Amanda Rishworth

SA Federal 
Labor Party

Sexy music videos

Sexy music video ban
heraldsun.com.au
January 23, 2010

"There is no silver bullet - the industry does need to consider content and what ratings they are giving it,"

She said a rating of PG or M could give parents a guide to what was appropriate for their children.

"This is not about being a prude but about providing good role models," 

 "It's more than just sex, it's about the role women play in them."

The South Australian MP said "scantily clothed" women in the clips were "gyrating" around men and giving "suggestive looks". Many just looked like "props" for men, she said.

Why should children be exposed to videos like this?
thepunch.com.au
January 29, 2010

Not only are sexually provocative images of women used to advertise, but they are routinely featured on television, music video clips, movies and even toys.  While adults are better equipped to deal with the bombardment of sexualised content, we need to stop to consider the impact it has on children.

Surely this is an example of how we have gone too far where we now objectify even children.

How to tackle the sexualisation of women and girls, and associated negative effects, is complex and difficult but must be addressed.

Some advocates in this area have called on industry to become more responsible in where and when they show this content, while others have called for government regulation.

We also need to educate and help parents to counter the messages so persuasive throughout our mass media.

One thing we can’t do is push this issue under the carpet. We need to do our best to ensure that the next generation of women grow up confident, self assured, and not determine success or fulfilment by whether they qualify as a ‘sexy bitch’.

Michelle Roberts

WA State
Member of the Legislative Assembly
Labor Party
Electorate: Midland

In August 2004, as the WA Minister for Justice she applied to the Attorney-General to have to MA15+ rating of the game MANHUNT reviewed. This led to the Review Board banning it.

This is her statement issued on September 29th 2004.

A controversial and violent computer game has now been banned nationally following concerns raised by Justice Minister Michelle Roberts.

Mrs Roberts said the national Classification Review Board had ruled that the game Manhunt could not be legally sold, hired, advertised or exhibited anywhere in Australia.

The Minister said it was the responsibility of Western Australian retailers to remove all games from the shelves immediately.

"This decision is a big win for the Australian community," she said.

"There is no need for a game which is so disturbingly violent to be available.

"As a mother of teenage children, I was appalled at the sickening level of violence contained in the game and that its rating made it accessible to many young people."

Mrs Roberts wrote to Attorney General Philip Ruddock last month raising concerns about the classification of the computer game.

The Minister asked for the MA15+ classification to be reviewed immediately.

"I urge anybody who has a copy of this game to dispose of this game at once, rather than face any penalties," she said.

"Anybody found in possession faces a fine of up to $10,000."

Kevin Rudd

Qld Federal 
Member of the House of Reps
Australian Labor Party
Electorate: Griffith

Made the following comments regarding the Bill Henson controversy in May and June 2008.

Kevin Rudd
Interview with Karl Stefanovic, 
Today Program, Nine Network
23 May 2008

STEFANOVIC: I want to show you some photos this is an art exhibition in Sydney that is causing quite a stir. These are images from Bill Henson, now one critic says that he is an artist of ferocious integrity who depicts androgenous girls and boys adrift in the nocturnal turmoil of adolescence? What we say is, is that, that is crossing the line. What do you say?

PM: That’s the first time I've seen them. I think they're revolting.

STEFANOVIC: Should the Government step in here with some sort of or some level of control here?

PM: Well, the NSW authorities through the police are already examining this matter which is why I'm not going to comment on a legal process.

STEFANOVIC: As a Dad how do they make you feel, those photos?

PM: I’ve just said, it's the first time I've seen them, I find them absolutely revolting. Kids deserve to have the innocence of their childhood protected. I have a very deep view of this. For god sake, let's just allow kids to be kids. Whatever the artistic view or the merits of that sort of stuff, frankly I don't think there are any. Just allow kids to be kids you know.

Kevin Rudd
Interview with Mike Carlton and Sandy Aloisi, 
2UE Radio, Sydney
23 May 2008

CARLTON: Alright. Can we switch to another topic, there is a bit of a storm here in Sydney this morning. An exhibition of photography was to be shown at a gallery in Paddington last night. Images of kids as young as 12 and 13, apparently naked. Do you have a view on that?

