The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > A culture supportive of child abuse? > Comments

A culture supportive of child abuse? : Comments

By Patmalar Ambikapathy Thuraisingham, published 29/5/2008

This is not just a debate on art, censorship or rights, but whether we are a society supportive of child abuse.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Patmalar Ambikapathy,

Sir,

"What is child abuse and child pornography? Legal definitions exist for both and there are also private opinions of what is, or is not, child pornography."
Can you please tell me the Australian Legal definitions or the private opinions you prefer?

And please note here in Australia we once arbitrarily defined children as people under the age of 21. The legal definition changed 3 times last century. How many alterations do you think we should we make this century?
Should it depend solely upon the majority flavour morality of any peculiar time?

I think you'll see by answering the above querries we in Australia, who follow liberal democratic notions, are obviously not a culture supportive of child abuse.

You might also consider our developing liberal democratic attitudes towards censorship and our history of bans on literature film and other art.

Even if we Australians are able to be easily corrupted and need protection I find myself asking why would we need to go to an art gallery to view child pornography when there are, apparently, plenty of networks peddling much more horrific rubbish on the net?

So has the art gallery been targeted because they and an artist are 'easy marks'? It is plainely easier to 'nab' a gallery, an artist and his exhibition and the likelihood of gaining a conviction than 'nabbing' a true dealer in blatant paedophillia?
Posted by keith, Thursday, 29 May 2008 10:06:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I feel very sad to read Keith's post.
Are you saying that "Art" / "Artists" have the say in how our children are portrayed.
Parents are no longer allowed to take photgraphs of clothed children at sports and cultural events. Your opinion is all about the grandiose idea that art should be protected at all costs no matter what damage the art does. I think that we should protect children whatever the cost.
MAREE LORRAINE
Posted by MAREE LORRAINE, Thursday, 29 May 2008 11:14:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree with the author. When we as a society make rules to protect children and set legal parameters to what constitutes pornography under the law, this does not imply exceptions.

If there are exceptions under the law lets debate and discuss them but the bottom line is that protection of children should be the first priority not some commercial or artistic motivation as the author describes. This debate is not just about the children portrayed but what this means for all children by default.

I would argue that the pro-Henson advocates are not supporting child abuse per se or have that intention. I imagine they believe that they are in their own way protecting chidren under some sort of libertarian concept or in the interests of artistic freedom.

However, this is simplistic and does not change the fact that this particular art, depicts child sexuality in a public forum.
Posted by pelican, Thursday, 29 May 2008 11:28:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
i note 3 new articles about this topic

very interesting that some feel need to keep starting new debates with new angles to defend the perversion of children as art

We cannot reply to all the posts
[noting 5 on the topic all ready isnt that enough?]

it is hardly possable to reply to any one 'topic' unless like the supporters of this 'artist' one acts in concord or somehow has access to multiple id's.

But we know that the issue boils down to having images of children means some feeling is being satisfied ,
i just dont care to condone that naked children is the right thing [or the right multiple topic ,to give adults satisfaction.

I understand the arty types feel they deserve more
[more of the public purse[more time [more attention,more rights to subvert children in the name of 'ART'

noting 40 who attended the 20/20 find the time to support the perveyor of perversion to avoid the concequences of his perversions [in the name of art]

when are we going to say this topic has had enough EXPOSURE ,
to allow children to be children,

[i hear that even as recently as today these fine arty types have sent in an underage CHILD to defend their colluded transgressions of human decency.

Can you sympathising bleading hearts stop and think for a moment is it
is ok for a child to run nakid through the street
[or through an 'ART' gallery
[or come to your subsidised dinner party ,and strip off]

please wake up people
this isnt about ART its about allowing children to be perverted for adult tittillation

Imaging the child models school friends
[or more specificlly the 'boys' in her class passing arround HER photo]
this CHILD forever bears the scar of your sought out perversional need

Our deeds have consequences
[if you photo nakid kids you commit a crime]
get over it
grow up

[how many more shots you plan to plant here to squew the debate about this matter in this forum?]
Posted by one under god, Thursday, 29 May 2008 11:54:08 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“… I support the actions of the New South Wales and Victorian police in their investigation of what is alleged to be child pornography.”

I very strongly disagree Patmalar. The actions of confiscating artworks and threatening to charge the artist and gallery are just way over the top.

If the police had made it clear that a legal line was possibly being breached with the display of Henson’s work and that the parameters needed to be resolved, then fine. But their hardline action is completely unacceptable.

I’m not going to repeat my argument here. I’ve explained why I think this on another thread (one of the five active threads on this subject!!) http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1831#36422, http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1831#36740
Posted by Ludwig, Thursday, 29 May 2008 12:48:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A very sad but much needed debate.

