By: shan98_2000
23/05/2008
5:59 pm Yahoo! Profile:
shan98_2000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Myself I am not into Art much, to me a Picture of 4 dogs plaing poker, or a chimp on toiletseat is art.
On this morning news there was an Art Critic (someone who cant get a proper job) was telling the reporter that the Photo's was an attempt to capture puberty.
Well nothing wrong with that, but was it nessercary to Photograph the childrens gentials. |
|
By: john_barr2003
23/05/2008
5:59 pm Yahoo! Profile:
john_barr2003 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Oh. And nudity is just so passe' these days. |
|
By: grupils
23/05/2008
6:01 pm Yahoo! Profile:
grupils Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| shame on you for not having a brain.... |
|
By: andrew.dinham
23/05/2008
6:03 pm Yahoo! Profile:
andrew.dinham Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Has the photographer in question been caught doing this? If so, then he should be charged with suitable offences, but I have not heard this was the case?"
No he knowingly, solicited the services of a minor, enticed her to remove her clothes, posed her for illegal photographs, all for personal gain. Not a hell of a lot different than the pervert really.
-----------------------
He was doing so for art sake (again, can a naked human form not be seen purely as art?), not for personal sexual gain as far as we know. If it turns out differently, then throw the book at him!! |
|
By: co1868
23/05/2008
6:05 pm Yahoo! Profile:
co1868 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
McDonalds, Kentucky, etc., show us scrumpteous food to make us hungry and to try and motivate our desires etc.
Hollywood produce movies and such filled with violence and wet the appetites of those enclined to be violent.
As well as art lovers and such, these pictures (art or otherwise) would have been visited by paedephiles and would have stirred up their sexual hunger state for kids.
Perhaps even your kids or grandkids...
Is that a good thing??? |
|
By: co1868
23/05/2008
6:08 pm Yahoo! Profile:
co1868 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I think some of you need to try and think beyond your seemingly self centered and immature attitudes... But judging by your comments so far, I doubt very much if you even understand my suggestion, let alone have the ability to do this... |
|
By: px_ceo
23/05/2008
6:09 pm Yahoo! Profile:
px_ceo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Is a picture of a traditional clad girl from Papua New Guinea considered the same? What about a traditional, older, female dancer?
It is the norm for PNG society. Where do we draw the line? |
|
By: johntillerstudent
23/05/2008
6:12 pm Yahoo! Profile:
johntillerstudent Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| KO then I agree. Change him and anyone who publish images of embreos and while you changing poeple, charge Germaim Greer for that porn book of naked boys called Boys |
|
By: shan98_2000
23/05/2008
6:12 pm Yahoo! Profile:
shan98_2000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I am not sure on the law, (if someone can correct me here I will be grateful) but I was under the impression that the taking any photo's of children underage reguardless if its for art or not naked was an offense.
About 5 years ago a Grandparent was arrested by the police after he put a film into chemist to be developed and the chemist saw a couple pictures of his young grandchildren in the bath and called the police in. |
|
By: ripfelix
23/05/2008
6:12 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ripfelix Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"He was doing so for art sake "
Sorry, Andrew. I dont think you can use artistic license as an excuse for displaying inapropriate images. Either the taking and displaying of Naked Underage girls is illegal or not. If it is, then prosecute, if its not then any nude photo of underage children is acceptable, as long as your intent was "artistic" |
|
By: cheeky_dee_au
23/05/2008
6:12 pm Yahoo! Profile:
cheeky_dee_au Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Tolouse Le Trec said to a woman who objected to one of his paintings. "Madam, get your filthy mind off my clean painting"."
Perfect quote.
"McDonalds, Kentucky, etc., show us scrumpteous food to make us hungry and to try and motivate our desires etc."
Yes, but being a vegetarian these ad's don't make me hungry, just as not being a paedophile, these pictures are not going to stir up sexual feelings in me for a 13 year old.
If you are one way inclined and strongly, advertising and nude pics are not really going to change that so much. there is only so much convincing that the media can do ;) |
|
By: bundyau
23/05/2008
6:13 pm Yahoo! Profile:
bundyau Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
By: co1868
5 minutes ago
Yahoo! Profile:
co1868
Did this message offend you?
Report abuse
Re:Prosecution over nude child photos ur ... Reply to this message
McDonalds, Kentucky, etc., show us scrumpteous food to make us hungry and to try and motivate our desires etc.
Hollywood produce movies and such filled with violence and wet the appetites of those enclined to be violent.
As well as art lovers and such, these pictures (art or otherwise) would have been visited by paedephiles and would have stirred up their sexual hunger state for kids.
Perhaps even your kids or grandkids...
Is that a good thing???
------------------------- ----
Never thought I would say this,but I agree with you |
|
By: andrew.dinham
23/05/2008
6:14 pm Yahoo! Profile:
andrew.dinham Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
McDonalds, Kentucky, etc., show us scrumpteous food to make us hungry and to try and motivate our desires etc.
Hollywood produce movies and such filled with violence and wet the appetites of those enclined to be violent.
As well as art lovers and such, these pictures (art or otherwise) would have been visited by paedephiles and would have stirred up their sexual hunger state for kids.
