soft child porn promoted as ART by sydney gallery

[1hotbusa]

i'd be more than happy to go to jail being a serial killer of paedophiles.

Is it just me or does that whole train of thought bring a smile to others faces as well?

Gotta be legend status behind bars

I think a jury of your peers would struggle to bring down a guilty verdict for that one.

[Ozboc]

The police are charging this guy and they have siezed the offending photographs.

Story in the SMH

SMH Story Here

Not defending this guy at all , just found it amusing that the media hype things up so much, what do i mean ?

They reported that they had seized the offending photos and about 5000 other photos from his computer / premises

this makes it seam like all the photos were of objectionable material , when i fact they may just be photos of tree's , mountains and so forth

got to love the media for hyping things up

Boc

[busakid08]

DJ & Bugsy- nail on the head - the rest are f#$%ing sheep to the media as usual! How about doing some research, how many of you know about art? How many of you actaully have an original thought !
Oh and before you start going on and abusing me etc - I have 2 daughters 16 & 18; so dont think I support child porn or any other sick sh|t that goes on in this effked up world but I do support individuality when its done in the right context.
(and I am not a particular lover of art either)

[Macbusa]

why a naked child ???

what a load of bullshit.

[Leviathan]

Now I'm no art buff, but I would imagine that the goal of photographic art is to have people look, comment and appreciate your work.

Naked underage children should not be looked at, commented on or appreciated!

If such material is allowed to be shown under the guise of "art" people can become desensitised to it. I'm sure that our fine artists can find alternate muses to create their works and just let children be children.

Just my opinion.

[Dan85]

DJ & Bugsy- nail on the head - the rest are f#$%ing sheep to the media as usual! How about doing some research, how many of you know about art? How many of you actaully have an original thought !
Oh and before you start going on and abusing me etc - I have 2 daughters 16 & 18; so dont think I support child porn or any other sick sh|t that goes on in this effked up world but I do support individuality when its done in the right context.
(and I am not a particular lover of art either)

well im sorry you think that me hearing about a guy using a naked 12 year old as art is wrong and makes me a f*&^ing sheep to the media. whether you have daughters or not makes no difference in the fact that photographing a nude 12 year old girl is WRONG anyway you look at it. hey heres a great idea lets stop with the you dont agree with my point of view so your a f*&^ing sheep nonsense and remember the fact the man took nude pictures of a 12 year old. well i guess my moral compass must be f****d up or i must be old fashioned thinking its wrong to to take nude pics of minors. well im gonna head off cause i dont like being called a "f*&^ing sheep" or grouped into the "uneducated masses" and im gonna exercise my right to artistic expression and go kill something and take a photo of it cause im feeling angry and need to express my self surely thats ok isnt? hopefully busakid08 you have taught your daughters more manners and respect than you your self have. good night

[Sumkhun]

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/S.../image.jpg

I like art too

[ROD]

If im a sheep im right behind Dan on this one there is no place for it and i realy cant see how some of you can agree with it .maybe you would like a section in the picture gallery set up so you can post nude pics of your teenage daughters

[kev11e]

G'day
Well, it's difficult to judge it as pornography without seeing it, so I'm assuming most here have seen the pics...
And would realise that some of the images are over 20 years old...
And some of the subjects have been quoted as still not being offended and do not consider it as pornography...
Lot of knee-jerk reaction here people...
Regards
Kevin

[m8ee]

ill go with Kev too on this one.
Does anyone know about this artist?
Has anyone gone to the trouble to see other work he has done in comparison?
Does anyone know what he was trying to put across? Not that he has to.
Maybe what this has proven is that people are or can be very narrow minded and see naked and think porn instead of body, shape or whatever.
Just because there is a naked girl under age (laws made merely by man remember) does that mean it is porn or it was intended to be?
He may have been trying to get the message across that the human body is beautiful at any age...I don't know.
But he obviously isn't a porn promoter as such.