I have worked for the past six years in very remote aboriginal Australia in WA, QLD, SA and NT all greater than 4 hours drive from a Coles or Woolworths supermarket (my definition of remote by the way). In all six communities I have worked in I have been confronted by horrendous child abuse and it has been going on for years. The abused often grow up to be abusers themselves..... we all know the story and let me assure you that Nanette Rogers didn't tell half of it. (Alice Springs Prosecutor)

My nursing colleagues all knew it was going on in all the years I was there and just put it down to "the aboriginal way" - end of story.

However after a serious, but much needed breakdown, directly precipitated by the child abuse I was confronted with and the subsequent action or lack thereof of the agencies I worked for, I have permanently left remote health after over 23 years and I have taken up a new career in mental health, never I hope to look child abuse in the face again.

I couldn't have been more wrong! I am living and working in a white community in an acute mental health facility with 20 beds. Almost all of our patients have suffered sexual abuse as children. I couldn't believe it! I guess the climate now is to tell all and I think this is great - lets just make sure that these people who do tell their stories do not talk to deaf ears, as so many did out remote. And lets make sure that those ears that are listening like mine, are not castigated for their efforts.

Keep debating my friends and above all "Maintain your rage" - I am.

"The greatest reason for evil to flourish is for good men to stand by and do nothing" Edmund Burke 1700's (I think)
Posted by Helen54, Thursday, 29 May 2008 1:10:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Three contributed articles on the same subject when we have already been dealing with it in the General section ever since Henson first put his foot in it.

Enough is enough.
Posted by Mr. Right, Thursday, 29 May 2008 1:45:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican - "However, this is simplistic and does not change the fact that this particular art, depicts child sexuality in a public forum."

Oh? I'm almost certain it depicts a naked teenage girl, not a child engaged in a sexual act or even posed provocatively. I'm one of the many Australians who finds nothing sexual about the image whatsoever. It seems any "sexuality" in the photo is in the eye of the beholder, and we are entitled to question why some beholders are aroused by such an innocent work.
Posted by Sancho, Thursday, 29 May 2008 2:11:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Author> "If this debate excludes children’s rights to be safe, we will all be diminished."

If that includes the right of the child not to be harrassed by society for voluntarily modelling for an art exhibition.

But since this article and the tone of it as they are, I don't think the author cares a damn about the wishes of the model. Hence, the author is not leaving the model alone and is imposing her own morility on the model and the demonisation of the work and the choices of the model.
Posted by Steel, Thursday, 29 May 2008 3:12:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Society is constructed upon abuse of the weak(er), starting at the beginning... children.

Our baggage handed off... to each new generation.

Encumbering them with our issues, hangups and nonsense. Forcing them and others to live in the shadow of OUR thoughts and fears. This eposide is clear evidence of that. Allegedly concerned persons project THEIR deviant thoughts onto another, the viewer. This is so ironic, so blind and so stupid, that its actually amusing.

We demand they carry the baggage, adjust themselves to it and make accomodations. Thus robbing them of their true potential, their true spirit. This we ultimately do to ourselves.

We dump all manner of bias and prejudice upon them.

The most wounderous of all poetic ironies... WE ARE THEM and THEY ARE US. The perceived differences are purely temporal. Thus is society. Constructed upon delusion propelled toward illusion. Lies, lies, lies. A lot of feel good lies. All most as many as the feel bad lies of guilt and shame.

Their names taken as justification for the short-sighted. The injustices visited upon others in the name of children will be visited upon those children... in adulthood. Duh.

Ah, the blind follies of ignorance.

The most pervasive abuse is psychological/emotional. They are manipulated fiercly, automatically, unconsciously. We install their buttons, so that they may better do the bidding of a decrepit society. A future that we will ultimately sell out to. So we must sell the youngens into our future service.

Few people are fit to breed. Fewer still fit to raise a child.

Much fewer have any business attending to their development (child-care, creche, kinda, primary and secondary school). These people are largely pervuyors of ignorance, do not possess the courage to act truthfully and dont demonstrate capacity for self-awarness/contemplation... integral to raising succeeding generations with some appreciable wisdom.

As an example of the rabid cognitive dissonance that permeates society, this guy is being charged. When Greer did the same thing, it was a 'celebration.' Society loves free licence.

Pfffft. THIS society just isnt worth saving.
Posted by trade215, Thursday, 29 May 2008 4:13:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I wonder how many people posting here have actually seen the photographs seized by the Police - other than, of course, what appeared in the newspaper. I certainly have not.

