BYU censors portraits of gay students ....

[_Runtu]

Bad news for Droopy: BYU put the exhibit back up.

http://jmichaelwiltbank.blogspot.com/20 ... pdate.html

[_Mike Reed]

So what does that make droopy now? A critic of BYU?

[_wenglund]

Wasn't this an art exhibit? Isn't the purpose of an art exhibit to exhibit your art? If his art has an ideological and personal agenda, shouldn't he have a right to display it at an art exhibit?

Where did you get the absurd notion that because anyone or everyone creates something they call "art", this somehow obliges (by way of the "artist's" supposed "right") the art exhibitor to exibit anyone and eveyone's art?

If there is a right, I would think it would be the exhibitors right to decide what to shown in THEIR exhibit. And, for those who are even the least bit familiar with art exhibits, it is near universal that the people who organize the exhit choose which artists and which art pieces are exhibited.

Doesn't most art have an ideological and personal agenda? You make it sound as if the purpose of this art exhibit is to display art that promotes the missions and purposes of the University. I am so glad I attended a regular University with art exhibits that displayed art promiting the artists ideological and personal agendas.

So, to your way of "thinking", it is okay for artists to promote their ideology and agenda, but it is not okay for the people in charge of the exhibits to promote their ideology and agenda?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_harmony]

So, to your way of "thinking", it is okay for artists to promote their ideology and agenda, but it is not okay for the people in charge of the exhibits to promote their ideology and agenda?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

BYU was within its rights to pull the exhibit. It is also within its rights to reinstate it.

[_Pokatator]

In my opinion, the problem Coggins7 and BYU has with this exhibit is that they can't tell who is gay and who is not from the pictures. They have an identity crisis on their hands. The exhibit has humanized the gays. Coggie and BYU have a stereotypical view of what a gay looks like and how they behave, the exhibit has shaken that paradigm of theirs and they are reacting.

They are like the rapist or the molester that can perpetrate a crime against someone as long as they can see the victim as an object. As long as the victim is an uncaring, unhuman, unfeeling object, in the perp's eyes then there is no penalty, no crime, no harm, no foul. The perp doesn't have to acknowledge that the victim exists.

But if you humanize the victim then the perp has to think about consequences and make different judgements and choices. Coggins can't visualize that gays are human, or they aren't ugly, or caring, or have feelings or don't have warts and horns and whatever his mental image is. The exhibit has shaken his world view a little and he should be cut some slack here. In fact he is so pathetic I pity him.

[_Trevor]

Bad news for Droopy: BYU put the exhibit back up.

http://jmichaelwiltbank.blogspot.com/20 ... pdate.html

It's good to see that the folks at BYU came to their senses.

[_Analytics]

I do think the Church expects these people not to talk about it to anyone except in the strictest confidence (probably a counselor) and not to demonstrate it to the public in any way. In other words it's an aberant desire that should always be repressed both now and in eternity. ...

It's a lot harder to get married if you're poor or ugly. I'm poor, but I still don't feel the same attraction for ugly women that I do pretty ones. It's just not natural. Too bad says the church.

What the...? Your post is hysterical, Ajax. I could only write that if I was piss drunk or stoned, which happens to be very expensive in NYC. So you're saying that same sex attraction is like ugly girl attraction: it's just not natural....

I think what he's saying is that being gay is like being attracted to beautiful women when you are a poor, ugly man who can't have one. You can't have what you are attracted to. Too bad says the church!

This reminds me of a crazy old branch president of mine who in a roundabout way would talk about how much he couldn’t stand his ugly wife, but about how he had faith that after the resurrection, she’d be young and beautiful again and then he’d again feel attracted to her. The glories of Celestial love!

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Bad news for Droopy: BYU put the exhibit back up.

http://jmichaelwiltbank.blogspot.com/20 ... pdate.html

I hate being right all the time. ;)

[_SatanWasSetUp]

Wasn't this an art exhibit? Isn't the purpose of an art exhibit to exhibit your art? If his art has an ideological and personal agenda, shouldn't he have a right to display it at an art exhibit?

Where did you get the absurd notion that because anyone or everyone creates something they call "art", this somehow obliges (by way of the "artist's" supposed "right") the art exhibitor to exibit anyone and eveyone's art?

If there is a right, I would think it would be the exhibitors right to decide what to shown in THEIR exhibit. And, for those who are even the least bit familiar with art exhibits, it is near universal that the people who organize the exhit choose which artists and which art pieces are exhibited.

Doesn't most art have an ideological and personal agenda? You make it sound as if the purpose of this art exhibit is to display art that promotes the missions and purposes of the University. I am so glad I attended a regular University with art exhibits that displayed art promiting the artists ideological and personal agendas.

So, to your way of "thinking", it is okay for artists to promote their ideology and agenda, but it is not okay for the people in charge of the exhibits to promote their ideology and agenda?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It looks as if the exhibitors put the display back up because they decided it did not violate the honor code. Good for BYU.

[_Trevor]

It looks as if the exhibitors put the display back up because they decided it did not violate the honor code. Good for BYU.

Proving once again the tenacity of the old BYU adage about art: when in doubt, yank it out. If no sin, put it back in.