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.

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.

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.

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.

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)

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