republican (at least the stereotype that he was using). So, it was fun to be able to say who I am and what my general beliefs are and that as liberal (opposite of Bush) as I am, I still found it offensive. Granted, I don't think most Republicans share Bush's values so you're right that it was a kind of irrelevant point on my part. It was just fun to throw it in because I'm sure I'm more politically aligned with the artist and the gallery owner than he was assuming. And, it could be a criticsm given without all of him easy rationalizing it because, again, I'm really open to provocative art.

I just re-read your post and just got it.


----------

