base_nz 0 #51 July 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote> And i stiil want to know where the appropriate place is to hang a big picture of a fully naked slightly suggestive 12 year old girl!This is the part the keep being overlooked, YOU think it's Slightly suggestive. that mirrors more your moral preachings than it does an inanimate object. Because that's ALL it is it is an inanimate object that people place morals and opinions on. It has no real suggestiveness, the qualities of the image are ONLY those that PEOPLE (you) put on it. so by that definition there are no sexually suggestive pictures of children......bullshit.... Have you actually seen the pictures that got taken from the gallery? got no problem with nudity at all and the suggestive the better if your 18 0r over . My porn collection is also fairly impressive....... But my point is i know NOONE who, If i had one of the more suggestive ones on my wall, wouldnt look at me when they walked in my house like i was a bit weird....and i definitely wouldn't be getting any if i bought home a date to look at my artwork.... like i have said before a lot of his work is pretty good ... but there HAS to be a line..... there are sickos out there.....And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #52 July 16, 2008 Squeak: As an educator and a mandated reporter under the law, what would you do if presented with a photo of one of your students in this sort of situation. Actual question. Would you be mandated to report this as a potential abuse situation? What about the consequences if you do NOT report it and it is discovered that you knew about it? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites VanillaSkyGirl 6 #53 July 16, 2008 As a person who has a Bachelors' degree from an art college and has drawn hundreds of pictures of many female and male models of various sizes, shapes, ages, I have found none of this to be a sexual experience in any way. Yes, I have drawn a man's penis or a female's breasts and vagina. No, this did not change the picture into a sexual one. As I drew each figure or each pose, I tried to capture the essence of the person and his or her mood, as well as what I visually saw in front of me. I understand that it's the age of the models that is disturbing to many, but I don't think that a nude child or person is a sexual image. I glanced at some of the photos...they did seem ethereal to me. Some of them also seemed a little dark. I am sure that there is a story in the collection. Without seeing the whole thing as the artist would have wanted it to be seen, we cannot make a judgement about what the statement was of this particular show. I personally find that age (12-13) to be beautiful and awkward at the same time. These girls look like little nymphs, sweet fawns. I remember this age well. It's the stage when a girl is in between worlds, when she is caught between being a young girl and turning into a young woman. The only bit of natural "sexuality" in using girl's of this age might be perceived sexuality, due to the onset of the physical changes of a girl's body. Yet, as a female who remembers being that age, I did not think of my body as sexual at that age. I was aware of changes, but I did not fully realize what this meant to the outside world. To me, using a young girl's nudity might be an expression of vulnerability, not her sexuality. Her true essence is in transition from a little girl duckling into a beautiful swan, someday. It's the shift of the child's innocence that is a little scary, perhaps? The fact that this has caused a debate of this nature is telling of how instinctively protective we are of our youth, which is not a bad thing. We fear those who will look and see something evil in something as innately beautiful as a young girl's nude vulnerability and innocence. Would people feel differently about the artwork if the artist was a female? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #54 July 16, 2008 QuoteSqueak: As an educator and a mandated reporter under the law, what would you do if presented with a photo of one of your students in this sort of situation. Actual question. Would you be mandated to report this as a potential abuse situation? What about the consequences if you do NOT report it and it is discovered that you knew about it? If one of my students were in any of those pictures, the first thing i would do is talk to the student, and parent to ascertain that mutual consent was given for the student to model. If all was well then i would say, congrats, you and the photographer make some very cool images.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jenfly00 0 #55 July 16, 2008 QuoteMy porn collection is also fairly impressive....... I sincerely don't intend this as a personal slap, but I'm wondering if there is any connection between amassing a "fairly impressive" porn collection and sexualizing the photos in question.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base_nz 0 #56 July 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteMy porn collection is also fairly impressive....... I sincerely don't intend this as a personal slap, but I'm wondering if there is any connection between amassing a "fairly impressive" porn collection and sexualizing the photos in question. just didnt want you to get the wrong impression after you said i was preaching morals.........And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 370 #57 July 16, 2008 Quote Is it art or pornography to exhibit photographs of naked 12- and 13- year-old girls? Quote Call it either, it's illegal. It's also pretty sick. