Page 1 of 5
#3
Not child abuse, but child porn perhaps.
Quote by FrenchyFungus
I am not a woman as I currently claim


Quote by Rabid
I am actually a woman, unlike Frenchy
#5
"Is it art?" is probably the most stupid question anyone could ask. Anything can be art, full stop.

But posing naked is hardly an abuse. I imagined they were showing intercourse to warrant all this controversy or something.
Quote by BLOBERT
BRO
#6
i don't think it can be considered abuse unless he touched them himself. it's still child porn though. which is bad. very bad.

edit:

"And after all of this, I am amazed...

...that I am cursed far more than I am praised."
Last edited by Sol9989 at May 23, 2008,
#8
Quote by Reject_666_6
"Is it art?" is probably the most stupid question anyone could ask. Anything can be art, full stop.

But posing naked is hardly an abuse. I imagined they were showing intercourse to warrant all this controversy or something.


Sorry, but I made the thread quickly and they were the first questions that came to mind.
#10
why did the parents allow there children to be photographed like that?
i can't play the video i want to see childporn ^^ lol
#11
bill henson is one of the greatest conceptual photgraphers australia has ever seen. he's been doing works like this for years and it wasnt until someone finally took notice of him and complained, that all this fuss has occurred. it is not child porn, its art. all it was intended to be was art. its not his fault that others interpret it in a way it wasnt indended to be
#13
Porn isn't the correct term, I don't think.

You don't class classical nudes as porn. I think his work is art, but the models aren't old enough to consent to be in it. Therefore he is in the wrong.
VENUSIAN
FB SC BC TW
Patterns In The Ivy present ethnicity on an intriguing and dedicated level. ~Ambient Exotica
A mesmeric melange of yearning voice, delicate piano and carefully chosen samples. ~Lost Voices
#14
It is art. But definately not abuse. The children did it willingly. But he should have had the parents sign a waiver I think. I reckon that if he did, he may not have gotten prosecuted. Maybe had his show closed down, but not prosecuted.
#15
a squad of police spent several hours yesterday examining the photographs of boys and girls believed to be about 12 years of age.


lol
In his house at R'lyeh, dead Cthulhu waits dreaming.


╔═══╗
║  ██ ║
╠═══╣
║╬  •• ║
╚═══╝
#17
Hawt is what i call it
But seriously it is definitely child porn In my opinion , but not child abuse...still wrong me thinks
EDIT:What Rabidguitarist said..hes pretty much spot on.
Quote by dillonrips7

I like to pretend I'm Johnny Depp, and scissor away at my crotch.

Quote by _InsanitY_
holy **** awesome win right there

Quote by Shadowenspirit
/win!
Last edited by KCGIG1 at May 23, 2008,
#18
pornography has to be intended for use in a certain way, it would kinda be like calling some of dahlis work pornography, yeah it has naked chicks in, but ure really not gonna sit there and wank over it....
#19
Quote by Martindecorum
not abuse, but aparently these days anything can be art, but there has to be some limits and i say 12-13 year old girls is probably the limits


No there shouldn't. The very point of art is that it has no limits, so that it stimulates other people's imagination in new and different ways.

Quote by Atreideslegend
pornography has to be intended for use in a certain way, it would kinda be like calling some of dahlis work pornography, yeah it has naked chicks in, but ure really not gonna sit there and wank over it....


+12

What most people don't realise is that not every representation of a nude person is porn.
Quote by BLOBERT
BRO
Last edited by Reject_666_6 at May 23, 2008,
#20
the intention was not for the image to be used for sexual gratification of a third party, so no, not porn.

but that doesn't make it legal/moral.
#21
Oh the majority of them were 12 and 13 ... that's kinda pushing it, I'm sure if they were at least like 15-16 it wouldn't of been blown up that much.

This definitely would of been taken differently depending on where it occurred though, in a lot of European countries this wouldn't of had such an uproar since most of them let their children run wild and naked at the beaches and ****.

Still kinda ... strange ...

This reminds me of the blown-out-of-the-water controversy of Hannah Montanna // Miley Cyrus showing her back for vanity fair or w/e ... that was just ridiculous.
#22
Quote by filthandfury
I heard about this, here are some of the pics (censored, obviously) so you can judge if they're inappropriate.

http://www.news.com.au/gallery/0,23607,5031912-5010140-1,00.html

ok some pics are definatly offensive and at the last pic it's like something out of a child porn movie :s not that i've ever seen one of course
that NOT art , just pics of naked underaged boys and girls! and how did the museum allow it ? :s smessed up
#23
Quote by Reject_666_6
No there shouldn't. The very point of art is that it has no limits, so that it stimulates other people's imagination in new and different ways.


