What happened to my "girls in camera shirts thread"...it's gone/deleted/vanished

Status
Not open for further replies.
fdigital said:
Yes. A black person is black in the same way that a white person is white in the same way that the female form is attractive to (most) males in the same way that the male figure is attractive to (most) females.

How a thread of girls in camera shirts can be seen as sexist is so far beyond me.
Click to expand...

People like to make this seem a lot harder than it is, mostly so they can complain about how white guys are so victimized. To spell it out:

Being attracted to the female body? Wanting to take pictures of it and appreciate it? Pretty much a-ok.

Fixating on it so that you deny (or at least fail to consider) that there's an actual human being behind the boobs? Sexist. If you are hung up on the word "sexist", you can just substitute "rude", "lacking in human empathy", or whatever floats your boat.

It isn't rocket science.

If you're an animal lover, think of it as the equivalent of people who buy their kids a pet rabbit on Easter. Then the thing gets abandoned in a field two weeks later and starves to death because nobody considered that it's an actual, living creature--not just a seasonal decoration.
 
zumbido said:
Yeah. A lot of people around here have an unrealistic sense of what a "nice little oasis" this place is. There are enough interesting discussions about actual photography, sometimes, to keep checking in, but the fact that it's even more male-dominated than the popular electronic gear forums tells you all you need to know. Wasn't always that way, but at some point there was an influx of guys that are interested mostly in pictures of their cameras and tits, and next thing you know half of the people who actually had anything to say (including all the women but one, it seems) were gone. Ah well.
Click to expand...

There are makeup forums out there you know - with the userbase mainly female.
 
filmfan said:
fdigital... it was not the topic of the thread apparently, but the comments made within the thread... AGAIN, your gun is pointed at the wrong target my friend.

one more time... it was not the topic of the thread, but the comments made within the thread that elicited deletion.

(not that I agree with the result, but I cant help pointing out to you that you are endlessly harping on the wrong issue)
Click to expand...

Understood, but it was mentioned that it would have been less likely to have been deleted if it was simple called "camera shirts" rather than "girls in camera shirts".
 
filmfan said:
fdigital... it was not the topic of the thread apparently, but the comments made within the thread... AGAIN, your gun is pointed at the wrong target my friend.

one more time... it was not the topic of the thread, but the comments made within the thread that elicited deletion.

(not that I agree with the result, but I cant help pointing out to you that you are endlessly harping on the wrong issue)
Click to expand...

(edit: please disregard me quoting this post here, I mistook the intention of its contents.. my post still makes a point though I think)

Look, I moderate two other forums and we usually just delete the offending comments if it gets out of hand and post a message in the topic warning everybody to cool down.. if that doesn't help, the topic gets locked.

I know the topic got removed because of 'offending' comments (quite who they offended remains to be seen.. stupidity usually says more about the person shouting it rather than the one to whom it's directed). But by deleting the whole topic, it put a label on those photos which they didn't deserve. That's the whole issue I have with this discussion... just saying that it was deleted because of comments of others doesn't justify the fact that the OP lost a topic and will probably not share such photos again in the future (hell I'm pretty sure I wouldn't if it turned out people apparently couldn't handle it), which is a shame in my book.
 
Last edited:
zumbido said:
People like to make this seem a lot harder than it is, mostly so they can complain about how white guys are so victimized. To spell it out:

Being attracted to the female body? Wanting to take pictures of it and appreciate it? Pretty much a-ok.

Fixating on it so that you deny (or at least fail to consider) that there's an actual human being behind the boobs? Sexist. If you are hung up on the word "sexist", you can just substitute "rude", "lacking in human empathy", or whatever floats your boat.

It isn't rocket science.

If you're an animal lover, think of it as the equivalent of people who buy their kids a pet rabbit on Easter. Then the thing gets abandoned in a field two weeks later and starves to death because nobody considered that it's an actual, living creature--not just a seasonal decoration.
Click to expand...

