Where do we draw the line - I have no idea
I have been following this thread with some interest. I have found most photographs of nudes, male or female, result in no reaction by me. They are not of interest to me generally. So I can never quite understand some peoples, IMHO, over reaction.
I remember that in the past few months I have seen two very good nude photographs, both were of children horror of horrors one was a quite famous photo taken in the early 1900s of a group of young lad swimming or sunbathing in an estuary, the other was a group of 10year olds, in the 1920/30 who had done a similar thing in a London park and were being chased by a furious looking policewoman chasing them with a stick. Both candid shots, quiet exquisite, and both illegal if taken today.
But did you realise, images created by computer, psudophotographs, can also classified as illegal an pornographic, as one 19 year old found out in Canada, who had scanned images of children from a clothing catalogue, and alter their images in some way, he got a 2 year sentence. Even images where say the heads of adults and children are swapped and superimposed on each other, (though why one would do this I dont know), would also fall foul of the law. The harm or exploitation of children is totally unacceptable but I never expected this to include almost cartoon type images, nor did I expect to include a farther who had taken photographs of his young children playing naked at beach in France being arrested back home in England for having pornographic material and being a paedophile, (he was eventually acquitted).
But Im still no near my goal of what is a clear definition of what is considered obscene and pornographic.