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base_nz 0 #58 July 16, 2008 I do find a huge difference in painting, sculpting and drawing these sort of images compared to photography.....im not sure if thats weird or not?. And i didnt have a problem with the majority of his work just a few pictures that i thought where a bit over the top. Not trying to preach though....and funnily enough it was a woman who decided to do the photo shoot of her 12 year old. I guess trying to show exactly what you have just described......And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #59 July 16, 2008 Quote Quote Is it art or pornography to exhibit photographs of naked 12- and 13- year-old girls? Quote Call it either, it's illegal. It's also pretty sick. No it's notYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #60 July 16, 2008 Quote I do find a huge difference in painting, sculpting and drawing these sort of images compared to photography.....im not sure if thats weird or not?. This is a common judgment by people who think photography is not an art form. it take just as much skill (although sometimes a different type) to produce good artistic photos, as it does a good painting. it's like comparing stick figures to a Van GoughYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base_nz 0 #61 July 16, 2008 What????...so you take great stick figures?.....congratulations! I know it can be an art form....for me though... i guess its a lot easier to take a great tandem PHOTO ....Rather than a great tandem PAINTING???......... Who knows, i just know that for some reason if those pictures that where a bit borderline had been paintings i probably wouldnt have a problem at all.....its weird........And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #62 July 16, 2008 Quote fir enough....I just know its easier to take an amazing Tandem photo... then it is to draw it not if you are an artist who works with charcoal or paint and does not skydiveYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ianmdrennan 2 #63 July 16, 2008 Rosa, Thanks for that well thought out perspective. Blues, Ian Performance Designs Factory Team Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #64 July 16, 2008 QuoteWho knows, i just know that for some reason if those pictures that where a bit borderline had been paintings i probably wouldnt have a problem at all.....its weird... the weird thing here is that you dont seem to understand that the issue is with YOU not the photos. The issue is with how you perceive them images.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Butters 0 #65 July 16, 2008 You can't yell fire in a crowded theater (unless there is a fire) because your right to freedom of speech doesn't justify the potential harm to others. So, given the content and potential harm to others can the "art" justify it's existence?"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #66 July 16, 2008 QuoteYou can't yell fire in a crowded theater (unless there is a fire) because your right to freedom of speech doesn't justify the potential harm to others. So, given the content and potential harm to others can the "art" justify it's existence? well it obviously does here in Australia. The USofA has very prudish standards by Australian, and European standards.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base_nz 0 #67 July 16, 2008 . the weird thing here is that you dont seem to understand that the issue is with YOU not the photos. The issue is with how you perceive them images. Guilty as charged suggestive pictures of naked 12 year old girls doesn't do it for me....so if thats a problem I have i guess its one i can live with.... ....cheers for the concern though........And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Botellines 0 #68 July 16, 2008 QuoteWho knows, i just know that for some reason if those pictures that where a bit borderline had been paintings i probably wouldnt have a problem at all.....its weird... I don´t know why some people think the issue is the form of art that representations where delivered, and not the representation itself. The issue here is if the girl consented to, the family consented to, if the girl was not made felt unconfortable, if she was aware that her schoolmates may end up seeing her naked and all those things that may affect the well being of the child. Wether it is a picture or a painting or a sculpture is irrelevant. What about if she had her breast and her private parts covered with her hands? It may not offend you then but she still would have had to pose naked in front of a stranger. So if it was okay with the model and no harm was done, then i think it is alright. Just for the record, i personally do not like those pictures that much because I hate any kind of so called art that involves provoking the audience. And using a 12 years old girl model is surely going to provoke many people. It is like getting cheap publicity. Just my opinion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #69 July 16, 2008 Quote . the weird thing here is that you dont seem to understand that the issue is with YOU not the photos. The issue is with