| Author |
Message |
Dug
Joined: 04 Jul 2005
Posts: 4837
Location: Gippsland
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:02 am Post subject: The debate about children in art begins again |
 |
|
The debate about children in art begins again
From todays Sydney Morning Herald
| Quote: | 
Subjects for censor sensitivity? ... Clockwise from bottom left: details from Picasso pochoir Boy Child, Olympia Masked by Polixeni Papapetrou, a Bill Henson photograph of a young boy.
Art or child porn? Now censors must decide
ANDREW CLENNELL STATE POLITICAL EDITOR
March 10, 2010 Comments 10
ARTISTS who create images of nude children would have to pay $500 an image to get Commonwealth classification to make absolutely sure they would not be prosecuted under new child pornography laws.
The Attorney-General, John Hatzistergos, announced yesterday a sweeping overhaul of child pornography laws which includes removing an ''artistic purpose defence''.
The defence has been used only once - unsuccessfully - by a child pornographer.
Have your say
But the law change may threaten artists who do not get their work classified by Commonwealth censors. The artist Bill Henson had his contentious work judged by film censors before going to exhibition.
The artist Polixeni Papapetrou, whose photograph of her six-year-old daughter on the cover of Art Monthly caused a storm last year, did not have her work sent to censors.
She criticised the law change yesterday and asked whether she could be prosecuted if her work were judged by authorities as child pornography, saying: ''I think they're barking up the wrong tree. I really think they should be going after those people who exploit children.
''I don't know of any artists who exploit children and if they do they should not be protected by any legal defence.''
The law change received cautious support from the executive director of the National Association for Visual Arts, Tamara Winikoff, who said artists were working with the director of public prosecutions on ''protective protocols so that art experts are consulted and can advise on whether the material had been produced by a genuine artist''.
''While the removal of artistic merit may seem to make artists more vulnerable to constraints on their freedom of expression, police and the ODPP need to establish the material in question is such that a reasonable person would find it offensive in all the circumstances,'' Ms Winikoff said.
Asked if parents who submitted a photo of their children naked for public exhibition now needed to get those photos classified, Ms Winikoff said:''That's a matter of their own judgment.''
She said: ''It's really very rarely artists' work can be considered to be in danger of being child pornography.''
Mr Hatzistergos said: ''There will be no further artistic purpose defence. It is anomalous to describe something as child abuse material and then to have a defence of artistic purpose. Instead, the definition of child abuse material will take into account the context in which the relevant material was produced or came into existence.''
Under other changes to the law, witnesses as well as child abuse victims will be able to give evidence by video link and those they accuse will not be allowed to cross-examine them.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
thecatsgrin
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 2181
Location: Gippsland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 12:14 pm Post subject: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
Corporations and fashions designed for children are still able to dress them up as whorish adults to sell provocative clothing to minors...
Let kids be kids, artists be artists and wipe out the pedophiles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
belle2
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 189
Location: Newcastle
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 12:19 pm Post subject: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
$500 per work for the censors to decide whether it is acceptable. All because SOME people might take it the wrong way. The people who object are not one of THOSE people but are worried about SOME people . How many pedophiles are there for goodness sake that we change the course of our art so as not to cater to them.
I do think that if there is a concern that a model is being exploited no matter age or sex that it be looked at but to charge an artist for every work containing a child is mind blowing!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thecatsgrin
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 2181
Location: Gippsland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 12:45 pm Post subject: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
| Sounds like a revenue raising excersise... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gggraph
Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2063
Location: In front of the Computer.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 1:46 pm Post subject: Re: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
| belle2 wrote: | | $500 per work for the censors to decide whether it is acceptable. All because SOME people might take it the wrong way. The people who object are not one of THOSE people but are worried about SOME people . |
To quote from Tom Lehrer: There are people who do not love their fellow man, and I HATE people like that!
Belle has gone straight to the crux of the matter - it is not necessary for somebody to actually be offended, just for the possibility to exist. Governments are always afraid of being accused of not doing something - Global warming is too hard, but this seems doable.
Ultimately, stuff like this collapses under the weight of its own inconsistencies. The best response is to help them look silly. Thankfully, they are off to a good start by charging $500. Had they said $19.95 they may have got away with it.
For example: I sense a business opportunity where a bunch of upstanding citizens assess the 'offensiveness' of art for a reduced rate, undercutting the government. If they try to stop it, we can take them to court for restraint of trade.
