Art or porn?

This debate has recently been going on in the australian media because an artist (whos name i cant recall right now) has been investigated for producing child porn because of an exerbition he produced that included a photo of a 13? year old naked girl.

This investigation coincides with a change in the laws in the US to alow a NGO to decide which sites contain "child porn" in order for them to be put on a banned list which is blocked by US ISP's

The artist involved was found to have no case to answer by the DPP which meant that the AFP dropped the case. Im not sure if the NSW's goverment has also droped its case or if it was only the federal case that was dropped.

It also gets interesting in some of the comments that the PM has made about this work. He called it a discusting piece of child exploitation.

So does the fact that a child is naked in a non sexual manner automatically make it porn? (i find this an interesting contrast to the naked babies which are constantly in huggies ads)

Does the PM owe this artist an apology for defaiming him when the DPP has said that the work is art and not porn?


For the sake of interest both the "child" and her mother gave concent to the pic

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The obscenity laws in the United States state that child pornography includes minors involved in sexual acts or close ups of their sexual parts in an explicit way.

A picture of a naked 13 year old girl is not child pornography as such. But it is if she is spreading her legs and the camera is zooming into her crotch. Or if she touching herself or engaging in any other sexual activity alone or with another person.

Also, this doesn't include scenes in movies where the sex is stimulated and part of a story. Thus Romeo and Juliet is never censored despite necessarily involving an under age relationship.

Another example: In the beginning of Superman 1, Clark Kent as a three year oldish child appears naked.

The laws may indeed be different in Australia, but you'd have to either post the pic or a link to the exhibit for us to determine whether it constitutes something sexual.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Ok i found the artist
Its Bill Henson

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080529/wl_asia_afp/entertainmentaustraliaartpornography_080529065455

I will TRY to find a link to the exact work but i dont know if its even online

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Also, in this case, it is not a matter of consent. Until majority, children do not have the right of consent, I do believe, in every country which has a conecpt of a minor. Nor can the parents say "okay" to child pornogarphy, otherwise fathers and mothers who abuse their children would be free to do so.

 

it MIGHT be this one but im not sure:
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2005/01/10/billhensonuntitled_wideweb__430x283.jpg

 

The Age has it printed according to the Wiki article on this controversy. Check there, Asguard.

 

i cant find it but i DID find an interview with the girl. She is now a 35 year old mother of two

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

http://www.theage.com.au/news/natio...ly-safe-andcalm/2008/05/25/1211653848660.html

 

I just found the pic. It is a case of maliciously bad photo shopping, but I do not see how it could constitute as pornography. It's very bad art, but still art.

It is not sexual in nature. It is not meant to tittilate. It includes one bare breast. If it is indicative of the exhibition, it is not by any means a pornographic display.

I've seen photos by Annie Leibowitz in her art collections I'd consider pornographic. This does not fit the bill.

 

if government says its porn than its porn

 

Draqon, do you ever contribute meaningfully to discussions?

 

HA HA

Found it
http://saladjournals.wordpress.com/2008/05/28/art-or-what/

 

Yes I do. I stated my opinion.

 

It's not pornographic. It does not depict any sort of sexual focus on this girl.

It's not that great of a picture, either. Nor is the girl exceptionally beautiful.

But the adolescent girl is a classic study for feminine beauty. As such, I do not think we can reasonably limit the photographing in such a tasteful manner as this of such. If it was, however, obscene, that would again be different.

If this was a close up of her twat, that would be one thing. That'd be blatantly pornographic.

 

I take side of the government, if the government says the picture is pornographic than it is pornographic.

 

who didnt take photos of they're kids while they were in the bath when they were younger?

i dont think the pictures are bad, the girls were happy posing for the pictures, and obviously they had perants with them, so why all the fuss, is it because a few PC henry's complained?

 

there used to be a tv programme on that showed girls and boys in certain stages of development, through, birth, to pubiity, and childborth when they got older, and we saw everything, should that also be banned because they showed children naked?

should mums and dads not be allowed to take photots of new born babies has soon as they are born because some PC henry will complain to the hospital?

 

bells firstly from everything i have herd there were only 3 photoes not many (there is a link off that site i posted which has a video surposedly shows the whole exerbition and i never saw what your discribing)

Secondly it really doesnt matter if it was an artist or an idiot who reported him. Who reported him only makes a difference if the reporter was a DOCS worker, a cop, someone working for the department of film clasification, a pollie ect.

As far as i can see the exerbition had been on display for YEARS (after all the "girl" is now 35), so how is it only becoming a problem NOW?

and as LA said are the huggies adds pornographic?
is the breast feeding add pornographic?
is the pic mum has of me (about 3) naked and covered in paint because she wanted to drag it out for my 21'st BD pornographic?

Since when did sociaty get so perverse that the naked human body is AUTOMATICAL pornographic?

Should all my medical texts be burned because they show the reproductive organs as they develop?

is your pic of a circumcision pornographic? (wont argue that i dont find it discusting though)

 

What is the PM (Prime Minister?) and a DPP? Do you have a link to any of his pics?

 

Anyone remember the trouble the Scorpions got into for Virgin Killer. Her privates are covered up, but still....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!