how you perceive them images. Guilty as charged suggestive pictures of naked 12 year old girls doesn't do it for me....so if thats a problem I have i guess its one i can live with.... ... Nice try, but you're still the judgmental oneYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base_nz 0 #70 July 16, 2008 ... But the arguments your making are the same a pedophile would make if he was caught with pictures.... At some stage doesn't someone have to be judgmental??...And where do you draw the line???.....And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #71 July 16, 2008 Quote... But the arguments your making are the same a pedophile would make if he was caught with pictures.... At some stage doesn't someone have to be judgmental??...And where do you draw the line??? I dont draw the line, that's what the judicial system is for. The Maplethorpe exhibition, and the Piss Christ exhibition both caused outrage throughout a whole range of demographics. I have no problem with either of themYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Butters 0 #72 July 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteYou can't yell fire in a crowded theater (unless there is a fire) because your right to freedom of speech doesn't justify the potential harm to others. So, given the content and potential harm to others can the "art" justify it's existence? well it obviously does here in Australia. So how does Australia justify the "art" given the content and potential harm? QuoteThe USofA has very prudish standards by Australian, and European standards. Do you believe that the issue regarding the "art" is based more on prudishness than the content and potential harm?"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Butters 0 #73 July 16, 2008 Quote I dont draw the line, that's what the judicial system is for. So you allow your government to draw the line for you and then accept without question the line ... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 370 #74 July 16, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Is it art or pornography to exhibit photographs of naked 12- and 13- year-old girls? Quote Call it either, it's illegal. It's also pretty sick. No it's not Maybe not where you come from.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #75 July 16, 2008 Quote Quote I dont draw the line, that's what the judicial system is for. So you allow your government to draw the line for you and then accept without question the line ... no if I question my government i do it at the polls. as to your previous post. acceptable societal standards are set by the people, and reviewed and reassessed over time. what i find offensive is apparently different to what you find offensive. Given that here in Australia the pictures in question are not considered pornography, (in a court of law) and actually some of which appear in our National Gallery, I will take it as read that at least our society in general accepts the pictures as art. Your society may not, based on the standards set by your people. But given that in the popular free to air media in the USofA you cant say Nigga, or show butt crack without it being blurred out, I would hazard to say that yes your country is more prudish than mine and many others in Western modern societyYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 3 of 6 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
lawrocket 3 #52 July 16, 2008 Squeak: As an educator and a mandated reporter under the law, what would you do if presented with a photo of one of your students in this sort of situation. Actual question. Would you be mandated to report this as a potential abuse situation? What about the consequences if you do NOT report it and it is discovered that you knew about it? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VanillaSkyGirl 6 #53 July 16, 2008 As a person who has a Bachelors' degree from an art college and has drawn hundreds of pictures of many female and male models of various sizes, shapes, ages, I have found none of this to be a sexual experience in any way. Yes, I have drawn a man's penis or a female's breasts and vagina. No, this did not change the picture into a sexual one. As I drew each figure or each pose, I tried to capture the essence of the person and his or her mood, as well as what I visually saw in front of me. I understand that it's the age of the models that is disturbing to many, but I don't think that a nude child or person is a sexual image. I glanced at some of the photos...they did seem ethereal to me. Some of them also seemed a little dark. I am sure that there is a story in the collection. Without seeing the whole thing as the artist would have wanted it to be seen, we cannot make a judgement about what the statement was of this particular show. I personally find that age (12-13) to be beautiful and awkward at the same time. These girls look like little nymphs, sweet fawns. I remember this age well. It's the stage when a girl is in between worlds, when she is caught between being a young girl and turning into a young woman. The only bit of natural "sexuality" in using girl's of this age might be perceived sexuality, due to the onset of the physical changes of a girl's body. Yet, as a female who remembers being that age, I did not think of my body as sexual at that age. I was aware of changes, but I did not fully realize what this meant to the outside world. To me, using a young girl's nudity might be an expression of vulnerability, not her sexuality. Her true essence is in transition from a little girl duckling into a beautiful swan, someday. It's the shift of the child's innocence that is a little scary, perhaps? The fact that this has caused a debate of this nature is telling of how instinctively protective we are of our youth, which is not a bad thing. We fear those who will look and see something evil in something as innately beautiful as a young girl's nude vulnerability and innocence. Would people feel differently about the artwork if the artist was a female? