|
Page 2 of 9 pages < 1 2 3 4 > Last › |
Rex D.
|
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 | 11:42 PM
Damn it! I'll get the hang of it someday. |
Suki
|
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 | 11:42 PM
Nothing to do with an artist killing critters so sorry on the off subject comment! But ... talking of singular and plural words. Mouse and House have different spelling by one letter. How come the plural word of mouse is "mice" and the plural term for house is not "hice"? |
Hairy Houdini
|
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 | 11:44 PM
No shortage of rabbits around here. I usually see tracks most every morning in the winter, and I think I may have seen bobcat tracks yesterday, both less than fifty feet from my house. As a matter of fact, a litter of rabbits became quite familiar to me last year, as I accidentally uncovered their warren while mowing. I covered their hole with a couple of boards, and they matured quite nicely. I've taken to leaving tree prunings down on the ground as shelter for them, and feed. I'd prefer they chew on the downed limb bark, than my live trees. I haven't seen as many this year, and the bobcat tracks may have something to do with that. Nothing like the scream of a bobcat, believe me. Scares the bejeezus outta you. |
Myst
|
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 | 12:11 AM
A cougar scream can get your attention to! |
Rex D.
|
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 | 12:11 AM
It should totally be "hice".
|
Hannah
|
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 | 12:29 AM
Crushing up bugs? Native Americans? They eat bugs too. That is like deer, not domesticated animals. People do not have cat heads on the wall. |
Hannah
|
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 | 12:31 AM
P.S. Makeup testing on animals is wrong. |
Rex D.
|
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2004 | 01:26 AM
I think you enhance the cuteness of an animal with a little makeup. Some blush, eyeshadow, painting they're cute little nails, you know, like....nevermind. |
Sabrina P
|
Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2004 | 06:43 AM
How did they fit a person inside the butt of a chicken? :0 |
Hairy Houdini
|
Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2004 | 09:44 PM
simple... little person, big chicken, and a running start |
Rex D.
|
Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2004 | 10:57 PM
They could have pulled it off in the fourth dimension, you can do some really interesting stuff there. |
kim
|
Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 | 02:54 PM
well yes it is all true! she brutally kills the animals as shown in a FHM issue this year she states that she simply throws them away when she is done and doesnt find anything wrong with it seen as the chinese eat dogs. so yes well it people like her that make our world an 'unhealthy' place! |
Rex D.
|
Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 | 03:40 PM
God, I sure hope they at least get to make it up to animal heaven for compensation of their death.
Animal #1: "So what brought you up here?" Animal #2 "Some lady just Had to take some pictures of me. I thought my cuteness was finally paying off. Turns out it was the other way around." |
Hannah
|
Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2004 | 01:03 AM
They test it on animals because if there is something toxic in the makeup they don't think it will be important if they harm the animal, not the human! |
Hannah
|
Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2004 | 01:06 AM
Who would want to look at something perverse like a cat head on a face or some dead fingerpuppets. Ick! Makes me shiver. Grotesque. |
Rex D.
|
Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2004 | 01:15 AM
Marilyn Manson would dig it. |
Lia
|
Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2004 | 02:16 PM
Hey all,
Unfortunately her images are not fake. She is slaughtering (murdering) innocent animals to proove the point that people in our western society has double standards on how we treat our fellow animals. We have them as pets, think they are cute and love them, but still a majority of westeners eat meat and wear leather! I'm a vegetarian, I think it is appauling to kill, whether it's for art, food or clothing. There is no need and Nathalia's aim is futile cause the only people she really enrage (and thus stir emotions in) are the ones that find her actions completely wrongful and immoral!
I would like to see murdered humans on display and hear artists defend the artistic idea behind that!
Nathalia B. must be stopped and killing animals should become a crime in every industrialised country which can provide protein-sources for their citizens in alternative ways.
Peace/Lia
|
Lia
|
Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2004 | 02:26 PM
On one hand Nathalia Edenmont is achieving HER goal though...A very selfish such that she has admitted to...And that is to sell art and to get into galleries. Lots of art people think her ideas and art theory about "dubble standards" are extremely interesting, so interesting that they choose to disregard the way the images were created, as they disregard how the pig they are eating at Christmas was treated. In all this doen't she contradict herself, if the double standards was what she wanted to oppose???
Nathalia is booking galleries all over. DISTURBING! She was charged in Sweden for killing animals in an inhumane way, but could not be prosecuted because of lack of evidence... |
Maegan
|
Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2004 | 03:07 PM
"We'll save the Whales, but kill the Children", a line from a song written by Jeff (Jeffrey?) Brewer. The song is basically saying that people will invest time, energy, & money in saving animals...but children are dying of hunger, being beaten, & being taken in abortions.
Frankly...she can kill all the damn animals she wants. It's stupid...but I'd rather see an animal die than a child. I'd kill a million Christmas pigs to feed a child. |
Rex D.
|
Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2004 | 03:36 PM
I agree with that completely Maegan. I too wouldn't give a damn about any animals as long as we could do something about children in need at solve those problems once and for all. |
|
Page 2 of 9 pages < 1 2 3 4 > Last › |
