From: Ben Barton (email suppressed)
Date: Mon Sep 14 2009 - 01:10:50 PDT
> the problem arises when (mostly white guys) get off on children
What a sweeping, racist assumption. Exactly what this has to do with ANYTHING, let alone Stan's film, is beyond me.
Sorry to be so "off topic" - but I'm sick of 'Cari' clogging-up my inbox with this drivel.
Ben Barton
Roundeye Films
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cari Machet" <email suppressed>
> To: email suppressed
> Subject: Re: Looking for prints to screen / From JONAS
> Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 19:10:29 -0400
>
>
> oh my alla
> who defined sexuality as lack of innocence?
> childhood erections are sexual
> little girls have orgasms
> these are facts
> NATURAL
> the problem arises when (mostly white guys) get off on children
> period
> children are sexual beings
> so are dogs and birds and...
> denial of this is stupid
> (perhaps this is part of the conversation stan was having in the film)
> i would say there is a huge psych problem if a child is not sexual
>
> as far as jonas's denial - i don't buy it
> i have direct experience with him being - dare i say prudish - about
> someones 'sexual' film
> but whatever who cares really
> he supported it or he didn't
> he voted it into essential cinema or he didn't
> why does that matter so much?
> what is important is stan - i am sure he pulled it for a reason
> well beyond jonas's reaction - if any
> why is jonas a factor even in something about stan?
> this is hierarchical (and perhaps patriarchal) in a weird direction
>
>
>
>
> cari machet
> nyc 347-298-9818
> AIM carismachet
> email suppressed
> http://tiny.cc/bbvCR
> Skype carimachet - 646-652-6434
> Syria +963-099 277 3243
> Amman +962 077 636 9407
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Jim Carlile <email suppressed> wrote:
>
> > In a message dated 9/12/2009 10:30:26 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> > email suppressed writes:
> >
> > Have you actually seen the Brakhage films under consideration here?
> > These films do not show child sex, but they also do not just show
> > totally "innocent" nudity of the beach-snapshot variety. In "Song 9,"
> > for example, there is a little boy with an erection. When I showed
> > this film in a small town in Connecticut in 1967, it elicited a very
> > angry response from an, um, older matron.
> >
> > Childhood erections are not sexual. They're innocent. And in the past,
> > general child nudity was never considered to be sexual unless it was overt.
> > Nowadays it is. If anyone is considering Brakhage's film to be child porn,
> > then this is a fairly recent development (I'm not sure anyone is, but don't
> > get them started...)
> >
> > It's because of this that I doubt Mekas or others condemned the film at the
> > time.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > __________________________________________________________________ For info
> > on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>
-- An Excellent Credit Score is 750 See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! __________________________________________________________________ For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.