Why would ANY parent allow their kids to be photographed like this is beyond me, unless they also see their own kids as sexual objects.
There isn't even any emphasis on beauty, it looks like outtakes from 70s porn.
I understand why a man would want to take pics like this, because they are sick in the head. But why would ANY parent allow their child to be photographed this way?
As far as I am concerned these are child porn images with just enough restraint to allow an argument about their 'artistic merit'.
To me, the only difference between these pics and pedophile pics is the photographer has found what he thought was a clever way to openly indulge his sickness while under the guise of 'artistic expression'.
I don't try to define porn, but I know it when I see it.
These pics have NO VALUE other than presenting pedophilia as an artistic endeavor.
Sorry, but if this man were in front of me right now I would tell him I believe him to be a pedophile and that his idea of 'art' is highly offensive.
There is NO MERIT in photographing nude children, and everybody knows I myself have a thing for nudes, but these images make me feel sick.
Yes. A lot of people feel this way and have told him so. On many occasions. And quite publicly. I saw an interview with a journalist who has written a book about Henson and this issue. He's a journalist I really respect and admire completely. I was interested to hear his investigations and conclusions.
I actually knew (believed) you would feel this way and I almost censored them myself. But in today's world it's an important controversy to engage in I think.
If the internet censorship was not the central issue I would disagree and say there is no need to see the images to have the debate.
However, they are central to the argument of censorship of an entire nation. So they must be seen and assessed I suppose it just makes me queasy to look at them.
I do not believe his work should be showed, But at the same time it is the parents whos morals are most in question here.
I just never thought I would see the day Australia decided to adopt red China type of censorship.
I'd love these photos if they were consenting adults. No questions about it.
But knowing that they are NOT consenting adults, it's very disturbing.
But I am against censorship of any kind. It sounds more like what John Howard would've done than what Kevin Rudd should do.
I self-censor. I'm now back in Seoul, where I had mentioned seeing photos of naked young boys. While pre-pubescent male nudity in Korean culture is a non-sexual, very good thing, we from the West do interpret it as child porn, so I turn my camera as far away from those photos as possible. (Plus, whenever I return home, US Customs may bust me as a "child pornographer," which I am certainly NOT.)
You are absolutely right, Ally. In fact the other day, while photographing one of my favourite Launceston parks so my kids could see what's available here for their kids should they choose to move down here, I stopped and asked all the parents with kids at the playground section if they minded me taking pictures that might have their children in them.
Consent is certainly the issue. And whether the child is of an age to give informed consent.
But Christy - I don't have a problem in the removal of these pictures from your site. It is such a fuzzy line, the one of censorship, and I really can't imagine that I will ever notice a difference. I can't think what might be censored from my reach that I would be looking for.
I almost did impulsivly remove them, but that is kinda the entire point.
I didn't do it for several reasons. Not the least of which I brought it on myself when I posted the thing about Aussi censorship of the net.
And, these images, though they make me slightly ill, are already out there and the parents knew all about it and wanted their child photographed in this way.
I believe it is ultimately the failure of their parents that has brought these images into the public domain and discussion.
To me, that should be what these photos are about. Not about censorship and not about pedophilia, but about parents who do not mind publicly turning their kids into sexual objects.
I try not to be a hypocrit, as i said, you all know I have a thing for nudes myself, but I think Ally got it perfectly right.
Knowing these are NOT consenting adults can not be reconcilled, not even if he had emphasized their beauty instead of their sexuality.
Children should never ever be photographed like this. He was not trying to 'show their beauty'. He was turned them into sexual objects. Their parents let him.
I think they should all be slapped. really really HARD.
In my opinion, those pictures are porn. I think the parents are sick and should be charged with a crime of negligence or child endangerment.
I agree with everything christy said. I don't believe it's about censorship. It's about parents criminally negligent and selling their kid into the porn industry.
9 comments:
Sorry Woz.
I don't find any artistic merit in these.
I just don't.
Do you know what these pics remind me of?
Micheal Jackson.
Why would ANY parent allow their kids to be photographed like this is beyond me, unless they also see their own kids as sexual objects.
There isn't even any emphasis on beauty, it looks like outtakes from 70s porn.
I understand why a man would want to take pics like this, because they are sick in the head. But why would ANY parent allow their child to be photographed this way?
