Naked guys in a former temple are now 1/2 price!
Note who this show is sponsored by!
http://www.artsblooming.org/Home/Components/Calendar/Event/9674/710?backlist=%2fhome-bcpa
Naked guys in a former temple are now 1/2 price!
Note who this show is sponsored by!
http://www.artsblooming.org/Home/Components/Calendar/Event/9674/710?backlist=%2fhome-bcpa
I heard Tari was going to make a special appearance at this show… explains why the show is “half off”….
wow nice choice for a sponsor Pantagraph
It would be interesting if there were to be a protest about this to see if the Pantacrap would even write a story about it. I agree with another comment in a different thread, time to boycott Pantagraph advertisers, let them know you are doing this. You might also note you don’t support porn as the Pantacrap does
MEIDAGHPST: Thank you for the plug of my suggestion that we boycott Pantagraph advertisers. To be clear, let the advertisers know you are doing this. The Pantagraph could care less–they are a lost cause, living in their Marxist (and clearly deviant supporting) LaLa Land.
This whole thing is a a pleasant distraction from politics. As far as a protest gathering, lets all get together and have a wienie roast.
I think it’d make more impact by calling some advertisers (like the local churches, daycare centers, etc. that advertise) and cluing them in to pornography that the Pantagraph is sponsoring. Now that, might create quite an impact!
Does anyone know if Hobby Lobby is still advertising in the Pantagraph? They used too advertise weekly.
Nope, nice try though Aaron . 🙏🏻
God is way more powerful, but then you know that Aaron.
I think there will be a wienie roast afterwards. Why is it one half off?
Really, naked magicians! Their magic must have no power. Gads!
You seem to be hung up about partial nudity. According to you most of Western art, movies and cable television would be pornographic. No one in their right mind thinks so. Perhaps you’d want to paint over the Sistine Chapel which features a lot of nudity. No one is forcing anyone to see this show, if it offends your sensibilities don’t go and see it.
so funny, they aren’t cutting prices in half because hoards want to see it!
What an idiotic remark, BLNOCITIZEN. There is absolutely no connection between the Sistine Chapel and a taxpayer subsidized stuntfest by 2 sexual deviants. Agree that nobody is forcing us to SEE the show–we have better taste and morals. We just resent being expected–directly or indirectly–to PAY for it, or to patronize entities or companies that lend their support to such garbage.
Let’s see this show has been around for a long time. It has shown in many cities all over the world. It’s just you guys that seem to have a problem.
Who appointed all of you as censors? No one. Sexual deviants? How can you say that if you haven’t seen the show? If you haven’t seen the show, then you have no basis to call anyone a “sexual deviant”, especially if it’s just partial nudity. What’s the deviant part? There isn’t one. Everyone posting here is a prude who hasn’t seen the show, who are make statements about something they haven’t seen. That’s like commenting on a book you haven’t read.
And yes, the Sistine Chapel and art fit in here because there were people who always want to censor and insert their narrow minded sensibilities into art and entertainment.
Again no one is forcing anyone to see this show. If you’re offended, don’t see the show, it’s that simple. Problem solved.
It violates the City code Chapter 6 : Section 33 : Entertainment., but laws aren’t important.
BLONO, you need some serious help. It is one thing for a person to pay for porn that is not partially subsidized by government tax money. This however is. get it? Probably not….
You are all basing your objections to a show none of you have seen. How do you know that violates any codes? You don’t. You haven’t seen the show. Neither has anyone here on this forum. Until you have, none of you have any basis to criticize anything in this magic show.
Gee, I’ve never read so many priggish and sanctimonious individuals who seem not to have a life. I guess I should buy everyone here smelling salts for their fainting vapors. Who appointed anyone here the grand poobah censor in Bloomington? No one.
Video of the show is included on the BCPA website. Obviously people object, they can’t sell tickets!
@BLNOCITIZEN, partial nudity? Lol. These Aussies claim full nudity. Sue for false advertising if they don’t, right? Comparing to the Sistine Chapel? Lol, that’s a stretch! Anyway sure let’s have nudity. Maybe a couple of strip joints could help revitalize downtown. If the BCPA can do it, why not everyone else? Then I really like your statement. “No one is forcing anyone to see this show, if it offends your sensibilities don’t go and see it.” Hey, I agree with that comment. Just think of all the stuff we could do with that defining our laws. I really don’t care about this show one way or the other. However the bottom line is it seems as though nudity as entertainment is against the law in this town. And it seems as though some (chosen) people in this town can do what they want when others can’t. That, I do disagree with.
Why don’t you see the show before you comment on it? There is a whole lot of fake outrage about a show no one here has actually seen. Most of the commenters here need to get a life. Maybe Diane can form a committee to barge in on the act and do a citizen’s arrest. I bet anything she’d look both pretty foolish and the resulting legal fight would leave her penniless. But hey, it’s nudity and that has to stop, she seem to be the only one who is truly outraged.
Hey BloNocitizen would you be ok if you were subsidizing the Catholic Church at the BCPA? I’m not ok with subsidizing anything that involves entertainment or religion with taxpayer dollars.
Bottom line blonocit – they are NOT very good magicians, so they have to add a “gimmick”, a boring one, a very sophomoric and boring one – Do YOU understand yet? People who titter and giggle and want to go see people OMG!!! NAKED!!!!” and think it is something “fun and edgy” are the ones who “need to get a life”. Geez, you are probably the sort of person who would pay to go see a crucifix in a jar of pee and think it was “art” or buy one of those blank pictures that dummies with money buy.
How do you know what kind of magicians they are? You haven’t seen the show. Again, commenting on something none of you have seen, calling it “pornographic” or “deviants” are all loaded words for a show NO ONE HAS SEEN. Ronin, you are not an art critic or a critic of anything. If you have not seen, read or viewed a piece of art, entertainment, then you critique is not valid.
Would I subsidize the Catholic Church exhibit at BCPA? Well, the Catholic church was the patron of a lot of great art for centuries. The Met in New York did have an exhibit of Catholic art, vestments, papal crowns etc recently. And many people wanted to paint over the Sistine Chapel even during Michelangelo’s life because they were upset about the nudity.
Perhaps I don’t want to subsidize the many wars our government has carelessly stared. How many hundreds of billions have been wasted.
For people who haven’t seen the entertainment they are somehow condemning, if it offends, don’t see the show. It’s that easy.
Does everybody else understand a video of their act is on the same site where tickets are sold? Haven’t seen? I know it’s a hard concept to grasp!
I personally don’t have any moralistic objections to the show – done properly, I think it has a lot of potential to be funny, and if my personal situation were different, I could certainly imagine circumstances where I might even go to see it and enjoy having done so.
But I still find it objectionable. Why? Because it is not a show that will play well here in B-N, which means it Is a show that will end up losing money. Depending on the amount of money lost, one could potentially justify something like having a traveling ballet company or some international cultural show (Maori warriors come to mind) with the excuse that it’s cultural or enlightening or something like that, but this has no such redeeming value. This is just magicians (comedians?) with the gimmick that you can potentially see their ‘down unders’. This is the kind of entertainment that should be brought in with private funds, probably to a private venue, not something that taxpayers should be forced to subsidize.
“Video of the show is included on the BCPA website.”— “Does everybody else understand a video of their act is on the same site where tickets are sold? Haven’t seen? I know it’s a hard concept to grasp!”
The entire show is included on the website? No a 30 second promotion was on the website. Again you need to get a life. Don’t go and see the show if it offends you. That’s also a concept that’s not hard to grasp!!!!!
You are trying really hard to defend porn! BCPA emploee?