| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
|
|
#1857 2008-05-27 03:13 GMT |
I stumbled upon this and saw one of the images you refer to and felt outraged.
There is no way imho that children should be photographed in this way in the name of art.Porn is to mild a word to describe this, it is paedophilia.
Regards,Les.
|
|
|
|
#1860 2008-05-27 16:07 GMT |
I wouldn't call that art either, I think there is enough beauty in the body of an 18+ woman that he doesn't need to go around taking photos of the minors
|
|
|
|
#1862 2008-05-27 17:51 GMT |
i have a very un welcomed opinion i guess but if it is okay with the girl and her parents to be photographed nude it is okay with me i would not have known that she was 13 if the article did not say so
now if the photographer used her for any other thing than photography that should be a problem
personely i like faces more than naked bodies and the innocence in her face is awesome
|
|
|
|
#1863 2008-05-28 05:47 GMT |
Azeem,do you have any children and if so would you allow a child of your own who is only just reaching puberty, to pose naked for a photographer who intends to publish the images for all the world to see?
You said the child had innocence in her face and that just what children are, innocent and have not yet matured enough to make up their own mind about what they are doing.Any parent who allows their child to be exploited in this way would be acting very irresponsibly and should take time out to consider how their child would feel in a few years time when she is able to make an informed decision.
You also have to take into consideration that a child whose parents have allowed her to become exposed to this kind of exploitation, could grow up damaged by the experience for the rest of her life and could end up hating the people she thought she could trust.
|
|
|
|
#1865 2008-05-28 07:39 GMT |
Just thought I would bring you up to speed on Bill Hensen. And by the way I haven't made my mind up on the matter. However the girl in the photo is now 33 years or there abouts old and in a interview has said words to the effect, she would do all again. She also stated that the photogarapher treated her with absolute respect. Police haven't decided to lay charges yet.
|
|
|
|
#1866 2008-05-28 08:21 GMT |
Ok so this individual has grown up apparently undisturbed but that does not make it right.If we say that it is acceptable for a photographer professional or otherwise to hide behind art and photograph children in this way, even with the parents consent, then where else is it going to lead.Here in the UK you risk getting into serious trouble if you photograph kids that are not your own in a public place.You cannot even take your camera to take photos of the school play anymore.
This is how seriously the issue of child protection has become here and while I think it is going a bit too far at times, we still need to be mindful about the dangers of child abuse.Photographs like the ones we are referring to can be misused by some warped individuals and are just providing them with a means of self gratification.
|
|
|
|
#1868 2008-05-28 15:47 GMT |
yeah if the girl is now 33, this goes back to a while ago, the atmosphere and the laws were a nit different back then I don't think he is gonna get charged. But I don't approve his act either.
|
|
|
|
#1870 2008-05-28 16:20 GMT |
Gentlemen,
Interestingly, so far no comments from women. As a woman and mother I do not agree with photographing the girl. That photo was disturbing to me.
I know for sure that I would not have been willing to pose for such a picture at that extremely self conscious and awkward age. I would not have wanted a doctor let alone a stranger to see my body nude at that stage. As a mother, who has a daughter (now 25 yrs old) I would never have even consented to offering her for such a photograph. And, in my opinion a child does not have the maturity to make an informed consent. The photo may be presented as an "artsy" portrait but I do not feel it is art. What would one do with such a photograph????
|
|
|
|
#1876 2008-05-31 15:53 GMT |
is he still practicing this kind of photography's tho ?
|
|
|
|
#1879 2008-06-01 05:33 GMT |
Yes I believe he still does this type of photography.
I heard a radio broadcast the other day from a federal politician, he summed it up just the way I feel about it. Why if it is on my computer its considered child porn but if it hangs in a gallery it is art? And many Australian and World gallery have his work.
That’s exactly where I am at, we have all taken photos of our kids having baths I have even seen some family photos of quite old teenagers taking a bath so obviously in some family’s this type of photography is acceptable where as other find just plain disgusting. Where is that line.
For me I err on the side of caution I don't foto anyone with there clothes of even my own kids.
|
|
|
|
#1881 2008-06-01 06:52 GMT |
Hi Mark, I agree there is nothing wrong with someone taking photos of their toddlers in the bath etc; most of us has been there and done that.It is something for the kids to look back on in later years, all innocent family fun. Older children well thats another matter and imho is entirely inappropriate . I think most decent minded people know in their hearts where the line of decency is and it is these same people who find this guys work so offensive.
I do not however, believe that he should be prosecuted if the law has to be applied retrospectively,but if it is now illegal and he persists in doing this then he must be stopped.
Everyone who has had a part to play in this,the galleries,publishers and the girls parents are in my eyes just as morally guilty as Bill Henson.
|
|