As far as I am concerned these are child porn images with just enough restraint to allow an argument about their 'artistic merit'.
To me, the only difference between these pics and pedophile pics is the photographer has found what he thought was a clever way to openly indulge his sickness while under the guise of 'artistic expression'.
I don't try to define porn, but I know it when I see it.
These pics have NO VALUE other than presenting pedophilia as an artistic endeavor.
Sorry, but if this man were in front of me right now I would tell him I believe him to be a pedophile and that his idea of 'art' is highly offensive.
There is NO MERIT in photographing nude children, and everybody knows I myself have a thing for nudes, but these images make me feel sick.
Yes. A lot of people feel this way and have told him so. On many occasions. And quite publicly. I saw an interview with a journalist who has written a book about Henson and this issue. He's a journalist I really respect and admire completely. I was interested to hear his investigations and conclusions.
I actually knew (believed) you would feel this way and I almost censored them myself. But in today's world it's an important controversy to engage in I think.
If the internet censorship was not the central issue I would disagree and say there is no need to see the images to have the debate.
However, they are central to the argument of censorship of an entire nation. So they must be seen and assessed I suppose it just makes me queasy to look at them.
I do not believe his work should be showed, But at the same time it is the parents whos morals are most in question here.
I just never thought I would see the day Australia decided to adopt red China type of censorship.
The whole issue is just creepy.
I'd love these photos if they were consenting adults. No questions about it.
But knowing that they are NOT consenting adults, it's very disturbing.
But I am against censorship of any kind. It sounds more like what John Howard would've done than what Kevin Rudd should do.
I self-censor. I'm now back in Seoul, where I had mentioned seeing photos of naked young boys. While pre-pubescent male nudity in Korean culture is a non-sexual, very good thing, we from the West do interpret it as child porn, so I turn my camera as far away from those photos as possible. (Plus, whenever I return home, US Customs may bust me as a "child pornographer," which I am certainly NOT.)
Formerly Ally McLesbian
You are absolutely right, Ally. In fact the other day, while photographing one of my favourite Launceston parks so my kids could see what's available here for their kids should they choose to move down here, I stopped and asked all the parents with kids at the playground section if they minded me taking pictures that might have their children in them.
Consent is certainly the issue. And whether the child is of an age to give informed consent.
But Christy - I don't have a problem in the removal of these pictures from your site. It is such a fuzzy line, the one of censorship, and I really can't imagine that I will ever notice a difference. I can't think what might be censored from my reach that I would be looking for.
I almost did impulsivly remove them, but that is kinda the entire point.
I didn't do it for several reasons. Not the least of which I brought it on myself when I posted the thing about Aussi censorship of the net.
And, these images, though they make me slightly ill, are already out there and the parents knew all about it and wanted their child photographed in this way.
I believe it is ultimately the failure of their parents that has brought these images into the public domain and discussion.
To me, that should be what these photos are about. Not about censorship and not about pedophilia, but about parents who do not mind publicly turning their kids into sexual objects.
I try not to be a hypocrit, as i said, you all know I have a thing for nudes myself, but I think Ally got it perfectly right.
Knowing these are NOT consenting adults can not be reconcilled, not even if he had emphasized their beauty instead of their sexuality.
Children should never ever be photographed like this. He was not trying to 'show their beauty'. He was turned them into sexual objects. Their parents let him.
I think they should all be slapped. really really HARD.
That to me is what these pics are.
You know how we learn to look out for the catch phrases and arguments pedophiles use?
"But I would NEVER hurt a child. I LOVE CHILDREN."
Or the argument of how it is ok because 'children are sexual creatures, just like adults'.
To me this is an attempt to show you exactly that.
'See, it is ok because little kids really are sexual animals as well".
But we all know posing a little girl like a woman does not make her a woman.
And, this to me is perhaps the most disturbing part, that he DOES NOT attempt to highlight beauty.
The photos themselves look like bad porn. AMATURE porn.
I am certain his argument is 'But I just wanted to show their BEAUTY'. Yet as an artist he made no such attempt to accentuate it and highlight it.
In my opinion, those pictures are porn. I think the parents are sick and should be charged with a crime of negligence or child endangerment.
I agree with everything christy said. I don't believe it's about censorship. It's about parents criminally negligent and selling their kid into the porn industry.
Post a Comment