+12

What most people don't realise is that not every representation of a nude person is porn.

but people shouldn't be looking at 12 year old girls naked:s
#25
Quote by Retro Rocker
It might not be abuse or full on porn, but it's still damn wrong.
Where is the 'art' in naked children?


The same place where there's art in any other photograph.

The point of taking pictures of people to exhibit isn't just to see the people like "Oh, look, a naked boy. How quaint!", it's to get an idea of the emotion that the subject is feeling in the moment of taking the picture, and the interpretations vary for everybody.

Quote by toine
but people shouldn't be looking at 12 year old girls naked:s


None of them were naked, actually. The crotch was covered with their hands, and I think that the "boobs" were as well.
Quote by BLOBERT
BRO
#26
It is art.
Porn isn't really a good word to describe it.
It's not like she's getting fucked or something.
And I don't really see anything wrong nude photos if it's art and the people being photographed are doing it willingly
#27
none of those images where pornographic.

nudity does not equal pornography.
make Industrial and/or experimental electronic music? Join my group!

Last.fm
#29
Um... pics?
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#30
Porn is the EROTIC DISPLAY of nude persons

I don't see ANYTHING erotic about these photos.

The age is only thing i think he is wrong in

and even then, i GARENTEE the parents were consensual, as welll as the kids

So honestly, bugger the **** off
#31
I say it's abuse and not art. I think it's daft how you can pass of anything as art these days. I rape old grannies but I do it for a laugh, when people start doing it as art then I know the time has come to end it.
#32
Quote by Phoenix-Kun
Porn is the EROTIC DISPLAY of nude persons

I don't see ANYTHING erotic about these photos.

The age is only thing i think he is wrong in

and even then, i GARENTEE the parents were consensual, as welll as the kids

So honestly, bugger the **** off

so if i ask a 12 year old if i could take a picture of her naked and she says yes , it's ok ? :s
#33
Quote by toine
so if i ask a 12 year old if i could take a picture of her naked and she says yes , it's ok ? :s


If it has an actual purpose behind it, you ask the parents and show them that its meant for an artistic purpose, and it isn't an erotic Photo, then why not? Everyone is fine with it, your intentions are good, or i'd hope so, and no actual depravity is put upon anyone

I find nothing wrong with it, society has this enourmous no nudity thing, when honestly your born that way, its a social no no, thats all
#35
Quote by toine
so if i ask a 12 year old if i could take a picture of her naked and she says yes , it's ok ? :s


It's not just about the picture, it's about what it's meant to represent. If I take a picture of a dog, does that automatically make it a bestiality photo?
Quote by BLOBERT
BRO
#36
Quote by Phoenix-Kun
If it has an actual purpose behind it, you ask the parents and show them that its meant for an artistic purpose, and it isn't an erotic Photo, then why not? Everyone is fine with it, your intentions are good, or i'd hope so, and no actual depravity is put upon anyone

I find nothing wrong with it, society has this enourmous no nudity thing, when honestly your born that way, its a social no no, thats all

the ones who enjoy watching a naked 12 year old are just sick . and i'm pretty sure most people find a naked body erotic :s so it's just wrong. would you allow your daughter ( if you have one) to get naked in front of a camera for the whole world to see her naked body ? at such a young age?
#37
Quote by toine
the ones who enjoy watching a naked 12 year old are just sick . and i'm pretty sure most people find a naked body erotic :s so it's just wrong. would you allow your daughter ( if you have one) to get naked in front of a camera for the whole world to see her naked body ? at such a young age?

You might find a nude 12 year old erotic but not all of us do.
I mean,if I was in front of you and I took my clothes of,you wouldn't find it very erotic?
Last edited by timo1 at May 23, 2008,
#38
Quote by timo1
You might find a 12 nude 12 year old erotic but not all of us do.
I mean,if I was in front of you and I took my clothes of,you wouldn't find it very erotic?

i'm not the only one who would find it erotic
it's just wrong , that's what it is
#39
Quote by rabidguitarist
Porn isn't the correct term, I don't think.

You don't class classical nudes as porn. I think his work is art, but the models aren't old enough to consent to be in it. Therefore he is in the wrong.


+1

I think it could be considered art.
Quote by joehhy
i will use my lvl 90 Golduck against the evil 4chans, they will not stand a chance


Quote by Led Pepplin
My penis is quite literally trembling in fear.






FLOCKDRAW!!!!!!! EPICS!!!!!
#40
so do you consider the cover of the blind faith album porn? Nirvana's nevermind? Zeppelin's house of holy? Its art. Child pornography is defined as something that is sexual and not artistic. And nudism by itself is art.
Page 1 of 5