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #54 July 16, 2008 QuoteSqueak: As an educator and a mandated reporter under the law, what would you do if presented with a photo of one of your students in this sort of situation. Actual question. Would you be mandated to report this as a potential abuse situation? What about the consequences if you do NOT report it and it is discovered that you knew about it? If one of my students were in any of those pictures, the first thing i would do is talk to the student, and parent to ascertain that mutual consent was given for the student to model. If all was well then i would say, congrats, you and the photographer make some very cool images.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenfly00 0 #55 July 16, 2008 QuoteMy porn collection is also fairly impressive....... I sincerely don't intend this as a personal slap, but I'm wondering if there is any connection between amassing a "fairly impressive" porn collection and sexualizing the photos in question.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base_nz 0 #56 July 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteMy porn collection is also fairly impressive....... I sincerely don't intend this as a personal slap, but I'm wondering if there is any connection between amassing a "fairly impressive" porn collection and sexualizing the photos in question. just didnt want you to get the wrong impression after you said i was preaching morals.........And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #57 July 16, 2008 Quote Is it art or pornography to exhibit photographs of naked 12- and 13- year-old girls? Quote Call it either, it's illegal. It's also pretty sick. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base_nz 0 #58 July 16, 2008 I do find a huge difference in painting, sculpting and drawing these sort of images compared to photography.....im not sure if thats weird or not?. And i didnt have a problem with the majority of his work just a few pictures that i thought where a bit over the top. Not trying to preach though....and funnily enough it was a woman who decided to do the photo shoot of her 12 year old. I guess trying to show exactly what you have just described......And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #59 July 16, 2008 Quote Quote Is it art or pornography to exhibit photographs of naked 12- and 13- year-old girls? Quote Call it either, it's illegal. It's also pretty sick. No it's notYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #60 July 16, 2008 Quote I do find a huge difference in painting, sculpting and drawing these sort of images compared to photography.....im not sure if thats weird or not?. This is a common judgment by people who think photography is not an art form. it take just as much skill (although sometimes a different type) to produce good artistic photos, as it does a good painting. it's like comparing stick figures to a Van GoughYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base_nz 0 #61 July 16, 2008 What????...so you take great stick figures?.....congratulations! I know it can be an art form....for me though... i guess its a lot easier to take a great tandem PHOTO ....Rather than a great tandem PAINTING???......... Who knows, i just know that for some reason if those pictures that where a bit borderline had been paintings i probably wouldnt have a problem at all.....its weird........And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #62 July 16, 2008 Quote fir enough....I just know its easier to take an amazing Tandem photo... then it is to draw it not if you are an artist who works with charcoal or paint and does not skydiveYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ianmdrennan 2 #63 July 16, 2008 Rosa, Thanks for that well thought out perspective. Blues, Ian Performance Designs Factory Team Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #64 July 16, 2008 QuoteWho knows, i just know that for some reason if those pictures that where a bit borderline had been paintings i probably wouldnt have a problem at all.....its weird... the weird thing here is that you dont seem to understand that the issue is with YOU not the photos. The issue is with how you perceive them images.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #65 July 16, 2008 You can't yell fire in a crowded theater (unless there is a fire) because your right to freedom of speech doesn't justify the potential harm to others. So, given the content and potential harm to others can the "art" justify it's existence?"