Child Pornography in the Name of Art

Yet another way has been found to exploit children. In the news are reports about the father of a naked 6 year old cover girl. Nude photos of the 6 year old girl were featured in Art Monthly magazine, which also showed the girl’s nude image on its cover.

The girl’s father is angrily protesting comments about the inappropriate and disturbing photos with talk of children’s sensuality. He references a photo of his own child with a pacifier in this article by calling it a clear illustration of the hedonistic nature of children.

Children sucking on a pacifier is not an illustration of their hedonistic and sensual nature – it is a sign of them seeking comfort in the manner in which young children do. It comes from infancy when babies are held close and fed with a bottle or breast. That time is comforting to them, and as they age, when they need that feeling of comfort, they no longer have bottle or breast (usually) to turn to. They opt for a substitute such as a thumb or pacifier. It really is as simple as that.

Children are innocents, and to put adult sexual behaviors, drives, stimuli, and fetishes upon them is disgusting and incorrect. It says far more about the perversion and sexual stimuli of the one spewing it than it does about the child(ren).

I find the behavior of adults who see adult sexuality in children to be disturbing. I find the behavior of parents who see nothing wrong with displaying their young child’s nude image for all the world to see as disturbing. I find the behavior of not only displaying those images, but then adding sensual and sexual connotations to them to be disturbing.

I also find disturbing the choice of Art Monthly magazine to publish nude images of a minor child in the name of art. Thinly veiled child pornography is still child pornography no matter what other pretty names you try to give it.

Shame on you, Art Monthly magazine!