Cheers
Grant |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thecatsgrin
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 2181
Location: Gippsland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 1:49 pm Post subject: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
Sounds like a plan Grant!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
belle2
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 189
Location: Newcastle
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 5:07 pm Post subject: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
| Of course Wendy has a point. I would hope that K mart, Target and Best and Less will have to pay $500 per photo of kids frolicking in their underwear as these catalogues are a source of titillation to THOSE people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
megan.styles
Joined: 16 Mar 2010
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:08 am Post subject: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
My goodness, thats interesting.
Isn't it amusing how stuffy governments can be.
Yeah, I agree with above. This is definatly one of those laws that will blow over.
Kind of like the law in new zealand about child abuse. under the law the parents wern't able to phisicaly disaplin there child. Even if the disaplin was considered acceptable before the law was put in place.
It was changed pretty fast, so I don't think we need to worry to much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Devilbiss
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 3214
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 9:05 am Post subject: Re: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
| megan.styles wrote: | My goodness, thats interesting.
Isn't it amusing how stuffy governments can be.
Yeah, I agree with above. This is definatly one of those laws that will blow over.
Kind of like the law in new zealand about child abuse. under the law the parents wern't able to phisicaly disaplin there child. Even if the disaplin was considered acceptable before the law was put in place.
It was changed pretty fast, so I don't think we need to worry to much. |
To physically discipline your child (hit) them really shouldn't be necessary.
It's a bad thing to do and leads to problems later on in the child's life.
It's lazy, bad parenting.
You will lose your childs respect, and that's the worse thing that can happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
belle2
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 189
Location: Newcastle
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 9:22 am Post subject: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
| Your right, Daniel but I certainly had a healthy respect for the feather duster and wooden spoon! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thecatsgrin
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 2181
Location: Gippsland
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 2:51 pm Post subject: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
As kids we were smacked with the iron cord, wooden spoon or hair brush... it really hurt, and I cant remember it being a deterrent for doing mischief....we did it anyway.
We have the naughty spot ( what or where it is I am not sure, we havent had to use it yet!)
The censorship issues that are following this in other areas considering nudity in art, may reach a bit further.
It will only blow over if there are enough complaints.
It seems there are alot more parents willing to shout out and complain about not being allowed to smack their children , than artists working with images of children.
Will it change the rights of being able to paint a portrait of children without the $500 fee? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dug
Joined: 04 Jul 2005
Posts: 4837
Location: Gippsland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:39 pm Post subject: Re: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
| Daniel wrote: |
To physically discipline your child (hit) them really shouldn't be necessary.
It's a bad thing to do and leads to problems later on in the child's life.
It's lazy, bad parenting.
You will lose your childs respect, and that's the worse thing that can happen. |
Mr Cattle Prod was enough to make our children behave in an acceptable manner.
They soon found ways of hiding their misdemeanors and indiscretions like good rational adults do |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dug
Joined: 04 Jul 2005
Posts: 4837
Location: Gippsland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:40 pm Post subject: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
| It would be interesting to start reporting various advertisements using these new restrictions to see if they pass the censorship of child exploitation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thecatsgrin
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 2181
Location: Gippsland
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:25 pm Post subject: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
Yes.... I agree... and whilst on the topic of protection of children... what about that skank Barbie and her bratz buddies??
Marketed at kids, completely unrealistic, tarty, and after you have given them to kids they stay nude forever more.... Pretty much like any doll!!
It is fashion week... I am sure there will be some images of children taken.
Then again, they will be exempt because they wont consider it art, but advertising. Double standards... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gggraph
Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2063
Location: In front of the Computer.
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:20 am Post subject: Re: Re - The debate about children in art begins again |
|
|
| thecatsgrin wrote: | | Then again, they will be exempt because they wont consider it art, but advertising. Double standards... |
That's the best way to fight this sort of rubbish - it hasn't been thought through. So yes, if they bring it in, I would be lodging a complaint about any image of a child used anywhere. Photolabs would be a good start - having to pay $500 to gain approval to have your holiday photos devloped should raise some hackles. Bear in mind that the approval process is to prove that an image is NOT pornographic, so I'm all set to complain about images of toasters and hamburgers too. Why shouldn't they have to pay the same fee to prove their images are not offensive?
Cheers
Grant |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
