Thread: DPP to consider charging Henson

lot of chest beating and rhetoric going on again.

full moon again so soon..... i am over it.

or is it them alchopops hard at work?

a little look at australian cultural history tells the whole story about what australians consider to be "acceptable" in the "art world" and what that is perceived to be.

pulling several pics out in isolation and demonising anyone that dare has a different opinion to yours isnt a a very satisfactory way to discuss any moral issue. it may make you feel good but it achieves less than ****all.

this thread in itself just shows the cultural divide between those with european flavoured values and new world values imho.

now we are getting a big junk of middle eastern values about to be thrown in as well. just think of the chest beating you will get to do in the future...

odd people australians when taken as a collective. they love to think themselves as being independent thinking super heroes, but in reality they allow themselves to be one of the most heavily censored communities in the world, and i don't mean censored in what they see sexually, i mean in most facets of life including political, social and cultural.

lot of chest beating and rhetoric going on again.

full moon again so soon..... i am over it.

or is it them alchopops hard at work?

a little look at australian cultural history tells the whole story about what australians consider to be "acceptable" in the "art world" and what that is perceived to be.

pulling several pics out in isolation and demonising anyone that dare has a different opinion to yours isnt a a very satisfactory way to discuss any moral issue. it may make you feel good but it achieves less than ****all.

this thread in itself just shows the cultural divide between those with european flavoured values and new world values imho.

now we are getting a big junk of middle eastern values about to be thrown in as well. just think of the chest beating you will get to do in the future...

odd people australians when taken as a collective. they love to think themselves as being independent thinking super heroes, but in reality they allow themselves to be one of the most heavily censored communities in the world, and i don't mean censored in what they see sexually, i mean in most facets of life including political, social and cultural.

Looks like you just joined the chest beating mob, mate , however absolutely disagree with this entire post, whats alcopops got to do with people offering different perspectives. Why is it when people have a healthy debate...its a full moon. Who is being demonised, challenged, yes, demonised...no. There are forums all over the internet discussing this very topic...for and against.

My issue with the whole thing is not whether it is sexualised or not, not whether it is considered porn or not, no whether it has artistic merit or not.......couldnt give a rats ****. Its probably closer to the bone for the likes of me as I have an 11 yr old daughter. I wouldnt want anyone taking nude photo's of her, not would I want to go to see nude photo's of young children. If it is ok, why isn't there down at the local news agency an arty mag called "Naked Pre Teens" for the art lover in you?? Is that acceptable? That is the issue for me, and I cannot see how anyone would want to. And so far not one person, for me anyway, has been able to make me see differently.

I'm interested in personal opinions, so rather than talk about full moons, do you think it is acceptable to have photos of naked pre teens including full frontal nudity for viewing in a public domain? It really is a simple question. Would you hang up in your home, photographs of artistically done full frontal nudity of pre teens? If you saw the flyer and saw that it was a show on photo's of naked pre teen children, would you go along for a look? Cut it any which way you want, that is what this thread and many other threads I have read boil down too.

Also how we are supposedly a heavily censored country . What because the average Aussie finds the fact that photo's of pre teens is disturbing? I certainly don't feel censored what so ever, I would say like many countries you have conservative and liberal views across the board. Anyway thanks to all those that have offered their differing perspectives and opinions. On some of the more vibrant chats on here, on occasion my opinion has been changed or challenged. In this case, it still remains the same. Legal or illegal, artistic or otherwise, Henson or anyone else, as a father of an exceptional daughter and very proud dad, find it abhorrent that people would this sort of thing acceptable. Take away the lighting, the visual effects, what you have is an innocent child.............would you allow that to be your child?????????????????

Regards

Stevo on a hiatus now

i suggest you go have a bopeep at the olfc, your in for a fright sport...

"Also how we are supposedly a heavily censored country . "

Well that could be another very long and interesting (for me) thread. For one thing I agree with Incisor on that point but like this thread I'd have 50c each way and add the following point, we are as free and as censored as we want to be, it stems from our culture.

I thought Australia was as free and as easygoing as you could be, and then I visited the US. Walked through the streets of San Francisco and other places and the whole vibe was different. I didn't even know what freedom was and I saw Australia in a whole new light (not negative, just different). Robert Hughes (who I can't stand btw) referred to Australia's "life guard" mentality. Everybody has to swim between the flags. It goes to trading hour laws, liquor licensing laws, council by-law covering your guttering paint, speed cameras, the whole lot. And you can say that a lot of it is just plain common sense and I'm not sure I'd disagree. It may be well and good but it isn't FREEDOM.

This is why many in Australia cannot get their heads around the "crazy" gun laws in the US. Nobody can understand until they let go of the idea that gun laws are really about guns.

Originally Posted by CraigE

That is utter tripe Xavie. I have and will always put the interest of my children above mine or any one elses.

I disagree about the tripe bit, Craig. I know you put your kids first, but lots don't. Many, I think, without even realising it.

The majority of parents I know often put their kids first but also tend on occasion to put their own interests or their friends first. It's very important to many people I know to maintain their social presence and they don't seem to see the cost to the child.

Children have developing brains and particularly before the age of three need significant emotional guidance.

I often find it strange that some parents will expect their kids to accept being dealt with in a way that the same parents wouldn't treat grown adults who are capable of dealing with their own emotions.

Thus, whilst there are quite a few who virtually (we're only human) always put their kids/family first, in my experience there are many more who don't.

"Quite simple, but some people seem to have difficulty telling the difference between nudity and pornography. Note that in this case there was no hesitation in making arrests, where nearly a fortnight after the Henson raid, no arrests have been made or charges laid, and the only legal decision made has been that the official censor has decided that the images are not pornographic, despite your emotive language."

In relation to this statement.

This does not balance the findings.

One is a national peadophile ring where obtaining evidence by timley execution of arrests (ie seizing electronic devices such as computers etc) assists in prosecution and removing this scum from society.

The other is a well known artist where police have already seized evidence and are conducting further investigation.

A charge at this time does not clarify if the person is guilty or not. To be charged is being put before a Magistrate, Judge or Jury to find the defendant guilty or not.

The police have the real information and have acted upon it.

Lovely weather.

Dave

I think it comes down to this: I myself would not model nude, whether I was 3, 13 or 30. Nor would I allow my kids to until they were at least 18, when they could make their own decisions about consequences, etc. And I would also have to be a bit concerned about the artist's motives, even if my concerns proved unfounded.
This is probably mostly since I am somewhat ashamed of my own body. If this were to result in my kids being overly self-conscious, then I think it could be better than them becoming possibly suicidal from regret and shame.
This is just my opinion, and nobody else has to agree with me.

Originally Posted by dandlandyman

I think it comes down to this: I myself would not model nude, whether I was 3, 13 or 30. Nor would I allow my kids to until they were at least 18, when they could make their own decisions about consequences, etc. And I would also have to be a bit concerned about the artist's motives, even if my concerns proved unfounded.
This is probably mostly since I am somewhat ashamed of my own body. If this were to result in my kids being overly self-conscious, then I think it could be better than them becoming possibly suicidal from regret and shame.
This is just my opinion, and nobody else has to agree with me.

No I don't HAVE to, but I pretty much do.

The focus on this thread has been "pornography vs art" whereas I think we really need to consider the child... once this is out there it's out there forever. What do you think other kids at her school will do when they get copies (and they will) of these pictures ?

What about if she later decides she'll become a teacher - and her students get their hands on copies of the pics ?

What if she wants to apply for a government job and has to explain these pictures ?

I think the MAIN people we need to look at are her damn irresposnible parents.

I suspect they are greedy moneygrabbers living their lives vicariously through their daughter. They probably have some misguided idea she'll end up being a supermodel and support them in the style to which they'd like to become accustomed.

Here's betting when she's 18 there's a spread in "Picture" magazine of her as she is then in all her glory, and as she was at age 13 (the pics currently in question).

And that's what I reckon !