Hmmmmm, where do we start in reply to such ridiculous rubbish that steel just wrote.

Apparently, believing in the non-sexualisation of underage children in photography makes one a "fascist".

Steel, with your utterly immature post, based on ideology without thought for the innocence of children, you display such a non-grasp of the issue that it almost defies reasoned belief.

This topic has NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR LEFT WING VS RIGHT WING CRAP! That is YOUR manufacture.

It's NOT a political issue. It's a "child" issue.

I raised a house full of children. I'm surrounded by grandchildren and great grandchildren aplenty. I'm not having some ideological dogmatist such as you writing your crap, without reply. The mere thought of an underage child, posing nude specifically for a man to photograph and publish, and then calling it "art", and then trying to give the "impression" that it's all ok , shows the degree of desentisation some people have reached.

You deserve scorn and mockery regarding your childish "fascist" rubbish. I was one of Bob Menzies biggest supporters back in the days when the Liberal Party was the "Liberal Party". You're so blinded by dogma that you let it interfere with your reasoning ability, by actually accusing "ME" of abusing kids. You're utterly delusional, and have probably had very little contact and loving parental interaction with children. It's all dogma, dogma dogma from you.

Pathetic.

Cut the "ideological dogma" crap out of your posts......it makes you look so old fashioned and "historical" Left and right wing dogmatists like you are such a waste of protoplasm. Australia needs forward thinkers, not people engulfed by inflexible dogma.

philips,

Thank God you are a voice of reason. It is good to know their are some others out there who will defend children instead of insisting on the right to look at naked young boys and girls. Steel and Stg are regular defenders of the porn industry and this art is no different except it is exploiting kids instead of adults. Their view that it is not child exploitation reminds me of Bill Clinton who claimed oral sex with Monica wasn't sex. It has the same logic.

LOL, runner called phillips a "voice of reason"....

A truly appropriate comment on her credibility.

So Antiseptic, I see that's your one and only post on the topic.

It seems it's a bit too hard for you to actually engage your brain and comment on whether you think it's appropriate for adult men to enjoy commercially produced photographs of naked little girls, all in the name of ummmmmmmmm........ "art" of course. Oh, and let's not forget about your "rights".

I have no problem with the depiction of naked children (or naked adults, for that matter) but then, I'm not a dirty-minded old woman...

philips, did you even read my post before typing that out? Read the first sentence two sentences of my last comment and repeat them to yourself. They are simple facts and not hard to grasp. Your statements are regurgitations of what you've read in the media and your ignorant narrow mindedness. They are a collection of pieces you throw at anything that is currently topical in the media. Simple logic and reason, even facts, are beyond your grasp.

This is why you keep ending your comments with slogans such as,

"Let kids be kids........that's not hard to understand!"

....without paying any respect or attention to the children themselves and their parents, who have all spoken in support of the work and who are happy and proud of it. You even ignore historical information.