There's a big difference between the rabbit and the girl in your example - and that happens to be that the rabbit was, against it's will, put into that position. Most of the "racy" photos on here, and especially the ones in the thread are different to your example in that the girls intention was to be in the photograph.
 
fdigital said:
There are makeup forums out there you know - with the userbase mainly female.
Click to expand...

That's sort of a non-sequitur. Makeup is inherently gendered in Western cultures. I wouldn't expect many men there, just like I wouldn't expect many women in a beard-and-mustache forum. On the other hand, there are very many women photographers, and there are lot of them on some other photography forums... but there ain't many here. Exactly one who posts with any regularity anymore, it seems.
 
as a 'Woman' I was NOT offended by the Thread
in ANY thread you can possibly find a sexist, racist, etc bone to pick

Michael once posted another thread which I found to be a tad more intolerant of women..
the Girls in Thailand Bikini Party Pixs
though admittedly it was NOT THE PHOTOS
but more the way people related to them
with some men salivating as well as possibly doing other things :p

I think TOLERANCE & RESPECT is the key...:D
Not to Ban an Entire Thread but those Comments that step beyond the Realm

There was a recent thread here which I cannot find though I'm sure it still exists / Poll & Views on 'Photographing the Homeless'
I posted numerous shots and was pummeled by a Rude Dissenter.
Wish I could find the Thread for exact Quotes....
He argued rather insanely, telling me he wished someone would get me in a dark alley,hurt me, steal my M9, (which i don't even own, mind you I can't afford one nor would I if I could.... a Film Gal all the way)
No one came to my Defense but I was rather shocked that His type of behavior was Ignored.

Cheers & Best to All...Keep Shooting :D
 
Last edited:
fdigital said:
There's a big difference between the rabbit and the girl in your example - and that happens to be that the rabbit was, against it's will, put into that position. Most of the "racy" photos on here, and especially the ones in the thread are different to your example in that the girls intention was to be in the photograph.
Click to expand...

I think that's a meaningless statement, because "intending to be in a photograph" is something that is impossibly broad, and disconnected from what happens later. Many people intend to be in a photograph, but don't intend (for example) for it to be turned into an internet meme that ridicules them. That light saber kid on youtube a few years ago intended to be in his little movie, does that mean that it was socially acceptable for a bunch of halfwits all over the world to rake him over the coals until he had a breakdown? You can't arbitrarily and absolutely make the link you want to make here.

I think your "intention" argument holds for some (maybe very little, but at least some) pornography. I don't think it applies here.
 
fdigital said:
There are makeup forums out there you know - with the userbase mainly female.
Click to expand...


And in a democratic free thinking society you are free to join that forum Gavin ... and if they post a pic of you or a fellow male homosapien wearing a pair of 'budgie smugglers' with the Yves St Laurent logo on the front, please be offended for me! :D
 
Renzsu said:
I know the topic got removed because of 'offending' comments (quite who they offended remains to be seen.. stupidity usually says more about the person shouting it rather than the one to whom it's directed). But by deleting the whole topic, it put a label on those photos which they didn't deserve. That's the whole issue I have with this discussion... just saying that it was deleted because of comments of others doesn't justify the fact that the OP lost a topic and will probably not share such photos again in the future (hell I'm pretty sure I wouldn't if it turned out people apparently couldn't handle it), which is a shame in my book.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. (bold and color added, obviously, for effect).

Cheers,
Dave
 
Renzsu said:
Look, I moderate two other forums and we usually just delete the offending comments if it gets out of hand and post a message in the topic warning everybody to cool down.. if that doesn't help, the topic gets locked.

I know the topic got removed because of 'offending' comments (quite who they offended remains to be seen.. stupidity usually says more about the person shouting it rather than the one to whom it's directed). But by deleting the whole topic, it put a label on those photos which they didn't deserve. That's the whole issue I have with this discussion... just saying that it was deleted because of comments of others doesn't justify the fact that the OP lost a topic and will probably not share such photos again in the future (hell I'm pretty sure I wouldn't if it turned out people apparently couldn't handle it), which is a shame in my book.
Click to expand...

I thought the comment which you quoted helps your argument. Not sure why I was quoted...
If I were against slavery, I would not quote Abe Lincoln (as an example of a racist) in a speech calling out racists.
 