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #66 July 16, 2008 QuoteYou can't yell fire in a crowded theater (unless there is a fire) because your right to freedom of speech doesn't justify the potential harm to others. So, given the content and potential harm to others can the "art" justify it's existence? well it obviously does here in Australia. The USofA has very prudish standards by Australian, and European standards.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base_nz 0 #67 July 16, 2008 . the weird thing here is that you dont seem to understand that the issue is with YOU not the photos. The issue is with how you perceive them images. Guilty as charged suggestive pictures of naked 12 year old girls doesn't do it for me....so if thats a problem I have i guess its one i can live with.... ....cheers for the concern though........And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #68 July 16, 2008 QuoteWho knows, i just know that for some reason if those pictures that where a bit borderline had been paintings i probably wouldnt have a problem at all.....its weird... I don´t know why some people think the issue is the form of art that representations where delivered, and not the representation itself. The issue here is if the girl consented to, the family consented to, if the girl was not made felt unconfortable, if she was aware that her schoolmates may end up seeing her naked and all those things that may affect the well being of the child. Wether it is a picture or a painting or a sculpture is irrelevant. What about if she had her breast and her private parts covered with her hands? It may not offend you then but she still would have had to pose naked in front of a stranger. So if it was okay with the model and no harm was done, then i think it is alright. Just for the record, i personally do not like those pictures that much because I hate any kind of so called art that involves provoking the audience. And using a 12 years old girl model is surely going to provoke many people. It is like getting cheap publicity. Just my opinion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #69 July 16, 2008 Quote . the weird thing here is that you dont seem to understand that the issue is with YOU not the photos. The issue is with how you perceive them images. Guilty as charged suggestive pictures of naked 12 year old girls doesn't do it for me....so if thats a problem I have i guess its one i can live with.... ... Nice try, but you're still the judgmental oneYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base_nz 0 #70 July 16, 2008 ... But the arguments your making are the same a pedophile would make if he was caught with pictures.... At some stage doesn't someone have to be judgmental??...And where do you draw the line???.....And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #71 July 16, 2008 Quote... But the arguments your making are the same a pedophile would make if he was caught with pictures.... At some stage doesn't someone have to be judgmental??...And where do you draw the line??? I dont draw the line, that's what the judicial system is for. The Maplethorpe exhibition, and the Piss Christ exhibition both caused outrage throughout a whole range of demographics. I have no problem with either of themYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #72 July 16, 2008 QuoteQuoteYou can't yell fire in a crowded theater (unless there is a fire) because your right to freedom of speech doesn't justify the potential harm to others. So, given the content and potential harm to others can the "art" justify it's existence? well it obviously does here in Australia. So how does Australia justify the "art" given the content and potential harm? QuoteThe USofA has very prudish standards by Australian, and European standards. Do you believe that the issue regarding the "art" is based more on prudishness than the content and potential harm?"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #73 July 16, 2008 Quote I dont draw the line, that's what the judicial system is for. So you allow your government to draw the line for you and then accept without question the line ... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #74 July 16, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Is it art or pornography to exhibit photographs of naked 12- and 13- year-old girls? Quote Call it either, it's illegal. It's also pretty sick. No it's not Maybe not where you come from.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #75 July 16, 2008 Quote Quote I dont draw the line, that's what the judicial system is for. So you allow your government to draw the line for you and then accept without question the line ... no if I question my government i do it at the polls. as to your previous post. acceptable societal standards are set by the people, and reviewed and reassessed over time. what i find offensive is apparently different to what you find offensive. Given that here in Australia the pictures in question are not considered pornography, (in a court of law) and actually some of which appear in our National Gallery, I will take it as read that at least our society in general accepts the pictures as art. Your society may not, based on the standards set by your people. But given that in the popular free to air media in the USofA you cant say Nigga, or show butt crack without it being blurred out, I would hazard to say that yes your country is more prudish than mine and many others in Western modern societyYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