PM: Well I have just done the Channel 9 Today Program and for the first time I saw these images. I will say on your program what I said when I saw these images only half an hour ago.

I think they are revolting. That’s the first point and the second is, I don’t understand why we cant allow kids just to have their childhood and to be able to enjoy their childhood. I really have a problem with this.

But I notice that these matters are currently with the NSW Police, so I’m sure the police will make their own determination through the law about what should happen next.

CARLTON: (Inaudible) about police officers marching into art gallery’s and shutting things down?

PM: They are required to act within the definitions of the law. I presume what their policing here in NSW will be the equivalent of the obscenity provisions of the code. Because that’s what would apply in these circumstances. That’s why I’m reluctant to comment on the police process. They are independent and they are required to enforce the law (inaudible).

For the first time I saw the images on television, as I said, about half an hour ago. Frankly I think they are revolting and I just don’t understand why we can’t allow kids to enjoy something of the innocence of childhood.

Prime Minister of Australia Interview 
Joint Press Conference with Deputy Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, 
Canberra 28 May 2008 

Subject: Bill Henson

JOURNALIST:PM, Cate Blanchett says you should retract your criticism of Bill Henson’s artwork. Will you be reassessing that harsh initial reaction that you had to it? 

PM:When I was asked the other day for my reaction, my personal reaction as a parent, to the photographs which were shown on television that morning, I gave my reaction. I don’t apologise for that reaction. I stand by that view. And I will not be changed on it. In terms of the other matters concerning the legal processes, that’s always been properly the independent province of the law. Quite apart from any personal view of any politician – me or anyone else. 

JOURNALIST:Do you agree with the Prime Minister on Bill Henson’s exhibition and do you think it’s a good look to have the vice squad raiding art galleries in Australia? 

GILLARD:I’m now concerned that you don’t read my radio transcripts, because if you did, you’d be aware that I was asked this question earlier in the week and certainly endorsed the Prime Minister’s view. 

JOURNALIST:(Inaudible) 

PM:Well, Mark, there are two questions here. One is our personal view. And I was asked the other day for my personal view as a parent about the photographs which were whacked up on the television screen. And I gave my reaction. I stand by that reaction. And don’t apologise for it, and won’t be changing it. There’s a second point here, which is the process, the independent processes of the law. As I said on the day, that’s a matter for the legal processes to unfold. It’s not a question of a politician having a particular view at a personal level which dictates the course of action of the law. The law is an independent beast and the laws governing these matters have preexisted us by a long, long time. And that will sort itself through. 

JOURNALIST:Malcolm Turnbull said this morning, he’s got a couple on his walls at home. Should he take them down? 

PM:I’m unaware of those remarks. My remarks were entirely based on the couple of photographs which I was shown on television. And as I said, were remarks based on my personal view as a parent. That is the question I was asked, I think, by Karl Stefanovic. 

JOURNALIST: What about as Prime Minister? 

PM:Well, I’m a parent, I’m a person and my views on the photographs I was shown haven’t changed. I am passionate about children having innocence in their childhood. And therefore, when I’m presented with those sorts of photographs, and asked for my personal view as a parent, I gave them. 

Now, on the question of the law and how that applies, that’s properly in the hands of independent processes completely removed from any politicians personal view. I stand by my personal view, stated before, and I don’t intend to change from it.

Kevin Rudd 
Interview with Jon Faine, ABC Radio 774 Melbourne
06 June 2008

Subject: Bill Henson

FAINE: Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of Australia, my guest. Jon Faine with you on 774 ABC Melbourne.

Bill Henson’s photographs now will not result in a prosecution according to the New South Wales DPP in news that has been announced this morning. It seems that nobody, now not even within the legal establishment, let alone in the arts, censorship or media world agrees with your judgemental stance, if I can call it that, Prime Minister, that those photos were disgusting.

PM: Jon, if I am on national television, I am shown for the first time a couple of those photographs, and I am asked what my view, what my personal view is as a parent, I am as entitled as any other Australian to put my point of view.

