Quote:
|
Originally Posted by james t kirk
I'm probably one of the more sexually liberal individuals on this board. (A long story, however, I believe it to be true from what I have read in other posts on here.)
Never the less, I'm going to come down firmly on the NO (as in NO Need for these photos) on this one. (I stopped looking at those photos after about the 5'th or sixth one because it was making me feel sick.)
For one simple reason.
Let children be children for themselves.
They have enough children stuff to deal with, they don't need more.
Kids get 18 years where they shouldn't have to be part of the sex world, or the art world, or whatever world you want to call it. After 18, all bets are off, and I'm good with that. (Why couldn't this photographer take pictures of women aged 18 and over in the exact same poses? Would it not be the same are regardless of the age of the subjects?)
After they are 18, you can photograph them fellating a horse for all I care. But prior to that, no.
We don't need it and it's too slippery of a slope.
|
My own personal opinions on this are mixed and I'm at quite a loss at how to articulate them.
For what it's worth, it was the New South Wales police who decided to ban the exhibit and charge Henson, both state and federal governments commented on it because it became a media frenzy.
I'm angry at the fact that the media has blown this out of proportion. If anyone is guilty of exploitation, it's them. They're making money out of how they spin this, the artist isn't.
James, you asked why he couldn't just use mature age models? Well, the artist is trying to say something about what it is to be a young teenager. That's what he's getting at.
I sometimes feel that artists get rapped up in their own wankery and put themselves above the rest of society, ethics, and the law. But I really don't feel Henson has done that in these photos.
It
is a matter of ones own personal opinion. But in a free and democratic society we should be able to voice and express ourselves within an ethical and legal frameworks without the fear of being silenced.
I feel this whole affair has been yet another case of trial by media, where an individual has been demonised by a group who aren't elected, who don't represent common interests, and who only serve to make a commercial gain.
This will now be decided in a court of law, where judges and legal representatives have no choice but to put their personal opinions aside and argue what laws Henson has actually broken.
The world is sick, it's fucked up, and bad things happen. But why is it we jump all over the easy targets, yet switch of to the bad shit that ACTUALLY happens.
I've witnessed some awfully fucked up shit in housing commission flats and outback communities. Funny how the Australian public doesn't really want to know about it when it's happening to poor or indigenous Australians.
We should do our best to protect our children. There is a time and a place for everything. But closing them off from the real world doesn't help them in the long run, people have to get acquainted with the real world sooner or later.
To me, this whole thing is just another example of rampant hypocrisy.
Australia is by no means a 'conservative' society. But if we, as a people, are to progress, we need to be able to discuss ideas in context, and intelligently.
This is a hairy issue, I agree, and there's no absolutes. But people need to be able to step back and
think about why they feel what they do. People need to be able to read between the lines of media spin and form an opinion of their own. So far, the only politician to say something half intelligent over the issue was an opposition member, whose political party is very conservative.
If this whole affair does anything, I hope it wakes people up and makes them think.