[straightshooter]

I can't speak to the Australian exhibition but the "outcry" over Miley Cyrus' pic in Vanity Fair was absolutely ridiculous. She had a sheet covering her in front and showed her bare back but she was not topless according to the New York Times. It was simply that it was blown out of proportion by that tabloid trash excuse for a television show called Entertainment Tonight. If this was merely a prelude to more lurid pics shot by someone, it would be one thing. But this was a portrait taken by Annie Liebovitz of all people. Personally, I thought it was a beautiful photograph. However, to paraphrase Shaw, "There will always be barbarians who think the customs of their island and tribe are the laws of nature."

CW

[Ash]

Interesting points Kris,

Only, if a 13 year old girl said no and her parents said yes to a nude photoshoot, I think the parents would be up for a criminal offence. The parents of one of Henson's adolescent nude subjects who 'defended' him cannot speak for the rest of the parents, nor does that mean it is OK for everyone.

There are certainly differing opinions about the idea of childhood/pre-pubescent adolescent nude photography - all points for and against are valid, though not all would agree. Just because girls as young as 9 start having periods and therefore can theoretically start having children, doesn't necessarily mean they should go ahead and do so. This also meaning that they should be allowed to make decisions for themselves is a point I'd argue too. Menarche (ie. an indicator of physical maturity) is not related to emotional maturity.

But I know, there won't be a consensus on whether Henson's work is acceptable or not - just differing opinions...

[Dale]

Thanks Kris for the last post, good couple of links to read up on.

And a further update, the censors have found that the widely circulated image is of a "mild" nature and given a rating of PG, yes readers, that is suitable for children to view with parental guidance.

The NSW police had previously seized copies of magazines and invitations that reproduced that same image!

So it looks like Henson will "avoid" prosecution as a previous poster put. Now all that is left is the angry mob to enact "justice". I wonder if they will make him kiss the Australian flag before beating him. I just love justice done the Sydney way.

[flyer]

For most people, it is perfectly acceptable to see a picture of a naked baby, and most people would even call it "cute"(boy or girl), and it is also acceptable to see the picture of a naked woman (and I don't mean porno or sexually oriented pictures, just naked). Then, why is it so hard to accept a picture of a naked adolescent? There seem to be a lack of consistency somewhere...

[Dale]

For most people, it is perfectly acceptable to see a picture of a naked baby, and most people would even call it "cute"(boy or girl), and it is also acceptable to see the picture of a naked woman (and I don't mean porno or sexually oriented pictures, just naked). Then, why is it so hard to accept a picture of a naked adolescent? There seem to be a lack of consistency somewhere...

Indeed, which is why the image was rated PG, and funny enough why the DPP announced today it will not proceed in prosecuting Henson.

Henson is free to go back to being a preeminent Australian photographer.

Just another media beat up and to paraphrase, there is nothing more embarrassing than the Australian media on a moral crusade. (shades of the anti pedophile mobs in the UK attacking houses with brass name plates declaring the occupants where pediatricians.)

Next will come the settlements reached by those stupid enough to defame Henson.

[KrisK10D]

And I hope he takes them for millions. Especially the talk radio blitz that whipped everyone up into a frenzy of insults and threats. I wonder when the cops will return the half million worth of work they've so far seized?

Here's The Australian version... 'No charges' against Bill Henson, NSW prosecutors decide | The Australian