RE: oh, well ?

Socrates used to open the young's mind: he got executed for that ( well, as far as history tells us, but we know it might have been for some other reasons ( conflict of interest perhaps )

Should we suppose the official reasons of the power's decision was to not disturb public order.

In your case, I suppose that you would be opening these young minds with your nudity art.

But should you consider these are Christians ( born again or strong believers, we don't care... ), you would be disturbing their "order" and beliefs.

In a more pragmatic way, maybe the teacher, whom I supposed is sympathetic to you and your philosophy
and the fact that your not afraid of prejudice and judgement, is afraid herself to get into trouble ( fired or suid by parents ) with the nudity content if ever some kids naivelly report your performance to their very christian parents...

May I suggest you consider collaborating with university teachers instead, or at least, liberal and laic organisations ?

You just can't beat endoctrinated children/young teenagers, Frank: like in the "Matrix" movie, if they knew allready how much their mind could open, and how reality really is ( even if we undertstand only portion of it ), they would certainlly take the blue pill. And even if you force or trick them into taking the red pill, too many would regret and rather return to their state of "sheep", sleepwalking in the illusions of doctrines. In other words, they might be easier targets because their minds are constructing and of their innocence, but in my opinion, they would also be more fragile.

To us, fighting the system and enlightening ourselves and others is honorable and exiting; To them, ignorance is bliss.

Don't mellow your position Frank, reach out to our potential allies instead, so that we can outnumber them at last;

In freedom of thought we stand in the face of this new centurie's pluralist totalitarianism, but should be aware of not falling into that game by our position: we have no other choice but to see ourselves in opposition to "them", but should seek the opportunity to band with those who nourish the same hopes as us, may it be on different battlefields and with complementary view points.

Rafael ( sorry for the revolutionnary poetry, but you know I like that and I got more and more possesed as I've gone through with my text )

* * * * *

it is more a case of "self-censorship "... The most dangerous kind of censorship... And the most common kind also.


In Freedom,
Frank Moore

* * * * *

Hey Frank,

Well, if you don't wan't to start in that path, choose other targets: you shoudn't have to censor your convictions unless for purposes of protection, and even then, you have to fool them into believing you have censored yourself and choose that path ;)

Rafael

* * * * *

well, I always thought censorship, and especially self-censorship, is anti-art, to put it nicely. And self-censorship is shooting your own foot, a shitty form of "protection." and there's no such thing as self-censorship. You are censoring the art, censoring the audience, censoring reality. And you are promoting censoring, making censoring easier and more "reasonable "/"acceptable." my policy is they will have to do the censoring and I will expose them... Which is one of the functions of the job of being an artist.

In Freedom,
Frank Moore