Warning: This article contains disturbing sexual images
Jake and Dinos Chapman (officially known as the Chapman Brothers) are British visual artists who gained publicity in the 1990s as leading members of the alleged generation of Young British Artists. Since then, their works have been regularly exhibited in museums specified as MoMA, sold at auctions by prestigious publishing houses specified as Christie's, and repeatedly praised by major media specified as The Guardian.
For decades, journalists and art critics described Chapman's works as "provokative" and "iconoclast". However, these elaborate words are utilized to hide what they truly praise: the art of pedophiles. Indeed, the most "iconic" works of the duo irrefutablely sexualize and humiliate children to a disgusting degree. Seriously. If individual had discovered specified things in someone's house, they would inevitably have thought that they were profoundly insane.
As you may have noticed, this article precedes a strict warning. Actually, I do not urge reading this article publiclyUnless you want people to look at you strangely. But technically, I shouldn't gotta print any warnings. The pictures below are not from niche, hard-to-access locations, but from the websites of prestigious organizations. In fact, this article only contains photographs of "art" presented in museums, where intelligent people come to engage in "culture".
As you'll most likely notice, our culture is sick. This is due to the fact that those who have the means to advance circumstantial artists – the global elite – favour those who respond to their preferences, needs and obsessions, while mass media praise them. This is simply a review of what The regular Telegraph described as "powerful".
Who buys these things?
Searching "Chapman" on Christie's website is simply a disturbing experience. Not only can 1 find any of the worst "art" in history, but besides absurd amounts of money that people paid to own.
Typical Chapman painting: a tiny man's sculpture with an erect penis alternatively of a nose and a defrosting beginning on his mouth.
Yeah, that's what we're dealing with: kid sculptures turned into sexual objects. The name of this thing, "Fuck Face," leaves no uncertainty about the intentions behind it. It's about sexualizing and degradation of children.
As you can see on the screenshot, a very crazy individual paid 115,250 pounds (more than 150,000). Who bought it?
Another version of Fuck Face: Totally bare girl.
After gathering a fewer of these things, you come to a disturbing conclusion: we don't look at a strange, one-time thing that was expected to be satiric or something like that; It's an endless series of sculptures with all kinds of terrifying variations to cater to the needs and fetishities of rich freaks.
Yeah, you're looking at a sculpture of a bare young girl with a vagina between 2 heads. And yes, it's called "Two Faced Cunt".
And yes, individual bought it for over $100,000.
Chapmans besides love to carve bare children together. The name of this song, "Doggy", clearly refers to the sexual position.
As you can see on the screenshot above, "Doggy" belonged to a "novowogorian household charity fund". In another words, an elite household bought it and exposed it elsewhere.
That monster's called "The 4 kid of the Roach." According to the list, it was owned by a "important European collector".
Yes, people who we consider "important" are curious in having these things.
Chapmans besides liked to make complete arrangements, specified as this one, with many sculptures. I can only call it a pedophile paradise. The names of these works are truly disgusting.
Why do I get the feeling these things are utilized as erotic dolls by rich pedophiles? They're definitely set in a certain way.
The artists themselves seem to encourage the usage of their "art" as erotic toys.
The duo published films and photographs of his "art" utilized as erotic toys. Here: The man's severed head is utilized as a sex player.
The renowned artistic publishing houses have exhibited these photos and films for auctions. Where's the line between art and unstable pornography?
When they don't make erotic toys for psychopaths, Chapmans love to depict macabre and violence.
Chapmans "revived" Goi's painting "Desestres de la Guerra." Of course, with his own insane twist.
Even creating watercolors, artists focus on their favourite subject: failure of innocence by force against children.
Despite everything shown above, Chapman's works are praised and celebrated by "higher company."
The elite, socialist magazine, The fresh Statesman, contributed to the normalization of Chapman's "art".
Dean of the Sheffield Cathedral stands next to Chapman Cyber Iconic Man's 2015 work.
Yes, despite everything that was seen above, 1 of Chapman's works was presented inside the cathedral. To further emphasize the absurdity of the situation, this is simply a post on Instagram by Jake Chapman.
Jake created many works inspired by Sigil Baphomet, who is the authoritative emblem of the Church of Satan. His relation is full of Satanist images. Why did the cathedral agree to exhibit the Brothers' play?
Despite this, Satanist images are not even close to what concerns the Chapman brothers' posts on social media.
About Instagram accounts
As shown in erstwhile articles, people in this "culture" love to inform another degenerates with posts on social media indicating their interests. Rewinding Jake and Dinos Chapman's Instagram accounts is simply a disturbing experience.
In a fresh entry, Dinos is disguised as a scary white rabbit. W Alice in Wonderland White rabbit lures Alicia through the mirror. Who's he trying to lure?
Over 30 years later, Chapmans inactive make bizarre kid models. 1 commentator on Instagram says, "She's cute."
It is infinitely more worrying that Instagram accounts contain photos of real children in disturbing contexts.
Looking at the miniatures of Dinosaan's Instagram account, we see many works of art based on the subject of losing innocence. Among these photos is simply a image of the kid – most likely his son. But why?
Shouldn't these individual photos be in private social media accounts?
Why is there a image of a sad-looking boy in an account filled with sculptures of scary bare children? 1 comment on the IG says "panda eyes, so you do it," and another says "Your individual sex toy, how cool."
What's going on here?
Another weird image with the baby. Best comment just says "Creep". That sums it up.
A image of a kid and a snake. Why? What does she represent? Snakes usually symbolize sin. Well...?
Five children in pentagram shape. It looks like pedoratual madness. The only (allowed) comment is "Seans."
For any reason, this photograph exists on their Instagram account. Why? And why 1 of the comments says, "Now I'm thirsty!" Is it due to the fact that the licence plate contains PED letters? How's PEDO?
In summary
Jake and Dinos Chapman's works were described as "powerful" and "iconoclastic" by both media and art critics. However, after seeing the above pictures, no 1 in their right head would usage those words. What we have seen above is in fact a symptom of a sick culture celebrating pedophilia, while co-conspirators media normalize it with misleading words.
Some sources even claim that these horrific sculptures comment on "the sexualization of children". Really. It's like shooting individual in the face to comment on "violence in the media." You don't comment on it. You advance it. Moreover, erstwhile we realize that the full achievements of the brothers (and even their social media accounts) are strangely focused on the subject of kid hunting, we realize that this is more than "art".
It is about contributing to the dark and disturbing "culture" of the occult elite and satisfying its crazy fetishes. As shown above, rich "family funds" and "important collectors" paid immense sums for their own sculptures of naked, deformed, heavy sexually sexually abused children. Who would want something like that?
You know precisely who.
Translated by Google Translator
source:https://vigilantcitizen.com/
