These images are clearly not promoting the innocence of children. I'm a professional photographer myself and I know the difference between implied and blatant, and many of these to me are blatantly sexualized. The only exception I could make is the image of the child in the fetal position on the towel, but even that reeks of something sinister (the angle is clearly specifically chosen to be uncomfortably revealing of the child's bottom, not implying innocence at all, but definitely something else). A person who was trying to portray innocence would not use such blatantly sexualized angles and poses, even with a mature model. This is not innocence on display, it's child pornography hiding behind the facade of art, and the first images to the left and right of the headshot are quite frankly disturbing.
RE: Is the Photo Exhibition of Jock Sturges a Confirmation of the Overton Window?