Perhaps even your kids or grandkids...
Is that a good thing???
--------------------
Fair and valid points co1868, but I wonder who knew about the exhibition BEFORE the media got hold of it and controversialised it and who knows about it now? I would be more worried about who was interested in seeing it NOW (the dirty minded types) compared to the original crowd (probably an incredibly small artsy f a r tsy type community)? |
|
By: jackymountain36
23/05/2008
6:22 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jackymountain36 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| sucko you arty f a r t y snots. theyy'll let him off with a fine though. he'd probably enjoy jail if he went. |
|
By: r_raschke2482
23/05/2008
6:23 pm Yahoo! Profile:
r_raschke2482 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I don't believe I can add much to the comments already posted & I certainly haven't read them all... Basically I don't think taking photographs of naked children is ever "art" and I agree that the show should have been shut down.
I do have one query though; I hope someone has explained to the child in the photo that the Prime Minister and other prominent spokespeople weren't calling HER disgusting but rather the act of photographing her in that way... In my experience kids tend to get confused by semantics. |
|
By: rob665336
23/05/2008
6:30 pm Yahoo! Profile:
rob665336 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I agree. Those so called pedeophiles who use "art" as an excuse should be locked up. Those people who back these "artists" are sick, The whole concept is repulsive. Henson is a disgrace to Australia. In many countries he would be executed. |
|
By: rob665336
23/05/2008
6:35 pm Yahoo! Profile:
rob665336 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| You really are no better than the filth that get locked up. Art my aunt gladys. Next you will tell that Picasso can realy paint |
|
By: johntillerstudent
23/05/2008
6:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
johntillerstudent Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Anything in the public domain you and capture.EG I,m shoot the public foyuor of the Ambros building and this offical tell me to stop shoting. I tell him. pull your head in. his reponsed with,I will get you charge. Yes with being a nuisence but not for taking a photo. There is no such law. you can shoot what you can see that in public ,permition need if not in the public domain.Look,there is CCTV every where do they ask for permition.Even the new terror laws can not be inforce concerning a public domain.It is a basic human right that they are challanging and law well favor the Basic Human rights. |
|
By: reidsays
23/05/2008
6:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
reidsays Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Fair and valid points co1868, but I wonder who knew about the exhibition BEFORE the media got hold of it and controversialised it and who knows about it now? I would be more worried about who was interested in seeing it NOW (the dirty minded types) compared to the original crowd (probably an incredibly small artsy f a r tsy type community)?"
exactly my point earlier....as with many others
one picture was taken as the shadow of a man over the young girl....and this was seen as suggestions of abuse........yet this IS art..
i would actually see that as the 'looming shadow OF abuse' which hangs over the innocence, yet budding young???
THE REALITY OF ABUSE AND THE AFFECT IT HAS???
no matter whether clothed from top to toe - a perverted mind is still a perverted mind...and nothing can alter that view....these pictures would have remained known by few, know they will be viewed by many!
almost seems like a publicity stunt by the artist AND also a 'smokescreen' by those in power who are prosecuting the old grandads over photos of his grandkids in the bath, whilst allowing the serious cases a loophole:(
the child protection orgs have been thwarped for years and the anger and frustration needs an outlet...this may well be it...
but still - the porn and sexualisation continues unabated:( |
|
By: reidsays
23/05/2008
6:38 pm Yahoo! Profile:
reidsays Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
raschke "I do have one query though; I hope someone has explained to the child in the photo that the Prime Minister and other prominent spokespeople weren't calling HER disgusting but rather the act of photographing her in that way... In my experience kids tend to get confused by semantics"
agree....adult's hysteria and perceptions may well harm this child more than having the photos taken:( |
|
By: rob665336
23/05/2008
6:44 pm Yahoo! Profile:
rob665336 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Yeah you are right, but no one puts them in an arrrt studio to quell the sick minds of people like you. What kind of parent allows a low life like Henson to photgraph teir child nude, That has to be abuse. What else is the child subjected to. This is not art, but an excuse to view young children in a so called legal way. |
|
By: weed612001
23/05/2008
6:46 pm Yahoo! Profile:
weed612001 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
This is is so sad!! Sombody at ch 7 must have seen these pictures if they were able to put them to air? And i knew what position they would take as well.
That little girls life is going to be a living hell now.
All because of a ratings hungry hypocritical media and a society without a clue!! |
|
By: weed612001
23/05/2008
6:48 pm Yahoo! Profile:
weed612001 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Hey reids you see that? You have just been called sick!! |
|
By: jackymountain36
23/05/2008
6:48 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jackymountain36 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
All because of a ratings hungry hypocritical media and a society without a clue!!
pictures of nude little girls. what was that i d i o t thinking. |
|
By: thebigv_82
23/05/2008
6:54 pm Yahoo! Profile:
thebigv_82 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| The minute this artist gets away with it (which he probably will) every sick pervert who is involved in child pornography will just slap the "art" tag on everything they do! Who's to judge the line between art and pornography? He should be made an example of...not made an excuse for all the other sick f#@ks! |
|
