Its hosted on FTL's server. One more reason for fed games.
This is not Anon. Regardless of your opinions it jeopardizes the owner. That is not only disrespectful of his property, but his personal safety and freedom.
I won't condone or participate in the squirrelly debate about whats right and wrong. In the United States, there are specific laws about age of photography subjects, which are known as 2257 laws. The rule is eighteen. The subject is thirteen at the time of the photography.
I'm not gonna take it down or say another word - but you've all been made aware of the potential consequences.
That's OK, I don't think the picture, although controversial, would actually cause serious legal problems because it was produced by an accomplished artist, and in no way depicted the 13 year old in some kind of pornographic way. I understand you guys taking the pic down, but I don't get why my introduction to the pic and my sort of interpretation of it was also taken down.
People are going to wonder what the hell it was that I posted, and think that I posted "kiddie porn", so although I won't post anymore images like that again, I will explain what happened for people who are curious.
I posted a photograph made by the accomplished artist Bill Henson:
Henson's art has been exhibited in many locations, including the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York, the Venice Biennale, the National Gallery of Victoria in Melbourne, Australia, the Art Gallery of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia and the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. His current practice involves holding one exhibition in Australia every two years, and up to three overseas exhibitions each year.
Henson's photographs reflect an interest in ambiguity and transition. The use of chiaroscuro is common throughout his works. His photographs are painterly and often presented as diptychs, triptychs and other groupings.
Henson's works often meditate on the categories of and relationships between male and female; youth and adulthood; day and night; light and dark; nature and civilisation. His images often use flattened perspective and tend towards abstraction. The faces of the subjects are often blurred or partly shadowed and do not directly face the viewer.
According to Crawford, Henson presents "adolescents in their states of despair, intoxication and immature ribaldry". He has said that these "moments of transition and metamorphosis are important in everyone's lives".[1]
Henson's intention is to use photography for creative expression. He states that he is not interested in a political or sociological agenda, although the viewer cannot help but relate his works to their own stance on these issues. Henson, however, is not intending his photographs to be authoritative evidence but rather to suggest endless possibilities and cause people to wonder.
Henson studied at the Phillip Institute of Technology (later the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology) and the Victorian College of the Arts in Melbourne.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_HensonThe photograph I posted was one of the images that got him into trouble:
Images seized
On 22 May 2008, the opening night of Bill Henson's 2007-2008 exhibition at the Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery in Paddington, Sydney, was cancelled after eight individual complaints were made to Police voicing concerns about an email invitation from the Gallery to a "Private View" that depicted photographs of a nude 13-year old girl. Hetty Johnston, a child protection advocate (Bravehearts), also lodged a complaint with the New South Wales police.[2][3]. On the same day, Sydney Morning Herald columnist, Miranda Devine, had also written a scathing article in response to viewing the email invitation[4], which precipitated heated talk-back and media discussion throughout the day. In the process of removing the images from the Gallery, Police found more photographs of naked children on exhibition among various large format photographs of nonfigurative subjects, which they later sought to examine for the purposes of determining their legal status under the NSW Crimes Act and child protection legislation.[5] Following discussions with the Gallery and a decision by Henson, the Gallery cancelled the opening and postponed the show[6].
It was announced on 23 May that a number of the images in the exhibition had been seized by police local Area Commander Alan Sicard, with the intention of charging Bill Henson and/or the Gallery with "publishing an indecent article" under the Crimes Act.[7] The seized images were also removed from the Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery website, where the remainder of the series can now be viewed online.[8]
The situation provoked a national debate on censorship. In a televised interview, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd stated that he found the images "absolutely revolting"[9][10][11] and that they had "no artistic merit".[12] These views swiftly drew censure from members of the 'creative stream' who attended the recent 2020 Summit convened by Rudd, led by actor Cate Blanchett.[13]
On 5 June 2008, the former director of the National Gallery of Australia Betty Churcher said it was "not surprising" that the New South Wales Department of Public Prosecutions (DPP) would announce its official recommendation that no charges be laid regarding the Sydney Roslyn Oxley9 gallery's collection of photographs by artist Bill Henson.
Ms Churcher says it would have been ridiculous to drag the case through the courts:[14][15]
I'm very pleased that the public prosecutor has decided that it's likely to end the debacle because they always do, as soon as you take art into court it never works ... The court is not the place to decide matters of art.
On 6 June 2008 it was reported in The Age that police would not prosecute Bill Henson over his photographs of naked teenagers, after they were declared "mild and justified" and given a PG rating[16] by the Australian Classification Board, suggesting viewing by children under the age of 16 is suitable with parental guidance.[17]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_HensonI don't know to much about the content of the other pictures that got him in trouble, nor do I know much about Bill Henson's art, but the picture that I posted was merely a stylized photograph of a nude 13 year old model, posed in a rather non-threatening way. I'm pretty sure that the Law does allow nude depictions of minors if it is deemed to have "artistic merit". We have these same exemptions for artists over here, however, occasionally artists still get in trouble, however in almost every case I've encountered, the work is returned to the artist and the charges get dropped. This is not the same for writers, though. Controversial writers will often have their books destroyed at the borders.
I think this is one of my best threads ever, and I appreciate the participation, and I also understand that people don't want to get in trouble, or have my behavior cause troubles to others, and I respect that. I don't know what posting that picture and having it taken down really means. It's fascinating that a simple picture of a non-sexualized nude minor would create the kind of tension and fear of getting in trouble. It's bothersome to me, too.....but I don't understand why it has to be like this. My over the top language, particularly in this thread and choice of subject matter is not easy to come up with. It's sort of stressful. It seems so much easier to just NOT deal with controversial things, and just try to ignore it, or adopt whatever is the status-quo opinion about it.
I find it very interesting that the propaganda of sexual predators is very similar to what the state teaches about child sexuality. It is OK for the state to say that children should explore their sexuality in a natural way, but the sexual predator can't say the exact same thing. He will not say it, because then, his "cover will be blown". If a man not at all sexually attracted to children says it, then immediately, lots of people will think that he desires to have sex with kids, so he simply will not say it, so as to avoid trouble. If a woman says it, somehow, it sort of makes sense, and she will not be labeled any bad names.
This is indeed a psychological prison. We are supposed to be using logic, words, symbols and concepts to understand and live naturally in the environment, and perhaps make advances. But, it seems like we have constructed a prison out of these things.
I do not want to get in trouble and I don't want to get others in trouble. It sucks that we can get in trouble just for exploring the nature of these things.
The Free Talk Live BBS
Author
Topic: Is Being "Pedo" Really That Wrong? (Read 20902 times)