Perhaps you ought to try again, Ludwig.

>>...no matter how clearly and repeatedly I state my position, you and a few others with incredibly warped thought processes will insist that my position is something quite different<<

To begin with, you can tell us how your position differs from this one:

>>It seems that the worst of [Rolf Harris' actions] was a bit of groping, which really amounts to somewhat risqué activity, and nothing worse than that<<

So, do you confirm that is this your position?

And:

>>So how did he take her pants down and put his head right in her crotch if she wasn’t willing to let him do it? It does not compute.<<

Do you still maintain that she was a willing participant?

I think those two will do for now, don't you?

Once we have cleared up the misunderstanding that arose from believing that you actually meant what you wrote, we can move on to discover other, similar misunderstandings and consequent misrepresentations.

But you are still not listening, are you.

And that, when all is considered, is your biggest problem.

Further to my last post;

< "The community is divided on whether it should stay up or come down," he [shire president Robert Nixon] said.

"At the end of the day, council had to make a decision, and council received a lot of feedback from the community, and based on that it made a decision to reinstate it.

"I think you've got to listen to the community and the consensus we got from the community was that the painting ought to be put up and I emphasise once again that doesn't mean the council condones the act of Rolf Harris." >

So clearly there are whole lot of people in Dalwallinu who are not of the utterly hardline extremist type of sentiment that is being expressed on this thread.

I am sure that the spread of views in Dalwallinu shire is a whole lot closer to that across the country and in Britain, than the views expressed on this thread are.

I would suggest that the views expressed here, by all contributors other than me, are way out towards one end of the spectrum of the general thinking on this subject, and that there are many people out there who are thinking along the same lines as I am. Indeed, that has very much been my experience in face-to-face chats with lots of people, as I mentioned early in this thread.

No! No! Jay, let it continue; I hear that a couple of Unis have picked up on it and are contemplating Psychology and/or Sociology courses to be known as "Lud.101".

Let me see if I understand you correctly, Ludwig.

>>I am sure that the spread of views in Dalwallinu shire is a whole lot closer to that across the country and in Britain, than the views expressed on this thread are. I would suggest that the views expressed here, by all contributors other than me, are way out towards one end of the spectrum of the general thinking on this subject, and that there are many people out there who are thinking along the same lines as I am.<<

You are suggesting that the majority of people of Dalwallinu Shire, of Australia, and of Britain share your view that:

>>It seems that the worst of [Rolf Harris' actions] was a bit of groping, which really amounts to somewhat risqué activity, and nothing worse than that<<

And that they also believe, as you do, that Rolf's behaviour was welcomed:

>>So how did he take her pants down and put his head right in her crotch if she wasn’t willing to let him do it? It does not compute.<<

I cannot agree.

Further, I put it to you that you are in fact completely alone in your perception of what other people are thinking of Rolf's sins.

Another possibility, of course, is that you are keeping some very dubious company.

Ludwig, I simply quoted your opening remarks, and based my assessment of your stance on those opening remarks. If at some stage of the discussion you did in fact changed your stance, then I apologies.
A simple question, do you STILL agree with your opening remarks? I you do not then please rewrite it, just for me, so I'm clear on your new position. I'm not opposed to the discussion as you have presented the facts, forgetting the attacks on personalities contributing from you and others. Can I say this, to encapsulate it in a nut shell, one side, your side, that Harris was to some degree hard done by, on the other side Harris was fairly treated and the court judgment was correct and reflected the over whelming prevailing community attitude.
I don't wish to be a forum "enemy" of yours. You and I have a basic difference on this. I agreed wholly with the outcome, you don't, it does not make us "enemies".

I wasn't going to comment again on this topic, since it has been thoroughly dealt with, but ....

While I totally agreed with the result of the court case, indeed think Harris got off lightly because of his age (by Ludwig's criteria I am one of the 'utterly hardline extremist types'), I also do not think Harris' art works should be removed. If we removed all art works, music, books etc, on the basis of the artists' morality or criminality, there might not be much left!

Rather, they provide an opportunity to meditate on the complexity of humanity - that being creative does not necessarily mean being ethical or moral. Indeed, with Harris it provides an opportunity to contemplate how much our assessment of art is based on the celebrity of the artist. Now, knowing what the man got up to, will opinions of his art change? So we need to keep the work in the public arena.

In summary, the people of Dalwallinu who voted to keep the works on display do NOT necessarily condone Harris's behaviour. They may be as utterly hardline extremist as me.