|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Australia
& South Pacific
Bill Henson case dropped but Australias moral
guardians demand harsher censorship laws
By Richard Phillips
10 June 2008
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
New South Wales police announced on Friday that no child abuse
or pornography charges would be laid against internationally-acclaimed
photographer Bill Henson or the Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery. The decision
to drop the case was taken in the face of universal condemnation
by Australias arts community and wide sections of the population
over the censorship of Hensons exhibition and the seizure
of his work on May 23.
NSW police decided not to press charges after receiving legal
advice from the Director of Public Prosecutions and following
an Australian Federal Police announcement that Henson photographs
owned by the National Gallery of Australia did not breach the
law.
The decision also followed a ruling by Australias censorship
boardthe Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC)that
the exhibition photograph that sparked the anti-Henson witch-hunt
was mild and not sexualised to any degree.
It was given a Parental Guidance (PG) classification.
A PG rating is given purely as an advisory guide for parents.
Disneys latest movie, The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince
Caspian, for example, has a PG classification.
Henson said he was humbled by the depth of support
he had received over the past weeks and recognised that much of
it came from the desire of many people to voice their commitment
to more general principles.
The photographer went on to state that existing laws,
having been rigorously tested, still provide a framework in which
debate and expression of ideas can occur.
That Henson is not being prosecuted will not end the right-wing
campaign now being led by Hetty Johnson, a so-called anti-child
abuse advocate, and an alliance of right-wing demagogues and Christian
moralists. An outraged Johnson told the media on Friday that the
police announcement was a green light for the commercial
sexual exploitation of our children, and an absolute
disgrace. She demanded more repressive censorship laws.
In a June 6 comment for Online Opinion she declared:
This debate is fundamentally around two major issues. It
is a contest between those defending the historical rights and
freedoms of the Arts and those who defend todays rights
and freedoms of our young. One cannot be achieved without the
sacrifice of the other. In other words, anything defined
as child abuse or pornographic by Johnson and her allies should
be suppressed and its creators prosecuted.
Henson is not the only target. Those artists and others who
publicly opposed the police censorship of his photographs are
now considered fair game and denounced as elitist, cowardly, encouraging
pedophiles and undermining core moral values.
This themea perennial favorite of right-wing ideologues
the world overhas been hammered out in a series of chilling
op-ed comments over the past two weeks by Sydney Morning Herald
columnists Paul Sheehan, Miranda Devine and Gerard Henderson.
On May 26, Sheehan wrote that although he regarded Henson as
a fine artist the electric jolt of public unease
he has received in recent days is justified because pederasts
and child sexploiters have had a dream run in our society.
Sheehan then insisted, without providing a shred of evidence,
that there was a subculture of pedophilia among gays.
Another major problem, he continued, was that members of the artistic
community were cowards on all the important moral issues. Societys
ability to deal with child abuse and other serious social problems
was being prevented by privacy laws, artistic licence, freedom
of expression, Aboriginal rights.
The political implication of these allegations is clear: the
only way to stop sexual abuse of children is to dispense with
the aforementioned democratic rights.
Police-state measures demanded
Sheehans reactionary ruminations were further elaborated
by Miranda Devine in a May 29 comment entitled Artistic
crowd the real philistines. A perhaps more accurate title
would be: Why a police-state is required to defend Christian
values and save the poor.
Devine, the key initiator of the anti-Henson campaign, began
her column by hypocritically claiming to have been shocked
at the sight of police seizing Henson photographs.
No one wanted to live in a police-state, she declared, but
the suppression of democratic rights was a necessary last
resort when society was suffering from communal moral
ambiguity and failing to enforce its own standards.
This state of affairs, she continued, was caused by the
relentless normalisation of the abnormal, the annihilation of
taboos and the persecution of traditional moral guardians.
No explanation was provided about who these traditional
moral guardians were or how they were being persecuted.
Devine, who is reportedly paid $250,000 a year by the Sydney
Morning Herald, declared that the ultimate example
of social decay was in remote Aboriginal communities. This was
where, she insisted, the social norms we take for granted,
such as the love of a mother for her child, have collapsed. So
you get the Northern Territory intervention, where basic civil
rights have been overruled, with the bipartisan support of Federal
Parliament, for the greater good of protecting babies and children
from violence, sexual abuse and criminal neglect.
Nor was this breakdown, Devine insisted, confined
to Aboriginal people, but had hit the white underclass in
every city.
Devine conveniently omits any mention of the fact that the
social problems afflicting Aboriginal communities have been caused,
not by Aborigines or by welfare, but by two centuries
of unrelenting racial oppression, government neglect and unemployment.
Devines right-wing tirade simply repeats the arguments used
by former Prime Minister John Howard to justify last years
Northern Territory police/military intervention.
Her claim that the intervention, which is now being extended
by the Rudd Labor government, was aimed at the greater good
of protecting babies from violence and sexual abuse is completely
false. Its real purpose is to slash welfare, break up remote Aboriginal
communities and make it easier for the government and its big-business
allies to secure control of mineral-rich land and other lucrative
resources.
Devines targeting of the white underclass
also dovetails with Rudd government moves to extend welfare cuts
and other attacks on democratic rights and basic living standards
to non-indigenous people throughout Australia.
On June 1, Sheehan published another commentthis time
attacking a NSW judge, who had regularly heard child sexual abuse
cases and had written to the Herald demanding an apology
over the journalists slanderous claim that homosexuals
supported a pedophile subculture. Sheehan disingenuously
claimed that his comment was an accident, refused
to apologise and then suggested that the judge was incapable of
rigorous impartiality on issues involving gay culture.
The next day, Gerard Henderson devoted his op-ed column to
a berating of all those artists, writers, musicians and others
who had signed the Open Letter calling on the Labor
government to oppose the police censorship of Henson. Henderson,
a former speech writer for Howard, put forward no position on
the police closure of Hensons exhibition and the seizure
of his photographs but rebuked the signers as irresponsible
and mindless for warning that these sorts of police
measures had dangerous parallels with the attacks on freedom of
expression carried out by fascist regimes.
The continuing barrage of right-wing invective from Sydneys
so-called small-l liberal newspaper is a warning that
the attack on Henson and other artists will not subside. It also
demonstrates the direct connection between the assault on freedom
of artistic expression and the jobs, living standards and basic
rights of all working people, indigenous and non-indigenous alike.
Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and NSW state Labor Premier
Morris Iemma have played a central role in encouraging this campaign.
As the initial witch-hunt of Bill Henson was getting underway,
both men publicly condemned the photographers work. Informed
on Friday that the Henson photograph he had previously described
as absolutely revolting had now been given a PG rating,
Rudd retorted: Ive been asked many times since then,
Have I changed my view?... I have not changed my view
one bit.
Likewise on Friday, Iemma publicly congratulated the police
over their investigations and declared: My personal
opinion remains clear: these photographs crossed the line and
were inappropriate.
See Also:
Growing condemnation of censorship of
Australian artist Bill Henson
[3 June 2008]
Australian photographer Bill
Hensonscapegoat for a wider assault on democratic rights
[30 May 2008]
Australia: Labor government
backs witch-hunting of photographer Bill Henson
[26 May 2008]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |