'Forming sexualities as judicial virtues' by Leslie Moran at 273-289 explores -
the formation of sexuality in the institution of the judiciary. Its object of study is an archive made up of the texts of swearing in ceremonies of newly appointed judges of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Australia. The texts, records of public events, demonstrate a remarkable consistency of general content and tone. They take the form of what might best be described as life writing (biography and autobiography). They have a strong hagiographic quality. Dedicated to writing the life of the newly appointed judge, they are a particular form of life writing devoted to the portrayal of state officials. As such they have a double function formulating and fashioning the subject not only as an exemplary individual life but also as a subject that embodies the virtues of the judicial institution. Each swearing-in document offers a textual portrait that makes and makes public the values and virtues of the institution of the judge. An important context for this study is an earlier empirical research project on sexual diversity in the judiciary. Key informants in that research advised me that sexuality was unlike the other strands of diversity. It was described as a personal and a private matter: strictly extra judicial. The primary objective of this essay is to explore how, if at all, sexuality is made in these public judicial ceremonies and texts, and more specifically, how the subject’s sexuality is figured as an institutional ideal, as a judicial virtue. In undertaking this task the analysis will also examine some aspects of the role of gender in the formation of the judicial subject as a sexual subject.'Sexualizing the child: The strange case of Bill Henson, his ‘absolutely revolting’ images and the law of childhood innocence' by Brian Simpson at 290-311 notes that -
In 2008 internationally acclaimed Australian photographer Bill Henson planned to exhibit some of his work at a Sydney Gallery. This included photographs of a naked 12-year-old child. When one image was used in publicity to promote the exhibition it came to the attention of the organizer of a child advocacy group who complained to police that the image constituted child pornography. The subsequent seizing of the images gave rise to a community debate about artistic freedom, what constitutes child pornography and the capacity of children to consent. Although these events coincidentally occurred at the same time as a Senate inquiry into the sexualization of children in the media, the issue of childhood sexuality was a muted aspect of the ensuing public debate. ...
Much of the public debate that occurred after the reporting of Henson’s images to the police centred on the issue of free artistic expression and the point that for centuries the naked body (including the child’s) had been the subject of art (Marr, 2008: 129–130) versus the appropriateness of exhibiting naked images of children which might be used by paedophiles for their sexual titillation. There was also some debate about whether a child could consent to being photographed naked, and whether the parents could validly consent on the child’s behalf. But for the most part there was little direct engagement with the ambiguity of childhood that Henson’s work represents. It is my argument that the issues of childhood sexuality raised by Henson’s work lead logically to the complaints made against him as they feed into the anxieties held by many about the meaning of childhood and children’s sexuality. At the same time those who defended him tended to avoid the issue of childhood sexuality raised by his work in preference to more orthodox stances based on artistic freedom and denials that the images were sexual at all. ...
In all the debates about the Henson images the matter of childhood sexuality was side-stepped by all concerned. Few suggested that children had agency in these matters, nor did the rights of the child, including to be sexually educated, figure much in debates. One might be forgiven for agreeing with Kincaid that it was as if everyone wanted to maintain the child’s innocence to increase the allure of the sexual context in which the images were portrayed by some. But what may instead unite both sides of the debate is the investment that all adults have placed in children, and a consequent reluctance to empower children and acknowledge their autonomy rights. This was a controversy very much controlled by adults and articulated in accordance with their competing anxieties on both sides.