And I did. I don’t apologise for it. Haven’t changed it since. I also said in the same interview, that any legal processes associated with the treatment of these photographs and this material is completely independent of politicians. I have said that consistently since then. As it should be.

FAINE: The resultant lack of any police follow up or court prosecution suggests that this was an inglorious episode in the cultural discussions that this nation occasionally engages in Prime Minister.

PM: Jon –

FAINE: And you added some fuel to that fire.

PM: Well Jon if you are on national television, asked for your view as a parent in response to a particular piece of material, you can express a view or simply waive it through. I expressed a view, don’t apologise for it. But if we got to the stage where people can’t be asked their views on particular objects.

FAINE: That would be censorship, I am not a fan of that.

PM: What I am about to say is we are all entitled to express our point of view, even Prime Ministers and secondly, to say quite rightly that independent legal processes associated with the treatment of material such as this are completely independent of the individual views of politicians. And I have said that since then too. These two ideas, you know, can coexist.

Kevin Rudd 
Interview with Jon Faine, ABC Radio 774 Melbourne
06 June 2008

Subject: Bill Henson

FAINE: Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of Australia, my guest. Jon Faine with you on 774 ABC Melbourne.

Bill Henson’s photographs now will not result in a prosecution according to the New South Wales DPP in news that has been announced this morning. It seems that nobody, now not even within the legal establishment, let alone in the arts, censorship or media world agrees with your judgemental stance, if I can call it that, Prime Minister, that those photos were disgusting.

PM: Jon, if I am on national television, I am shown for the first time a couple of those photographs, and I am asked what my view, what my personal view is as a parent, I am as entitled as any other Australian to put my point of view.

And I did. I don’t apologise for it. Haven’t changed it since. I also said in the same interview, that any legal processes associated with the treatment of these photographs and this material is completely independent of politicians. I have said that consistently since then. As it should be.

FAINE: The resultant lack of any police follow up or court prosecution suggests that this was an inglorious episode in the cultural discussions that this nation occasionally engages in Prime Minister.

PM: Jon –

FAINE: And you added some fuel to that fire.

PM: Well Jon if you are on national television, asked for your view as a parent in response to a particular piece of material, you can express a view or simply waive it through. I expressed a view, don’t apologise for it. But if we got to the stage where people can’t be asked their views on particular objects.

FAINE: That would be censorship, I am not a fan of that.

PM: What I am about to say is we are all entitled to express our point of view, even Prime Ministers and secondly, to say quite rightly that independent legal processes associated with the treatment of material such as this are completely independent of the individual views of politicians. And I have said that since then too. These two ideas, you know, can coexist.

Kevin Rudd
Interview with Lisa Wilkinson and Karl Stefanovic, Channel Nine Today Show, Canberra
06 June 2008

Subject: Bill Henson

WILKINSON: Well your stomach did turn two weeks ago on the show when you described the photos that Bill Henson took as revolting. Now the classification board has given them the all clear and it seems unlikely that charges will be laid.

Are our censors and police, aren't they supposed to reflect community standards, it sounds like they're not reflecting your standards?

PM: Well I think on your program, I think it was Karl who asked me the question, what my attitude was as a parent to those photographs and my reaction was very clear cut.

I've been asked many times since then have I changed my view and let me say on your program today I have not changed my view one bit. I also said on your program that when it comes to the independent processes of the law, they are completely separate from what any individual politician may think, feel or respond to by way of their own individual judgments.

And independent processes of the law are on foot, dealing with this and other matters and we should not interfere with that one bit whatsoever.

WILKINSON: But do you think the classification board got it wrong?

PM: You know something, organisations like that are at arm's length from politicians, it's a matter for those bodies independently including the legal authorities, to evaluate these matters and reach their own determination. We as individuals may have our own private views; the virtue of our democracy is that we can have that.

I said on this program what my views were as a parent. I don't budge from that. But I'm not able to go around and start dictating to the legal authorities what they should or shouldn't do. That's quite a separate matter.

They've always been independent. In fact that's what I said on your program from day one.

***

Made the following comments during the controversy over the July 2008 edition of the Art Monthly Australia magazine which featured nude pictures of Olympia Nelson.

Continue...

   www.refused-classification.com

| Online Since April 2002