Censorship makes me nervous.It is even controversial to discuss it in relation to images of children. The latest row over a photographic exhibition in Sydney which, it now appears, police have closed down is the case in point.(here)
Naked photographs of children and teenagers.
The complaints are that they are sexual, and they may well be I don't know as I haven't seen them.
But not all naked pictures are necessarily sexual.
Anne Geddes has made a fortune out of delightful photos of cute babies. And we have on our wall at home one of our children in a giant plant pot after her style.
Whilst we are all so frightened to discuss this stuff, lest we be branded paedophilic, it would be a pity if we weren't able to have any more cutesy photographs.
3 comments:
I think though there is a huge difference between cutesy photographs of Babies and toddlers and the photographs of children and teenagers in "sexual" type positions and fashions. I think as a society we need to think about how much we want children sexualized in any form.
I was reading only the other day in Evil and the Justice of God by N.T.Wright.
"That Only two generations people regarded adultery in the same way as we now regard pedophilia. Which is worrying on both counts.
I agree. My point, though, is that you can't actually have a conversation about this without being accused of something or suspected of heaven knows what.
My point also, that nudity, nakedness, is not ipso facto sexual perversion. I am deeply disturbed that all picturtes of anything naked will be siezed and judged without anyone seeing them.
have YOU seen them. What I have seen does nto seem to me to be unduly sexualised. Though, inevitably, becuase people are sexual everything will alwaus be sexual to some degree.
With the possible exception of Ann Geddes!
God help us if the infallible Bishop of Durham is (as it were) not only Wright but RIGHT
Post a Comment