I am therefore not in the position to make any meaningful or intelligent comment as to whether they are child pornography, exploitative or merely of artistic merit. I suspect that most of those condemning the pictures do not have a clue of what they show because the prosecuting authorities are not going to publish photographs the subject of charges - to do so would be in contempt of court.

I agree with Sancho when who says "It seems any "sexuality" in the photo is in the eye of the beholder, and we are entitled to question why some beholders are aroused by such an innocent work."

I agree that if they are child pornography or exploitative they are to be condemned and rightly so. But as it would appear that there is some question of whether they are pornographic or exploitative I am not going to blunder along condemning, in my ignorance, out of hand what I really (like most Australians) really have no knowledge of.

It is also appropriate that the limits of permissible behaviour to be tested from time to time otherwise we would, for example, still condemned those whose minds are still in the dark ages to wearing kneck to knee swimmers when going swimming (not that the Speedos that so many men of my age wear out of misplaced vanity have anything to commend them)
Posted by Plaza-Toro, Thursday, 29 May 2008 4:14:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dave here
If you have read my postings on comments before then you would realise that my whole arguments have been on stopping child abuse but this countries governments agencies & etc have been allowing this to occur & our media doesn't want to touch the to hard cases as it may offend for 11years now my son has suffered yet nobody gives a damn this country will condone child abuse or anything else while ever you sweep it under the carpet & allow the insanity to grow just so some vain legal offical can impose their "power" of control
CHILD ABUSE MUST STOP ALL WHO CONDONE IT ARE AS GUILTY AS THOSE WHO DO IT
May your lord shine on you well
God Bless
Dave
Posted by dwg, Thursday, 29 May 2008 4:16:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thank you for posting your story, Helen54. A psychiatric nurse living across the street from me over 25 years ago made very similar observations to yours, about abuse causing mental illness.

It seems that child abuse is as old as war and families, and not restricted to any one group, and can be found even in the "best" of homes.

I don't expect anyone to be rational on the subject, which has become further complicated by the ability of anyone with a computer to post and receive pictures of children for any reason they choose.

What does strike me as ludicrous is the objection and suspicion of some in our community toward Muslim girls and women who wear the hijab and conservative clothing to conceal their bodies from public exposure. I wonder how many of these objecting people, in their reaction to another cultural tradition, fail to see it as a recognition of and adaptation to human needs and desires?

The best discussion I have heard so far on the topic of Bill Henson's paintings concerned the feelings of his models, and how their future might be influenced by the artist's work.

My guess is that these particular models will not likely be hospitalised, as are your patients, as a result of the pain and stigma of their perceived exploitation.

Were the models and their parents able to give informed consent? If so, did the consent include information about legality and public exposure via internet and mass media?

I see mainstream Australia as a culture which is supportive of child exploitation. Most of it is commercial and as everyday and invisible, in terms of its population health effect, as smoking on public transport was 35 years ago.

For me, the deeper question is about when exploitation becomes abuse. How and where will we draw a line as a responsible society? How do we control commercial exploitation in a society which promotes individual free choice with the aim of marketing a profitable choice of products?

I am beginning to wonder if the "free market" is all it's advertised to be.
Posted by Sir Vivor, Thursday, 29 May 2008 4:23:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SirVivor>"I don't expect anyone to be rational on the subject"

Why not? Regardless of what you expect, many are being rational. And it's probably not who you think.

>"My guess is that these particular models will not likely be hospitalised, as are your patients, as a result of the pain and stigma of their perceived exploitation."

Ah !@#$ it. I don't have time to respond to every moron, but this last one is a gem, so...

The models, my friend are perfectly happy with their volunatry modelling for the artist. That's why they did it.

Your assumption that they can only be damaged is a serious mental illness you have. The models are happy and were always happy with this, as are their parents. if anyone is causing them pain and anguish, it's that they are seen by their forebears as sinners and "revolting" for doing something they are proud of. All the stigma is being *created* by people like you and this author. Demonising the model has already begun so any damage will be because they have been harassed by people professing to protect them from harm, while insisting despite the models' protestations, that they were abused. It's equivalent to police or state psychologists making 'suggestions' to a child that they have been abused by their parents.
Posted by Steel, Thursday, 29 May 2008 5:03:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, Steel, as I said, I don't expect anyone to be rational.

You go off on a pretty irational tangent, old son (or daughter). I said "My guess is" I did not assume, I guessed. I can be wrong, of course. What are your assumptions, besides mistakenly assuming that I am really assuming instead of guessing?

and you say of me that:

"Your assumption that they can only be damaged is a serious mental illness you have."