Last edited:
zumbido said:
I think that's a meaningless statement, because "intending to be in a photograph" is something that is impossibly broad, and disconnected from what happens later. Many people intend to be in a photograph, but don't intend (for example) for it to be turned into an internet meme that ridicules them. That light saber kid on youtube a few years ago intended to be in his little movie, does that mean that it was socially acceptable for a bunch of halfwits all over the world to rake him over the coals until he had a breakdown? You can't arbitrarily and absolutely make the link you want to make here.

I think your "intention" argument holds for some (maybe very little, but at least some) pornography. I don't think it applies here.
Click to expand...

Kid uploaded a video of himself being silly and put it on the internet. I found it funny. I bet he won't do it again. Thats the thing - the more you censor and shield and protect people a) the more oblivious to reality they become and b) the less they learn.

Nannying people only bandaids problems.
 
Go figure (the colloquialism, not an anatomical reference....)

BTW, I agree completely!!!

helenhill said:
as a 'Woman' I was NOT offended by the Thread
in ANY thread you can possibly find a sexist, racist, etc bone to pick

Michael once posted another thread which I found to be a tad more intolerant of women..
the Girls in Thailand Bikini Party Pixs
though admittedly it was NOT THE PHOTOS
but more the way people related to them
with some men salivating as well as possibly doing other things :p

I think TOLERANCE & RESPECT is the key...:D
Not to Ban an Entire Thread but those that step beyond the Realm

There was a recent thread here which I cannot find though I'm sure it still exists / Poll & Views on 'Photographing the Homeless'
I posted numerous shots and was pummeled by a Rude Dissenter.
Wish I could find the Thread for exact Quotes....
He argued rather insanely, telling me he wished someone would get me in a dark alley,hurt me, steal my M9, (which i don't even own, mind you I can't afford one nor would I if I could.... a Film Gal all the way)
No one came to my Defense but I was rather shocked that his type of behavior was Ignored.

Cheers & Best to All...Keep Shooting :D
Click to expand...
 
Keith said:
And in a democratic free thinking society you are free to join that forum Gavin ... and if they post a pic of you or a fellow male homosapien wearing a pair of 'budgie smugglers' with the Yves St Laurent logo on the front, please be offended for me! :D
Click to expand...

Hahahaha


Good laugh :)
 
fdigital said:
Kid uploaded a video of himself being silly and put it on the internet. I found it funny. I bet he won't do it again. Thats the thing - the more you censor and shield and protect people a) the more oblivious to reality they become and b) the less they learn.

Nannying people only bandaids problems.
Click to expand...

You're not acknowledging the vast gulf between "nannying" and the necessary setting of social bounds on treating people with a lack of empathy. If you want to go down that road, you're endorsing Lord of the Flies and there's just no room for a productive discussion. Good luck to you. :)
 
zumbido said:
You're not acknowledging the vast gulf between "nannying" and the necessary setting of social bounds on treating people with a lack of empathy. If you want to go down that road, you're endorsing Lord of the Flies and there's just no room for a productive discussion. Good luck to you. :)
Click to expand...

I empathize with people who are in need of empathy. I don't empathize with the ladies in the camera/t-shirt thread because there was no need to empathize for them.

If someone finds trees to be sexually attractive (real condition - Phytophiliac), do you eradicate all trees from the earth in an attempt to empathize for the tree?
 
filmfan said:
I thought the comment which you quoted helps your argument. Not sure why I was quoted...
If I were against slavery, I would not quote Abe Lincoln (as an example of a racist) in a speech calling out racists.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I probably misread your post in context with one made earlier.. my post still stands though when read without your quoted text in it.
 
fdigital said:
I empathize with people who are in need of empathy. I don't empathize with the ladies in the camera/t-shirt thread because there was no need to empathize for them.

If someone finds trees to be sexually attractive (real condition - Phytophiliac), do you eradicate all trees from the earth in an attempt to empathize for the tree?
Click to expand...

That doesn't even begin to compute.

And you're mixing up "empathy" with "sympathy".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom