Printable View
As pointed out earlier in this thread, the censor is a waste of time and space.Quote:
Originally Posted by JDNSW
The censor has proven before to be more interested in protecting a company's profitability then it is in protecting children.
As above, they now have the ability to place R ratings on movies containing smoking and yet have never done it.
So much for the censor acting in a way that protects children.
Hmmm!
JDNSW :BigThumb:
Drivesafe:thumbsdown:
"Officials" decided to invade Iraq, "officials" decided to build a pipeline to take water away from an alreadly parched goulburn valley. "Officials" decide lots of things that are either unpopular or incorrect.
Just because they said the "art" works are ok doesn't make me like them, nor view them as acceptable.
Officials got elected.Quote:
Originally Posted by moose
That's the nice thing about a democracy, no one to blame but ourselves and our neighbours.:D
Cheers
Simon
No problem with your having this view - not everyone has the same view.Quote:
Originally Posted by moose
From the little I have seen of them, I don't like them either - but the question is not whether you or I like them, but whether they are pornographic, and it appears they are not, and hence not subject to censorship.
Let me set it out clearly again - the question on Henson's pictures has never been one of whether pornography should be censored or not, but whether they are pornography. The question of whether art should be censored is a totally different one, although it has been touched on in this thread.
It seems to me that some people have a violent reaction to an image of the human body, especially that of children, which has no basis on any rational grounds, and that this triggers an attack on anyone involved. This is similar to the reaction in some cultures to the sight of an uncovered female face, and has no more basis - both are learned reactions.
This phobia about children appearing naked is in fact quite recent in this country - fifteen years ago the exhibition would have not raised an eyebrow - in fact he has been exhibiting similar pictures for thirty years or so, I understand, with virtually no commotion, certainly none like this. I suspect that it is at least in part an American import - I can remember about twenty years ago my American sister in law going to a Sydney beach while here on holidays (before Slip! Slop! Slap!). It was mid week, and most of the people on the beach were mothers with preschool children - she was shocked that the children were almost all totally naked; mind you, she was also shocked that many of the mothers were topless!
John
Similar happened to me last week. I was down at the beach with the twins (3), and they were all in the nuddie, a fella was there with his kid, and he had to think twice about letting his kid - similar age to the twins - strip down and get wet.
This led to a conversation about Bill Henson, and censorship/self-censorship of happy snaps.
I got the, 'ooh aahs', from a busload of Japanese tourists as the kids ran past, still naked, on the way to the car.
First time I've ever encountered Japanese tourists while out with the kids and not had to fight off the cameras.
And before Stevo jumps on me for this one. I don't let the tourist take pics of the kids because the kids didn't like the times the tourists tried it, and they wanted to pick the kids up without asking or introduction, if the kids didn't mind it would have been fine with me.:D
Cheers
Simon