peterm1
Veteran
I think this is essentially true - spot on. Men love "stuff". Making "stuff", fixing "stuff", understanding how "stuff" works, improving "stuff", admiring well engineered "stuff". And men tend to have an action orientation - learning to excel at the skills needed to put those interests into effect. Men are over represented in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) fields for a reason. And that reason has nothing to do with culture or "toxic masculinity" or oppression of women for the most part.
It mainly has to do with the reality that men are, in this respect, "wired" differently to most women in terms of their interests and behaviour. I am not speaking in absolutes here - we are all part of the human race, men and women, and there is a lot of overlap. Some women are the same in this respect but there are simply fewer of them. Marie Curie is an example - in fact she won 2 medals and not many men can claim that, but look at the overall list of Nobel Prize winners for disciplines like physics, chemistry, medicine etc and you will see what I mean.
OK some will say the game is rigged but then the same people say this about EVERYTHING. Historically women may have been excluded by social expectations about roles but are they seriously saying that is the case today? No. You get to the top of your field by being interested in "stuff' - how stuff works and in fact being obsessed by it.
In short, you do not get to the top of your field and earn a Nobel Prize by talking about your damned emotions all the time. You get there by being interested in "stuff". And then doing something about it.
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
This is known as "lived experience" among the internet woke, and is not to be criticized.
I've actually read the article previously, of my own free will before this thread was started, thus my comment that I don't get the connection between the author's "men need to be more open with their emotions, but not to women" and "photographers are afraid of feelings, so don't know how to talk about art". While fascination with gear vs. actually using it is an interesting topic, I still don't see the connection to the article. I don't think boring your wife to death with your emotional baggage is the reason photographers like to discuss gear more than art.
Tim Murphy
Well-known
What does gear or even photography have to do with the article?
What does gear or even photography have to do with the article?
Dear Board,
I read the article and 60 some post later people are still talking about photography and gear?
Go back and read the article. Not because it is particularly interesting or compelling, but by reading the article you will realize that you are arguing about something that was never discussed, but projected into the discussion by the OP.
Regards,
Tim Murphy
Harrisburg, PA
What does gear or even photography have to do with the article?
Dear Board,
I read the article and 60 some post later people are still talking about photography and gear?
Go back and read the article. Not because it is particularly interesting or compelling, but by reading the article you will realize that you are arguing about something that was never discussed, but projected into the discussion by the OP.
Regards,
Tim Murphy
Harrisburg, PA
lynnb
Veteran
The author seems to believe that a female approach of emotional sharing is desirable for men. As a father of two daughters I've seen that approach in action and have been appalled at the vicious social bullying and destructively competitive behaviors that characterize many young women's experience with their peers as they grow and develop into womanhood, leaving a trail of damaged women in its wake. Men often pick up the pieces. Methinks the author wears a pair of 81A filters on her glasses.
emraphoto
Veteran
Dear Board,
I read the article and 60 some post later people are still talking about photography and gear?
Go back and read the article. Not because it is particularly interesting or compelling, but by reading the article you will realize that you are arguing about something that was never discussed, but projected into the discussion by the OP.
Regards,
Tim Murphy
Harrisburg, PA
I was beginning to think i was the only one. Phew!
aizan
Veteran
Yeah, that's true. The article doesn't say anything about photo gear, I'm just thinking about how it might be relevant to this activity. Nobody's really explained why emotional support is absent from online photo forums even though photographers are doing things that need it. An art practice or business is filled with drameh, so doesn't it seem odd that nobody starts threads to get help with those things? I think the articles I've linked give an explanation of why things are the way they are, and they might suggest ways to change things. Heck, maybe there's a more sympathetic way to approach answering questions about buying gear and stuff like that.
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
Give an example of emotional support that you've seen on a forum dealing with another art form?
peterm1
Veteran
Yes in general I think I would have to agree. Specifically in my experience men duke it out verbally or verbally and settle the issue - then mostly move on, perhaps helped by beer.
Women in groups can sometimes rather form little support groups (I have heard them called secret squirrel groups) then gossip, snipe, backstab and destroy other's reputations whom they see as competing with them. (To be fair some men do this too but its not so general behaviour amongst men except in politics where it is the rule).
In the workplace, even some women I know and have worked with under that kind of regime have told me they hate working for other women because of this tendency. In truth I recently had the misfortune of working in an organisation in which a bunch of feminists had taken over control, promoted others of their type and I have to say they were at least as vicious towards women who were not of the same stripe as they were towards the men.
aizan
Veteran
I only do photography so I wouldn’t know. But librarian Twitter is very emotionally supportive. That’s more like running a business than doing art, and 80% of librarians are women.
zuiko85
Veteran
I was commenting on the OP’s statement as expressed in the title. If I “talk about gear” it is because I’m interested in gear. Nothing more profound than that.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
That's a terribly wrong comparison.
In the current case many of us prove the article's generalization is wrong by showing it is wrong in our case. If enough men prove they all individually love chocolate, then any article saying men hate chocolate will be proven wrong.
