Another Henson Photo

Another column is abuzz with Henson outrage , yes it even show pics. Different pics from what were removed from the Bill Henson exhibition recently which was of a young teenage girl naked.

This selection still shows a young character and he is not wearing clothes. I think it is also shamefully aimed at young people and the dim lighting is meant to be suggesting erotica. I thinks we should be thinking long and hard about the implications on this on our society.

Simply because some creatures has fur and some does not have so much (different degrees of hairiness on different humans) well is that a reason that nudity is more or less moral on some critters than others? I ask you?

In fact some would say that certain hair on humans should be well covered up, the more hair the more cover please.

Birthday Suit Flight Cancelled

What next?

Well actually it wil not happen next because it got cancelled and thank goodness for that.

But a German Flight company, OssiUrlaub.de, was offering its customers a nudist flight to a Baltic Sea Island .

If you ask me it do not matter where it were going it is still wrong. Though of course if it were to somewhere like Antarctica the nudists might not be solured. Nudists are exhibitionists, filthy exhibitionists but they is also human. they likes their comfort and they wishes to keep warm not have their skins shrivelled off. there is also the shrinkage factor and I thinks some men can be quite vain.

Anyhows it was to be cancelled. The rules were, clothes on the flight, then strip. I is not sure if the air hostesses were in their birthday suits too.

I thinks it is also a bit unsafe. I find those seatbelts hard to do up, they could get caught on some delicate bits.

And it do bring a whole new meaning to talking about the pilot in the cockpit.

I thinks it is very disgusting and it is best to have everyone robed up to avoid such things. Such innuendo. I suppose the only good bit is it may be more difficult to smuggle stuff like drugs into the Baltic Sea Island strapped to your body under your coat because you is not wearing any coat.

But then if you were a good person you would not be smuggling any drugs.

Or going naked on flights at all!

Porn by any other name still do not look like art

I know I know.

I has heard you crying out for it.

"Prudey why has you not jumped ont he bandwagon with all the others and hopped up and down and got mad at this filthy exhibition by Bill Henson which show a young teenage girl in the ... well not in anything which is the scandalous bit?"

Well I can say I has been very satisfied to see that some moral peoples has been jumping up and down and doing their moral bit and calling this exhibition for what it is.

Child porn.

It is not art.

It is child porn.

Do not hide behind the word "art". I sees you is not giving the girl much to hide behind so why try a trick like hiding behind something yourself?

Fortunately the police has seized the pics and I am satisfied that charges will be laid and hopefully there wil be a public stoning. Or something like that. I do not see why some people can takes lots of pics of a young girl in the nuddy and then walk away unscathed. It is wrong. It matters not that she say she gave permission. She cannot know what she was thinking. Many Children's rights Activists have rightly pointed out that a girl may give permission now but later look back at her childhood with regret and think "Oh no I did a bad thing" and then that is not good that would scar her. I agree completely.

She will look back on her life and think it is wrong, just like many girls who have not lived Prude's way in their life may do so.

Of course if you had been living Prude's way in their teenage lives they would be looking back at their lives and saying hip hip hooray for me I was a good moral person no regrets.

So there is a big difference who should be able to say which is the best way to live as a teenager.

And that person should not be Bill Henson.

It is the person who can make decisions where the teenager would not have regrets of course.

I thinks you is knowing who we is talking about.

Now she's done it! And she'd do it again!

A teacher says she would flaunt her naughty bits again.

It has come to a sad time in our society when a primary school teacher, a moral compass for our young minds, has not only NOT repented for flaunting her naughty bits once, but has said she will do it again.

I hopes this is not meant to be an arithmetic lesson and she is teaching the kiddies to count to ten. Flaunt one, Flaunt two and so on. I think the old use your fingers to teach or maybe counters on a string would work just fine. I is not going in for these modern sensationalist methods.

Furthermore she pose naked in a magazine Cleo with her husband talking about their sex lives.

Well that is the end. Little kiddies do not needs to know about sex. It is quite sufficient for them to learn about the Good Fairy Penguin who bestow upon you a little baby if youse wish for one very hard and is good. And then this also mean she encourage her husband to show his tiddlywinks too, and everyone know that a man's tiddlywinks is much more ... let us say SEEABLE than a lady's.

So it is even worse.

And then even endorsing that rag Cleo. And you think you has not breached an ethical code of conduct? I fear for you!

No it is not right at all. I for one would make sure children is never seeing nakedness. There ought to be a rule that when they prepares for a bath it ought to be a bubble one, they is to close their eyes when they is undressed, then you whisk them under the bubbles quick before they is allowed to open their eyes so they don't get a look. Preserve their innocence.

Oh and don't let this lady teacher persuade you otherwise. Would you rather your child be a believer or a streaker? A member of the Prude fold or a centrefold?

I knows you will choose wisely.