I know about him, have seen a lot of his other works. Regardless of how it is interpreted, or what the artists "intentions" are, it is still pictures of MINORS with no clothes on. How do you. or anyone else, actually know what his intentions are? - Do you beleive that it is "art" just because he said so? If so, you are more narrow minded than anyone else.

The law states that you cannot take pictures of naked minors for a good reason. I do not simply agree with all laws simply because they exist, but I abide by them because they are in place as a result of the collective experiences of society to date. By your resoning DJ, kev, and Busakid, someone could put a show together with pictures of his dick hanging out of a kiddie, and simply say that to him it is beautiful, and therefore it is art.

In all societies the line must be drawn somewhere, and I beleive that if you support any form of pictures of naked kids being put on display, you are on the wrong side of the line.

I am not a sheep, these are my very own thoughts on the matter, and I don't give a rats arse what the media say about it.

Oh, and BusaKid08, be careful calling people sheep and such and making rash generalisations mate, many of us are quite able to think for themselves, and do not find attacks like that amusing. I don't call you a kiddie-fiddler, and I would thank you not to call me a sheep to the media.

[BUSGO]

Regardless of opinions on this issue, there is no point getting into a flame war over it.
There will always be opposite opinions in any group of people on any given subject.
We have to learn to live with and respect other peoples interpretations folks (So long as they conform to what is legal).

Art is Art and Porn is Porn.
Child porn is not art its a crime.

I have only seen the photos shown in the press and on TV out of this collection.
I can't make a judgement on those images in this case but the ones that I have seen are certainly not pornographic.

Maybe a definition of pornography needs to be consulted.

[busakid08]

(Baaaaa dont cry LOL) ok ok bit harsh - sorry to upset you.

Point I was trying to make and didnt really make it cos I sometimes get anoyed and distracted for a reason:

I spent the last year in Iraq, and one thing that became very clear was the information that is fed to us is very different from the actual story going on - am I now an authoruty on Iraq? shit no, but it I always find is that the "facts" from Media and online (gee its on the internet so it must be true - how many people actaully beleive that is astonishing) are very different to the real facts. My eyes were opened in the early 90's when I stopped watching TV and listening to the radio for 5 years and went searching for real stories - doesnt mean I know anymore than anyone else but some things I know are not true. Do I think a vast majority of people are sheep hell yes - take a journey to a third world counrty, talk to the locals, spend some time in a different culture then come back home and listen - you will laugh at the ignorance of the general public and hear all the "facts" verbatim from media.
Yep theres plenty out there who can and do think for themselves THANK GOD !!!!

Lovyasall

[Heidi1]

I'm really torn about this one. I've seen his work, we have exhibited it here, and it is in most major gallery's collections. His work is so far away from porn. There is nothing sexy or salacious about his images.

HOWEVER, (and this is where I get confused), I'm not a parent, but I wouldn't let my kid be photographed naked. There are boundaries, and this has to be one of them. Children need to be protected, sometimes from themselves, often the parents will say, 'but they WANT to do it', what bullshit.

BUT (and here is my confusion again), I'm with DJ Pete and BusaKid08. It is a very slippery slope once the moral majority leaps on a bandwagon and decides to ban art based on content. One day it is art, the next day it is literature, then it is movies, then the next thing we are all standing slavering around a bonfire burning books and art while the 'state' tells us what to do and we dob in our neighbours for not thinking like we do.

Don't tell me this can't happen, I am watching it start right now on the tv.

And remember, the beauty of a free world is that we can all have different opinions and no-one gets crucified for them (except mechanx, but he is a nob).

[mechanx]

do what me mate ''Hit.............r'' did gas the fucker and send him to hell . I have a big nob to heidi.

[westman]

Seems like a person can call themselves an artist and expect to get away with murder. I guess if one hangs out with the wine quaffing, handbag carrying, bisexual art crowd for long enough, being a pervert or rock spider is quite acceptable. The only requirement is they must wear a French beret and carry a shoulder bag. Luckily, most normal people seem to be able to tell the difference between art and perversion.