tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2107662966627079134.post767043936891254273..comments2023-11-01T01:13:46.302+10:00Comments on A Red Emperor's Muse: Guy Rundle on Bill HensonInksterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03970361485089790545noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2107662966627079134.post-34539861618736433392009-05-13T12:34:00.000+10:002009-05-13T12:34:00.000+10:00Can anyone enlighten me as to what Maurice O'Riord...Can anyone enlighten me as to what Maurice O'Riordan's likely motives could have been in republishing Frank Cordelle's naked girls in his April edition? (O'Riordan edits the Arts Council funded Australian Art Monthly, famed for the notorious 'Olympia' cover last year).<br /><br />It seems that the images were used to illustrate some trivial nudist libertarian point by the article's author, the naked Canadian professor Paul Rapoport - who is the publisher of commercial photographer Cordelle's naturist 'The Century Project'. The tab for the submission of the images to the Classification Board (who passed them) was picked up by the author.<br /><br />I have no objections to sloppily written material in an art magazine published under the auspices of the ANU (as, despite deteriorating standards, I uphold the principle of freedom of speech), but it seems there is something prurient and certainly provocative about O'Riordan's repeated publication of images of naked kids to drive home his somewhat obsessive point.<br /><br />Surely it follows that if the photos are being used in service to Rapoport's and O'Riordan's naturist/libertarian/anti-censorship agendae, then the child subjects of the photos have also been dragooned into service to it. <br /><br />Or was their publication simply a promotional exercise for flagging sales of Cordelle's book?<br /><br />Does that justify their publication? Why those particular images to promote the body beautiful and not others (there were similar questions asked last year as to what motivated Oxley/Henson to publish 'N' and not a Henson landscape to promote his show)?<br /><br />Aside from the (s)exploitation implicit in the whole B-grade exercise, what has happened to editorial independence? Is O'Riordan entitled to use his taxpayer-funded rag to as a vehicle for his own views? His accompanying editorial makes no bones about his contempt for new arts council child protection protocols, which I suspect slipped the ACA criteria, and were deemed irrelevant given the images passed classification.<br /><br />It is difficult to imagine that the child subjects (well into adulthood by now) would have any idea that their photos are being used for the purposes of defending the work of a controversial Australian photographer in an Australian art magazine. They forfeited all legal and commercial rights a long time ago.<br /><br />David Marr was similarly driven by his 'freedom fight' to republish Henson's photos of 'N' in 'The Henson case' in October last year. God only knows what convoluted form that consent took, but Michael Heyward (Text Publishing), long time friend of Henson who commissioned Marr's book, would surely know.<br /><br />Clearly there are still some loopholes in the law that O'Riordan is enjoying trumpeting from the safety of his well-padded lair at the ANU. In any event it is all rather dismaying to witness the persistent violation (if not corruption) of appropriate professional boundaries and editorial integrity that exist to protect the vulnerable and to safeguard the truth.mugseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02176778297055949440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2107662966627079134.post-74562374341859600252008-06-11T03:53:00.000+10:002008-06-11T03:53:00.000+10:00Filming up girl's skirts 'not indecent', court tol...Filming up girl's skirts 'not indecent', court told<BR/>NEWS.com.au, Australia - 3 hours ago<BR/>By Lisa Davies, Court Reporter A SYDNEY teacher who filmed up the skirts of two teenage girls was not acting indecently even though the act was "offensive",<BR/><BR/><BR/>It's all art to Henson's friends.Cadizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10669816733744295955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2107662966627079134.post-78971886362946399952008-06-07T08:32:00.000+10:002008-06-07T08:32:00.000+10:00RE: Hard Cases Make Bad LawAre you familiar with t...RE: Hard Cases Make Bad Law<BR/><BR/>Are you familiar with the 1934 case US v One Book called Ulysses. Viewed through a modern lens, it's difficult to imagine this was a "hard case" but it was, and made for some very bad law indeed.Tony Comstockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06376376894244593929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2107662966627079134.post-28201591715787391552008-06-07T05:38:00.000+10:002008-06-07T05:38:00.000+10:00The solution as local child protectionists in Oz h...The solution as local child protectionists in Oz have suggested is legislative change, it is ironic that the law in Britain, owed something to Henson, art, hobbies, research, that they don't do, they do sex offenders register.<BR/><BR/>From my point of view, and I have been true to this from the beginning, when faced by the self-immunity lobbyists, be they judges, teachers or people in the ACLU, is that the people with children of their own to protect. deserve the truth.<BR/><BR/>Do we wait, until the day comes, when home-schooling is the only safe option? <BR/><BR/>That really is the choice that is approaching in the distance and in some parts of the western world, it's already there.<BR/><BR/>Here is what I know, pedophiles are delighted with photos of naked little girls being distributed via the internet, <BR/><BR/>they have a sense of identity and are happy to be given anything iconic, they also for the most psrt, think they're going to win. <BR/><BR/>To them, the real sex offenders, are people who don't think like them.Cadizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10669816733744295955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2107662966627079134.post-5094703881835117222008-06-07T01:33:00.000+10:002008-06-07T01:33:00.000+10:00I'm not sure how "new" they are. E.g., did you see...I'm not sure how "new" they are. E.g., did you see his article the other week trying to defend the laws forbidding incest (laws that no good Millian liberal could justify in their current form)? Once again, he put up communitarian-sounding arguments. <BR/><BR/>I think he's a communitarian at heart, and therefore not a friend of social pluralism, the Millian harm principle, Rawlsian tolerance of many views of the good, and so on. He may be the sort of communitarian that ends up being on the left on economic issues, but I won't be surprised if we see him continue to take illiberal stances on "moral" issues.Russell Blackfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.com