"Ginx you do let that anger out don't you? self righteous my way or no way very often....
....Our first clash, the first unleashing of that blind anger was in a thread about saying sorry but lets stay on subject...."
__

You've clocked me Belly. I have little respect for a so-called 'Union' guy whose views seem more aligned with the Right. Give me a true Right-Winger any day;-they do not pretend to be anything that they are not.
You are yet another who is tenacious in pointing out the faults of others, and have a real thing about those who are unkind to you,.............but let's stay on subject..!!
____________
"Do you see a thread condemning the latest pedophile ring?"
__

DO you? Why do you impose on those who oppose 'Hensonart' that THEY should start such a thread?
____________
"Can you think you are the only one life has allowed to see more than one child destroyed by an adults needs?"
In fact how dare you? yes you, mix up your concern for victims with this victim less art?"
___

DON'T TELL ME WHAT I MIXED UP YOU PLONKER! AND DON'T EVEN BEGIN TO DEFINE WHAT I SEE AS VICTIMLESS ART!!
______________
"Did you see chains holding these kids to chairs?
Religion has much to answer for I am unsure if I should laugh or cry if I think of the story of Adam and Eve and compare it with this story....."
___

Stupido!
________________
"...It was clear from day one these two related threads would have to confront the fact no crime had been committed."
Posted by Belly, Saturday, 7 June 2008 7:03:52 AM
___

I have to agree with this. It all hangs on the definition of crime..

Well Ginx at it again my way or no way that line you draw under your thoughts is maybe a hint?
Every one has a right to an opinion even me!
Hey do not for a second think being from the right of my movements, both of them is defaming me.
I belong there, in the middle.
Can you get in in that angry head just maybe you are wrong? at least sometimes?
Mounting evidence is on display no crime was committed and just as surely people who never even saw the photos got it wrong.
In this thread re read it, some found things that just did not exist in the photos.
If you present your self as an angry person who both values your own thoughts more than others do and values others thoughts less do not get upset if we differ, your personal insults do not add weight to your case here.
It was and is art.

Great thread. 201 posts and rolling on strongly…maybe. Or maybe this post will kill it off?

Alright, so practically no one is concerned about the standard of policing displayed in this issue. There have been a couple of expressions of agreement (not on this thread but on some of the other six threads on this subject!), but not one single person has indicated that they think I am incorrect with my very heavy criticism of the police (as expressed on 5 June on this thread).

There is hardly any interest in this vitally important aspect of the issue. I find that extremely disappointing and perplexing.

People apparently don’t have a problem with exactly this sort of thing happening again, when some artist somewhere runs foul of the law while just doing what they’ve always done, or understanding from the relevant gallery and public that their work is acceptable. Maybe next time someone will be charged, end up in jail and have their career skittled?

Well, if no one is interested in policing, are they at least interested in trying to define the boundaries of what is acceptable and what isn’t? Or does everyone think that it is ok to leave them undefined and that the issue is over now that Henson’s work has been deemed to be within the bounds?

Or do you think that such boundaries are just too difficult to define for the DPP or anyone else with authority to even attempt?

Ludwig,

The police would have done well to have asked for advice from the DPP on whether Henson’s “art” met the legal definition of pornography. But the police's job is not to convict criminals, that is for the courts. The police need only suspect that an act, or actions, constitute a breach of the law. In the end the system worked as it was supposed to.

You say >>” Maybe next time someone will be charged, end up in jail and have their career skittled?”

This has done more for Henson’s career than anything he’s done previously by a country mile. He knew the art would be controversial and would get media attention. Already there has been a copycat exhibition trading on Henson’s notoriety.

I agree that we need to have boundaries. Personally I would say that photographing teenage children naked is beyond the boundary of what’s acceptable to the general community.

There have been a lot of Henson supporters suggesting that those who oppose these works are in a moral panic, or want to stop all nudity in art, and other equally silly things. But most of us believe that 13 is too young to be able to make the decision, to pose nude, for yourself. It may be in this case that the girl was fully capable of making the decision, but in this society we regularly draw lines to protect or restrict people of certain ages. Some teenagers could drive responsibly at 15, but we don’t let them, because we don’t have the time or the money to investigate on a case by case basis. I believe that kids who want to be photographed nude should wait until they are 16 to decide.

Let me pre-empt those who wish to claim that I am conflating nudity with sex, I am not. What I am suggesting is that 16 is the age when we consider that children are capable of making significant decisions about their bodies. It’s clearly an appropriate place to draw the line, if we agree that one is needed.

Where do others draw the line

Ludwig

I agree with all you've said regarding the police action. I just haven't seen it as the critcal and more interesting aspect of the debate that's all.

Paul

I agree with every word. In the interests of consistency and simplicity I think the line should be drawn to match existing delineations. The age of consent as you have suggested is probably the best one, or alternatively it could be drawn to match the age at which young adults can legally drink, drive and vote. I think the two are different - it's been a while since these milestones were an issue in our household so I'm not quite sure!

This issue certainly achieved one aim of art- to encourage debate and discussion. It has stirred a great deal of passion within society irrespective of which side of the debate one finds themselves.

PaulL- Your thoughtful and clearly reasoned arguments cut to the heart of the issue. I've appreciated your posts and thanks for your support.