Can they pull off the election?

20 08 2010

Real ad. Real political party.


Nude art rules

14 11 2008

ABC News: The fallout from the Bill Henson kerfuffle is here. The Australia Council has released guidelines on how fully or partially naked youngsters can be used in art. Artists will require parental consent, full disclosure and appropriate supervision. No mention of a Blue Card (but I am hoping that is just taken for granted).

The rules seem farely restrained and sensible. The worst in this news article is that works may need to be submitted to a Classifiaction Board before public release. This seems rather reasonable, and a similar process may have prevented the initial uproar of Henson’s photpgraphs – which stemmed from artwork being freely accessible on the internet, not from it being displayed in a gallery.

Less shrieking, more thinking – it actually works.

Build the dream

13 09 2008

Enslave the toasters!!

More naked children – for concerned parents

8 09 2008

WordPress blogging software handily has internal statistic tracking software.

It’s not always reassuring that “naked kids” continues to be a popular search term redirecting people towards this site. I suppose I can take some pleasure in wasting the time of people who are looking for such photos, and further reassurance comes from most of those search results are not pornography, but often news stories about child pornography.

This story – “Parents face porn claim risk” – was one of the results that appeared. As I clicked through the link, my visitor data will show that I came from a search for “naked children” (can I please be allowed to naively believe that all such hits are of such a nature).

“PARENTS sending family pictures over the Internet could be accused of child pornography under planned new laws, the State Government has been warned.”

I crashed an 18th birthday on Saturday (hey, I knew the lass, I just wasn’t exactly invited). At the party was a photobook/scrapbook that included a single naked-baby photo of the girl – ‘frontbottom’ and all. Obviously included merely for nostalgia and embarrassment purposes. Does this count as distributing child pornography?

The Australian government and public’s reaction to naked children in art recently with the Bill Henson affair has shown a very low (non-existent) tolerance to naked children being percieved as anything else.

The story is from the UK as far as I can tell. But could a similar situation arise through interpretation or extension of Australian laws?

Normally my authorative side is supportive of restricting freedoms to protect heinous crimes such as child abuse. I am generally in favour of removing all forms of corporal discipline to remove any excuse for child abuse in domestic and school settings. But to me this seems excessive on the surface.

Obviously something would need to be found that would separate private distribution of child family snaps, and more nefarious purposes. Allowing distribution between family members to be excused is not a solution – statistics show that abusers are often close family and friends of victims.

Would this be a freedom that families in Australia (or the UK, USA or elsewhere) be prepared to sacrifice to help combat child pornography?

Tales from the BCF

9 07 2008

My BCF post has been resoundingly this blogs most popular entry*. So I thought I might as well follow it up with a link to a website by former attendees for former and present attendees, as well as those in similar cult-like environments.

So many members of religious cults are too frightened to speak: while they are in the cult, and after they come out. The cardinal rule all abusers enforce on their victims is “Don’t talk”. For if we talk, we assert ourselves against the abuse, and reveal it for what it is.

The main authors/moderators appear to remain Christian and religious, but perhaps they are a few steps closer to freedom.

At present you can read their response to (BCF leader) Vic Hall’s response to the Four Corners programme about the church and members. Read the rest of this entry »

Illegal to be annoying in Sydney next weekend

6 07 2008

Well, looks like I can’t go to Sydney. I’d be arrested in no time.

If you weren’t aware yet, regulations brought in for World Youth Day, a mass Catholic pilgrimage in Sydney next week, have outlawed being annoying.

More specifically an “authorised person” (police or other emergency services official) may direct a person to cease any behaviour deemed dangerous, obstructing WYD events, or that “causes annoyance or inconvenience to participants“. Failure to comply with such a directive without a “reasonable excuse” can result in a penalty of 50 units. Police are saying the rules are nothing new, and are similar to rules in place during sporting events.

The main problem is it’s all very vague. Inconvenience may be little easier to delineate, but there is a whole host of behaviour capable of causing “annoyance” that isn’t dangerous nor normally illegal. Some people, including some Catholics, believe it or not, have rather high levels of irritability.