Art Erotica Pornography Obscenity and Child Pornography

[Absinthe]

Where exactly are the lines for the labels.

I have a friend with a newborn, and he had photographs of his son's bris on his laptop. He was showing them to a friend and someone else piped in and said that he should be in trouble for having child pornography on his computer.

Recently on the news, there was an article about some fake company selling child pornography, and when someone purchased something from them that was probable cause and a warrant was issued, they confiscated this fellows computer and charged him with possession of child pornography.

This got me to thinking, what exactly is child pornography? I gotta believe the picture of my friend's son's bris can't possibly be... Is the picture of the little girl that Maplethorp did where you can see up her skirt and tell she is a girl? What about all the stuff that Jock Sturges does on the nude beaches? Or all the stuff by Colby Katz?

I had assumed like many others that an image of a child in the nude could be construed as child pornography. At least, according to the legal definition at

http://www.legislationline.org/legis...474&less=false

that is not the case.

If you look at some of the sites like

http://www.asacp.org/page.php

they accept reports of child pornography and theoretically chase it down to eliminate it.

Interestingly enough, they list things they will not accept reports of and it is interesting to even find out that there are sites like child modeling sites and apparently some of them are in some pretty sexual positions.

So what is obscenity? Here is one definition

http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/o002.htm

although I think I like Tom Lehrer's from the song "Smut" where the lyric states "As the judge remarked the day that he acquitted my Aunt Hortense, To be smut, it must be utterly without redeeming social importance."

Must be some fine lines. This is more a statement of observation than a question at all. Just some things to think about.

[fschifano]

What sort of whack job could possibly construe pictures of an infant's bris to be pornographic?

[bjorke]

Oh, this thread is quite different than I had expected from the title. Maybe next time.

[Absinthe]

Originally Posted by fschifano

What sort of whack job could possibly construe pictures of an infant's bris to be pornographic?

Well the fellow was quite serious. Anyway, point is that when someone says a word/phrase like "Child Pornography" i means different thigns in different people's ears.

[Absinthe]

Byorke, it is just a stream of consciousness post... feel free to take it anywhere you choose

[Photo Engineer]

Look at the photos in "Show Me", a text to teach sex to children published in the 70s. This book was endorsed by the Roman Catholic Church.

Today, it would be porn.

PE

[bjorke]

Yet the most offensive bits of "Show Me" are in Parr/Badger's history of photo books. Tsk.

I am sure that consumers of child porn are upset and feeling ripped-off by those bris snaps, to be sure. There oughta be a law.

[leicam5]

I was told that some pictures of playing children by Sally Mann, an great artist who I do respect very much, ( http://www.kochgallery.com/artists/c...ann/index.html ) were considered as child porn in the US, I could not believe my ears...

[MattKing]

Pornography, and obscenity, are legal concepts, and relate to the law's struggle to differentiate between that which is harmful and destructive and worthy of societal sanction, and that which should be independent of such sanction.

Questions of Ethics and Philosophy are important to the discussion of those concepts, but they are balnced by questions of freedom, and practicality as well.

The question of nudity makes this even more complex - there is a vast difference of opinion on this earth about whether nudity and sexuality have any equivalency, and if so, how much.

Matt

[Absinthe]

Originally Posted by Photo Engineer

Look at the photos in "Show Me", a text to teach sex to children published in the 70s. This book was endorsed by the Roman Catholic Church.

Today, it would be porn.

PE

Wow! I had a neighbor when I was about 11 or 12 I think. I remember he sneaked that book out of his dad's book shelf and we looked at it. I am not certain from what I remember that there was anything all that "hard core" to it. But we new we were looking at something we shouldn't be.

Of course, at even earlier in my life, my mom was doing a lot of painting and taking art classes (back when only one person in a family had to work to eat). She had books on figure study, and loads of stuff with nekid people and such, and there was nothing "dirty" or wrong with any of them and there was never any need to "sneak" you just looked at them and enjoyed the beauty of the human body.

Personally, I have been very desensitized to images pornographic, artistic or otherwise (have I mentioned that I used to work for Penthouse?) So I don't see much difference between Pornography and Erotica or whatever other label it carries beyond "I like this" and "I dislike that" and "That image makes me feel all tingly... like when we had to climb the rope in gym class just kidding)"

Certainly if I see an image of a child, nude clothed or otherwise I see the beauty of youth as well as whatever other artistic curves and angles and artistic merit the image has.

If I see an image of anyone child, adult, even animal being abused or brutalizes or somehow being "wrongly" treated (to my values of what I feel is wrong) I feel an emotion and generally a negative one. If I take the time to differentiate between the photojournalism aspect of it vs the image setup in a studio or what-have-you it may change my opinion of it as well.

I used to say that the difference between pornography and erotic art was the feet and tops of the head. It seemed like in pictures I considered pornographic they either cut off the top of the model's head or her feet or legs from about the knees down. If they showed the whole model including the top of her head and bottom of her feet, then it was art. I've since changed my mind on that too.

In obscenity, there is a degree of the definition involving "offensiveness". And another involving primarily prurient interests. However, as much as some art should lift up, some should make us feel other emotions, and even offend too. Some should make you want to look away or hide your eyes as you pass.

Was it Stewart I think, that said "...I know it when I see it..." one would think there has to be something more to it than that. There must be a line. Especially, if you are to discuss it, you have to know or agree on what things are called.

If you say "View Camera" or "Monorail Camera" I have an image in my mind that immediately comes to me. And it is probably the same or similar image that comes to you. However, we do not really have the same image when one says Erotica, or Pornography, or Obscenity or Art...