It's clear from this series of photographs that Henson was standing near the girl's body taking numerous shots while she had her legs open, with the angles and poses only varying slightly from picture to picture. If Bill Henson is an artist for doing this, why are other Australians arrested for images that aren't even as explicit as these? I heard topless-only pictures of teenagers can count as illegal under some interpretations. That makes no sense.

this inst cp, not yet anyway, as theres nothing even a little sexual about it its not porn and therfore is legal, you on the other hand by showing a willingness for it to be porn and suggestion that it is sexy can still be charged as intent can make it so if the police dont like you

A girl laying completely naked spread eagle isn't sexual?

Holy shit.

if it is illegal, it's jailbait porn, which is diff to kiddie porn. pornography is without artistic merit and solely focuses on the sexualisation of its content. photos like these are not focused on sex or sexualisation, but merely on the body. a naked body is not in and of itself pornographic.

whatever you believe, there is definitely some gray area as far as the law goes, probly better off to just avoid this sort of thing, even if it's not porn.

Bill Henson specialises in dark, erotic photography. Now OP, you seem educated on the topic, and if so you too, would know that Henson came out and said that in no way were these photos erotic, and that parental permission was received. Now the media, and also yourself have completely ignored this. Give the man a fuckin break OP, imo you just CP legalised.

OP here. No. 338 you're not coherent. First you say his work is erotic, then you say it's not erotic because Henson claimed it's not. You said I'm educated and fair-minded but then you implied I'm not. You also said "Give the man a fucking break". But I wasn't criticising him, I was debating the general point of the legality of what he does.

Let's say there are two friends in Sydney who go to school together: Audrey, 12 and Jenny, 13. A few weeks ago their school field trip brought them to an art gallery to see Henson's nudes. There's an upcoming art show at their school and all students are invited to contribute an original work in any medium and any subject matter. Jenny asks Audrey if she'd like to pose for nude photographs. Audrey accepts and so do Audrey's parents. Jenny takes snaps of Audrey lying naked in bed with her legs wide open and her breasts, pubic hair, and genitals are showing. They select one of the photos to exhibit.

At the art show Jenny wins 2nd place in the photography category. A professional photographer attends the show and tells Jenny he's impressed and thinks she should pursue a career in nude photography. But Jenny is more interested in becoming a model, because she's been hearing people saying such nice things about her friend Audrey's portraits. Jenny asks the photographer if she may pose for nude photos at his studio downtown. He says yes, and gets Jenny's parents to sign a written contract. The next week Jenny is posing naked with her legs open on beds, sofas, chairs, tables, and the floor in the man's studio. He prepares some of the photos for sale as prints and earns big profits, some of which goes to Jenny.

Some of the prints are rated G and the others are rated PG by the OFLC. Jenny's schoolmates, girls and boys alike, buy prints of naked Jenny from the local art gallery. Soon they are hung in lockers at school, on walls in bedrooms, and the like. Soon many more schoolgirls are posing naked like Audrey and Jenny.

Is there anything improper in the above scenario? If not, why am I certain that if it actually occurred there would be arrests and jailtime? Does Henson belong to a privileged nobility?

>>359
> OP here. No. 338 you're not coherent. First you say his work is erotic, then you say it's not erotic because Henson claimed it's not. You said I'm educated and fair-minded but then you implied I'm not. You also said "Give the man a fucking break". But I wasn't criticising him, I was debating the general point of the legality of what he does.

No, he said that his work is speciallized in the erotic, he never said the pictures in question were. I stopped reading here because you obviously either have very poor reading comprehension or are twisting statements out of context for your own benefit.

The first of these photos was discussed at a Senate inquiry on classifying art held on April 27, 2011 as per this article in the Sydney Morning Herald http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/henson-photos-likened-to-child-porn-20110427-1dvrx.html

Art Inquiry Ponders a Suggestive Nude of a Girl by Bill Henson
http://wp.me/p17fql-11

A collection of 45 image files of Bill Henson's adolescent nudes.
http://up02.ayame.jp/up/download/1315480106.rar
DL pass: chan
unRAR pass: victoria
2.2 MB
(4 images added beyond the archive posted on 11/08/11)

to all the people saying yay or ney, the laws views are pretty simple and clear cut

read it and weep
http://circamp.eu/index.php?view=items&cid=1%3Ageneral&id=13%3Ahow-old-does-the-models-have-to-be-to-not-be-viewed-as-a-child&option=com_quickfaq&Item
id=9

me thinks some chans need to start tightening their belts and clearing some of the shit they have on them before they get shut down

>>16727
This thread has been here more than 2 years with no incident. Henson's work is widely considered art not porn and won out in an Australian legal battle in 2008. Auschan isn't run from the EU. The webmaster is Australian and it's hosted in the U.S., so EU laws don't apply.

As far as the EU, the topmost picture is contained within the book "Bill Henson Photographs 1974-1984" which as of today is sold by these EU booksellers at AbeBooks (search abebooks.com, abebooks.co.uk, or abebooks.nl):
* Antiquariaat A. Kok & Zn. B.V. (Amsterdam, NL, Netherlands)
* George Jeffery Books (Waltham Cross, Herts, HE, United Kingdom)

If UK and Dutch laws deem these pictures illegal, maybe Europol would like to arrest them, hmm? I suspect they won't bother.

The same book is for sale at
* Berkelouw Books (Berrima, NSW, Australia)
* Lake Macquarie Secondhand Books (Morisset, NSW, Australia)

While you're at it, go complain about the National Gallery of Victoria and the other Australian institutions that own Henson's photos.

And how about "1greener", the eBay.com seller based in San Francisco, California, United States who has "Mnemosyne" for sale (Item number: 250886318451). Supposedly it has that picture in it too.

The sight of a human body might offend you, but you'll never rid the world of these images.

"Henson's work is widely considered art not porn and won out in an Australian legal battle in 2008"

Couldn't really care less about the images in question, but the topic in question is somewhat fascinating and raises curiosities. In relation to what is quoted above, I have to wonder: If Henson's images are court-ruled as art, does it remain possible to prosecute a person in possession of the photos on counts of child pornography?

>>17291
Under Australian law, a picture that the The Office of Film and Literature Classification classifies with an acceptable rating cannot be prosecuted under pornography laws. This gets tricky in the case of Henson's body of work because only some of his photos, to my knowledge, have been officially classified to date, though I may be wrong. Of course, any book issued in Australia that contains Henson photos would be classified already.

There was a story a year or two ago of an Australian man (Paul Randal Dennison) arrested for possessing, accessing, and distributing child pornography and prosecutors decided that none of the Henson photos Dennison owned would be part of the evidence. I doubt they even checked on the classification status of each Henson photo.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/upset-at-sentence-for-porn-bagman/story-e6freuzi-1225863823416
"Also found on his computer were the controversial images of naked children shot by Sydney artist Bill Henson, for which he was not charged."

That's only fair as it's the same country where Henson still resides and Henson hasn't spent a day behind bars.

Bad parents, shit government. Someone should kill him.