On the other hand, the stuff about snowing is just stupid and no matter how many people say it it still is just a stupid thing, not a proof.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
He's saying you're drawing a false equivalence.
If you come up to me and say "you're not wearing hat" then I point to my hat and say "but I am wearing a hat" that's different than you coming up to me and saying "global warming is real" and I go "but it's snowing".
I'm still wondering about the OP's definition of emotionally supportive, if they just mean people saying "good job" and "you're doing great" or what? I feel like that sort of thing disappeared a lot of places when social media took over, and the need to always be "witty" and glib and sarcastic poisoned conversation. Sites like twitter and tumblr killed a lot of art forums, since the potential to reach much larger audiences outweighed the value of more intimate, helpful, feedback from a smaller circle of people who shared common interests. Now years later I see a lot of people complaining they have nobody to talk to, even when they have ten of thousands of people following their accounts...
If you come up to me and say "you're not wearing hat" then I point to my hat and say "but I am wearing a hat" that's different than you coming up to me and saying "global warming is real" and I go "but it's snowing".
I'm still wondering about the OP's definition of emotionally supportive, if they just mean people saying "good job" and "you're doing great" or what? I feel like that sort of thing disappeared a lot of places when social media took over, and the need to always be "witty" and glib and sarcastic poisoned conversation. Sites like twitter and tumblr killed a lot of art forums, since the potential to reach much larger audiences outweighed the value of more intimate, helpful, feedback from a smaller circle of people who shared common interests. Now years later I see a lot of people complaining they have nobody to talk to, even when they have ten of thousands of people following their accounts...
Out to Lunch
Ventor
The author's reaction to the response to her piece in Harper's Bazaar: 'My reported feature that went super viral. Probably my best work yet...". That's it ''Super Viral''...it pays the rent in Chamonix.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
I find it interesting how many folks care one way or the other about a random piece in Harpers (or anywhere else, for that matter). There's a kernel of truth there: in my experience it does tends to be guys who obsess about the gear (look at this site . . . 50:1 male to female). Same with the LUG. Same over at TOP. But in the final analysis: why feel threatened by someone alleging that this indicates some broader stunted emotional response or even a targeted emotional response? The article's conclusions aren't the first generalization to be both wrong and unhelpful at getting at any larger truth.
Now, let me tell you all how much I love my 50 Summilux Aspp. And the depth of that love? I double-dog dare anyone here to call me emotionally stunted. . . .
Now, let me tell you all how much I love my 50 Summilux Aspp. And the depth of that love? I double-dog dare anyone here to call me emotionally stunted. . . .
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
does it mean he equates "super viral" with being "the best work"? or am i putting words into his mouth?
EDIT: her, i mean HER. No i am not being male-chauvinistic. It's just that in Hungarian (language), we don't have genders.
[Isn't that the most emancipated language there is?]
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
obviously your love is superficial - or a lie - as you can't even spell the name of your "love"
busted!
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
"thing make money!"
In my role as illustrator I've become acquainted with a lot of authors/journalists, sometimes directly but more often indirectly. Accuracy is not very important, getting clicks is. And if you want to take a step down from journalist to "professional blogger" then bull****ting your readers it the best way to get clicks. Often the technique is fairly innocuous - asking for an answer to a not so esoteric question to stir responses in the comments, or if one is a bit more mischievous making a deliberate mistake such as getting the date wrong on a historic event. Whether it results in helpful suggestions or angry "WHY DON'T YOU PROOFREAD THESE???" comments is immaterial. The post gets clicks and comments and that's all the site cares about.
Still better? Make a whole series of articles on a premise that may well be true, but don't even bother with the details. I remember one series of articles where the author's first in the series was actually quite well researched and reasoned - but it was a somewhat decisive subject so stirred up hundreds of comments and hundreds of thousands of clicks. So what next? Come back next month with another well researched, well written article? Nope. Every week another item on the topic, each sloppier than the one before, until the author was grasping at straws trying to find anything relating to the subject that would keep the readership stirred up. This is not exceptional, it is basically the rule in online publishing.
clicks > quality
David Hughes
David Hughes
So I can make money from my OOF photo's? Wow! I'm getting all emotional...
Regards, David
Regards, David
Dogman
Veteran
"The basic argument is that guys suck at relating emotionally to other men because of contemporary homophobia, so they turn to women to take care of them instead.
"This behavior affects the world of photography by us not facing up to our anxieties about creativity. It's a lot easier to focus on gear and distract ourselves with GAS than it is to deal with artistic risks and challenges, especially when most of the photographers on forums are men who are no help when it comes to certain things. It's a trap!"
Okay.
So?
I mean, what difference does it really make?
"This behavior affects the world of photography by us not facing up to our anxieties about creativity. It's a lot easier to focus on gear and distract ourselves with GAS than it is to deal with artistic risks and challenges, especially when most of the photographers on forums are men who are no help when it comes to certain things. It's a trap!"
Okay.
So?
I mean, what difference does it really make?