Do you assume I am mentally ill, when you know me only by my post(s) here? Is that rational?

and what about the rest of your paragraph:

"The models are happy and were always happy with this, as are their parents. if anyone is causing them pain and anguish, it's that they are seen by their forebears as sinners and "revolting" for doing something they are proud of. All the stigma is being *created* by people like you and this author."

Do you have personal knowledge of these children's attitudes? Their parents (&/or carers)views and feelings? Do you know for certain whether their "forbears" consider them sinners? Is that their grandparents you're talking about, or what? Have you met these relatives of the models?

The idea that I am responsible for an element of any stigma born by the models is a consideration, and I gave it thought before I decided to contribute views to this particular discussion.

If you feel I've made an error of judgement, I respect that, but you are misleading yourself if you think any of your feelings are rational. Rational is about thought, not feeling.
Posted by Sir Vivor, Thursday, 29 May 2008 5:53:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
hi all,
artist here

go to france yahoo images
and you will find Mr Bill Henson's work online
much of it is there...

JHH

ps strange how works can disappear so quickly online,
and that teen porn sites are still there ?
Posted by JHH, Saturday, 31 May 2008 10:14:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Child Labour in the guise of high art!

As an artists adult nude model I know that the job is hard work. Nude modelling for photography makes the role more difficult because an individual is recognizable. It is because of person identification that “many professional artists models prefer not to pose for photographic artists” so said Anon at the Symposium discussion, Bay Area Models Guild in California on 24th Jun 2004. The photographic artist’s child models are not mere props but working accomplices in the creative process.

The child models have ‘laboured’ hard for Bill Henson’s art in an area of work that adult nude models generally choose not to do. Why is this childlabour exempt from the law which in Victoria is 15 years of age? How much were the child/children paid for their work and who negotiated their pay conditions? What were their working conditions and were they properly informed of the work required?

the Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes the right of
the child to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is
likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child's education, or to be harmful to the
child's health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development.

History is awash with examples of so called ‘high art’ exploiting children, we need only look at the barbaric practice of castration for the purposes of the castrati aesthetic which in one year alone mutilated 4,000 boys for the purposes of a musical fashion. Profit by the castrati singing for the elite through the sexual mutilation of young boys which made them unnaturally sing with the voice of a woman is very similar to profit through the fashion of exploiting children for the dubious craze of exploring the adolescent aesthetic.

The elitist high art card ignores the very real issue of exploitation of child labour working in an area where professional artist nude models generally steer well clear of.

Patmalar Ambikapathy is right in noting the financial gain by those who profit from the exploitation of individual nude child models.
Posted by think, Saturday, 31 May 2008 3:49:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Helen54 what an extremely misleading comment.

That abuse has nothing to do with this artwork. You seek to taint Henson by association and appeal to emotions without making a single substantiated comment. How does that abuse relate to Henson and his work?

What you have done here is disgusting: Using their abuse to advance your own political agenda. What a disgrace.

"It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." - William Shakespeare
Posted by Steel, Saturday, 31 May 2008 5:41:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Quote -"Helen54 what an extremely misleading comment.

That abuse has nothing to do with this artwork. You seek to taint Henson by association and appeal to emotions without making a single substantiated comment. How does that abuse relate to Henson and his work?

What you have done here is disgusting: Using their abuse to advance your own political agenda. What a disgrace.

"It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." - William Shakespeare" - unquote

Sorry to burst your caustic, arrogant and very ignorant bubble Steel, but white children abused are "primed" before the sexual act by books, sometimes artwork and movies - portraying children. Aboriginal children are forced to watch hard core porn often with children involved. One of the communities up north was spending an estimated $1500 a month on mail order pornography - this was in 2005

My ex husband was abused by a man who showed him artworks of naked children prior to forcing his intentions upon him. As for my being political - I vote green if that has anything to do with it.
Posted by Helen54, Saturday, 31 May 2008 8:05:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Helen, you are still doing it. Have you no shame?

You are attributing to media intended for adult consumption (in this case hardcore pornography), the crime of bad parenting and child molestations. That is absolutely disgraceful.

And you think I'm in the bubble here... Haven't you been reading the rubbish coming from you people? It's not even factual or rational.

....Such is propaganda. It's sad you believe it, but I suppose if you gullible and emotional it's hard to think critically about this.

Nowhere in your post do you acknowledge the wishes or opinions of the parents and the model herself who agreed to do the work voluntarily. They defend Henson and they blame all the damage and outrage squarely on you and your kind of bigotry. Harassed and demonised by society, the model is made ashamed to believe in her body. It's disgusting.
Posted by Steel, Saturday, 31 May 2008 10:25:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy