Henson Nudes Not Porn

Today, the NSW DPP has decided not pursue charges against artist Bill Henson over puublic display of photographs of nude pubescent children. Many people, me included, doubted that such charges, if laid, would result in conviction for pornography, or puublishing indecent material.

I previously posted that the legal issues were less important that the ethical questions.

"Is it right to photograph pubescent children in that way?"
"Is it right to then put images of nude children on display?"
(in a gallery or using the Internet)
"Is it right to display images of children in erotic poses?"

I wonder: 'Would a person who downloaded the uncensored images of Henson's nude children be charged with child pornography?' That is, would the viewing and downloading of such images for sexual gratification be criminal? Henson, and other artists, might rightly claim that they are meticulous and pure in their artistic endeavour, but should artists consider how other people will use their images, before they photograph naked children? Should they then not photograph children's genitals?

The questions asked above are particularly relevant in light of this week's arrests of 90 Australian people for downloading child pornography.

John