Do you feel this is censorship or child protection ????

Question: Do you feel this is censorship or child protection !?!?!?!?

"Police shut down child photo exhibition" (in Sydney Australia)

http://optuszoo!.news!.ninemsn!.com!.au/arti!.!.!.

I find it troubling!. It isn't the photographs that worry me so much as the intent and the motivation of possible viewers!.

It's a sad endightment on western society when everything has to be interpreted in the most base way possible!.
I understand why they banned it!.

What are your feelings about a photographic exhibition like this !?Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

Well, Lizzie, I have to come down square on the side of child exploitation!. The parents who allowed their children to be photographed should be ashamed of themselves - and publicly shamed!.

Had this so-called "artist" posted these pictures on a web site he would be arrested for pedophilia!. Instead, he is trying to legitimize his own latent pedophilia by having his work displayed in an art gallery!.

IMO, he and the owners of the gallery should be prosecuted for pandering to pedophiles and for exploiting children!.

Of course, I'm equally opposed to child "beauty contests" with 6 year old girls wearing makeup and mini evening gowns and high heels!. Just google JonBenet Ramsey!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

The photos in question are of a semi nude young lady (13 yo maybe!?) That is not art! That is exploitation, and I have to wonder where the parents were! This is an example on the decline of moral values that is becoming rampant in modern society!. IT is not an interpretation, a photo of a young person, nude or semi nude is base and probably illegal!. My feeling are these types of exhibitions are not art and the photographer should have his camera confiscated until he learns some moral values!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

**jaw drops to ground** definately child protection, i gree with the statement that it is kiddie porn, i have nieces this age, and even fully clothed they get unwanted attention from men!. the thought of them poseing nude and having photos taken, let alone put in a public forum, makes me feel physically ill!. this is the society that we live in, sick people are sexually attracted to children, it is a fact!. and no matter what people say, nude photos of 12 and 13yr olds is kiddie porn, and these sickos would flock to see it, and buy it legally!. the parens of these children need to be shot, as does the 'artist' (and i use the term loosely) and the gallery curator!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

im in complete agreement with Edwin on this!.!.!.

there was a line @ the bottom of the article
"She said they were beautiful photographs "if you take away the content"!.

kind of an a twisted way of thinking of it i think!.!.!. if you take away the content of hte photograph shown, its a dark space!.!.!. i dont understand how it can be a beautiful photograph with or without 'the content'Www@QuestionHome@Com

I haven't seen what it was so I can't tell but with all these child abuse and crimes going on even the one's in the internet for money and so on I guess they made the right thing, usually everyone is dissatisfied with authorities due to rules they must act upon but this one seems to be a decision they made themselves so I like the looks of it!.!.!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I guess I am the minority in thinking that very few nude photos are art!. Whether it be a child or a consenting adult most are porn!. I have seen very few nude photos that can be called art!. This is porn no matter the age!. A nude painting on the other hand is artistic!. just my opinion!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I think it is child censorship!! More like child protection!!!Www@QuestionHome@Com

I have seen Henson's work and none of what I saw is pornographic!. I haven't seen the photos for this exhibit, but from what I understand they are typical of his work and none of the images are pornographic or erotic!. They are not full nudes, but topless and not very revealing!. There doesn't appear to be any child exploitation or intent to exploit!.
Knowing all of this isn't enough to make a final judgment, but I would guess that it is a perfectly legitimate display of his art!. That guess is enforced by the off-the-wall remarks of those involved in shutting this exhibit down!.
The intent and motivation of the viewers is impossible to gauge!. That makes it almost as impossible to regulate!. All that can be done is draw a reasonable conclusion based on society's norm!. Not even the thought police have been able to determine why each individual watches nude children on National Geographic!.
As well as being a photographer, I spent 5 years of my free time fighting the exploitation of children online!. I worked with a very computer literate group associated with every level of law enforcement, I have testified before Congress and I helped put many perpetrators away!. I do not tolerate child exploitation!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

art is art!. child porn is porn!.!.!.a nude model can be 18 and able to legally sign her (his) name to a model release and understand what they are doing, and the shoot is done well and tastefully then it is art!.!.!.!.ofcourse the model is not treated as a sex object in art!.
children are beautiful subjects, with their clothes on, being children and being innocent, and NOT being sex objects!.
art is something i would have over the mantle in the hearth room for all to see (including my pastor, if i am a church goer, or my rabbi if i am of the jewish persuasion)!.
i don't call the other stuff art!. it's porn!. and children do need protected because they can get pretty messed up over porn being presented as art, that is damaging!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Here in America, the home of the free and the brave!?!.!.!.!.!.well it has come down to the base of the matter that the goverment has pretty much made it clear that "nobody has an opinion that matters who is also not a member of goverment" which basically means that our opinions dont count and so "my opinion wouldnt matter even if I was important"!.!.however, in an effort to stay in the realm of good taste, as an artist I would for reasons of prosperity, stay away from such a subject matter as this because it straddles a fence of sensability whereupon one can be torn a new,,,,uh!.!.!.!.butthole just for looking at such a thing or comemnting upon it!.!.!.!.!.it's like!.!.!.uh!.!.!.!.!.!.did you look at that exibition!?!.cuz if you did "you might be a pedofile"!.!.!.!.and nobody wants that kinda thing associated with them!.!.!.!.!.just my opinion!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.art on the other hand is what one makes of it and one person's Michaelangelo's "david" is some homo's perfect fit!.!.!.!.!.so to speak!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Well based on the linked image I'm the odd one out here!?

Authorities are saying its bad, artists are saying its art, the girl has yet to be interviewed!?

The example image I dont have any issue with it!. I think the lighting is marvarlous!.

In parts of the world nakid bodies are not seen as sexual and neither would that image be seen as such!. I certainly dont see anything sexual about it!? If people think there is something sexual about a girl with her torso exposed how far has this world sunk!?

If there are a lot worst than that image in the collection then maybe it is exploitation!? However how many 13 year old girls all they want to do is model, they get to do some, are they being exploited!? I doubt the models were forced to pose!?

Its a shame that this is censured to me!. Based on that one image I think why do they censore the masses because there are a few sickos around!?

What next girls have to walk around in paper bags because some people in society have issues!?

Girls of her age and younger and older dont wear tops on the beachs I will be on soon, as far as I'm concerned only the sick would see it as sexual!.!.!.!.!.!.!.

aWww@QuestionHome@Com

Interesting, I'm reading the answers provided by other folks and I'm wondering, did anyone here actually do research on the photographer before answering!? I'm commenting more on people's reaction rather than on your question!.

Bill Henson has been around for YEARS and pioneered many lighting techniques, he has had countless exhibitions and none were shut down!. Is it child porn!? I think this is very much in the eye of the viewer and not necessarily how he gets it up at night!.

And just for the record, i'm not a huge fan of this series but to go and classify this as child porn i think is pushing it!. However unfortunately i'm sure there are some demented individuals who would get their jolies from looking at the series!. However, i don't think this was his intended audience!.

If anyone would bother to look at his actual work then they would see a myriad of photographs not only depicting young adults (he mostly shot people who were between their teenage years and what would be considered adulthood, he's interested in the implications involved in the process of maturing) but also landscapes!.

But then again art is in the eye of the beholder, and sadly for most if it they think it wouldn't look good hanging in their trailer then "it ain't art"

I don't think Bill Henson meant this to be childporn or even to exploit children, i can point to hundreds of photographs online and find something that somebody out there would find to be exploitation!.!.!.!.!.good grief!.!.!.it is sad that this person's work is being interperted this way, but it's a sign of the times i suppose

And before any ignorant fool on here starts calling me a pedophile please remember that we all have a right to our own opinions, and no, i do not get my jolies from looking at child porn online!.!.!.!.thank you

PS: Lidy, you have excellent paint workWww@QuestionHome@Com