Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rausch
Good point, guess I put that wrong.
Should we kill black people to show why killing black people is wrong?
Gay people?
Kids?...
|
No, which is why I don't think the nudity in this would have to be there. Brokeback Mountain had a scene I would consider as vivid as you can get, and yet without showing an ounce of nudity. But to pan away is lame, IMO. This could be done without showing nudity, while still making the viewer cringe at what they see and experience the full spectrum of emotion involved.
I think also you have to put yourself into the mind of an actor or actress. I don't think she's old enough to understand the repercussions of something like this to herself and to her career, but at the same time people who make a living out of this form of artwork feel compelled to tell the story of others (fictional or real) as accurately as possible.
Honestly if she was 16 I wouldn't see a problem with it. Even though its still illegal a 16 year old has a much better understanding of the world enough to be able to take a role such as this and understand what its all about.
But then again, for all we know she has had a history of sexual abuse and feels she needs to do this because she's in a place where she can. There's too many variables to say its right or wrong, though I lean towards the latter anytime a 12 year old is subjected to any sort of sexuality, implied or not.
Moooo