Model MoRina wrote:
A simple solution to being annoyed by looking at images you consider vulgar is to stop looking at them.

Likewise, a simple solution to being annoyed by reading posts in an "Off Topic" section that you consider "inhospitable is to stop reading them:

Model MoRina wrote:
This is a good move.
Would have been nice to shut down the political crap years ago and then the forums may have survived. When you allow the political stuff, the nastiness spills over everywhere. When the forum attracts people who have nothing better to do than argue, it makes things inhospitable for those who wanted to use the site for something like... I dunno .. photography and modeling?

https://www.modelmayhem.com/forums/post … st20013593

  -----

Model MoRina wrote:
Who the fuck does this guy think he is? Him, Mark Zuckerberg and Visa and MasterCard should go have a beer together and celebrate their love of censorship.

Exactly!

Arizona Shoots wrote:
“You're all a bunch of perverts!”  According to this guy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrH-rw9cdDA

You are behaving like a “clickbait merchant".  Your topic is deceptive and exaggerated in order to trick people into clicking your link and responding to a non-member’s video. Yet you have not even bothered to express your own opinion.

Please point out where in the attached video ‘this guy’ actually says “You're all a bunch of perverts!”

He refers to a sub-group as “Guys with a Camera” and breaks this group down into those who shoot 100% nudes and down again into those who post links to their entire catalogs of what he believes are unflattering nudes. This is the sub-group who he has called perverts.

He is not pushing to ban or censor these types of images he is suggesting that some “Guys with a Camera” need to do much better before they can earn the honour of calling themselves (art) photographers.

The Other Place wrote:
Likewise, a simple solution to being annoyed by reading posts in an "Off Topic" section that you consider "inhospitable is to stop reading them:

Who is annoyed? I was responding to a post. Not sure what assumptions you are making about me, but I guess have it if it makes you happy.

And there is absolutely nothing political in what I wrote, so I don't know what you are talking about. Censorship is coming from everywhere right now, and that directly affects my photography business. Maybe you've never had your instagram banned for nudity when no nudity was present, but censorship affects all of us in creative endeavors.

The guy in the video is making accusations about the intentions of people who photograph nude or partially clothed women, and I think they are baseless. He's allowed his opinion. Who cares what other people photograph and whether the quality is up to a certain standard? What's wrong with creating images purely for fun as a hobby or for profit? It's all legal, right? I just don't agree with censoring legal activities, or labeling something soft core porn to get people upset about something that wouldn't upset them if they just didn't bother looking at it. I don't watch things on tv that I don't like, but I don't get mad that those shows exist.

Camera Buff wrote:
You are behaving like a “clickbait merchant".  Your topic is deceptive and exaggerated in order to trick people into clicking your link and responding to a non-member’s video. Yet you have not even bothered to express your own opinion.

Well it worked on you.

Arizona Shoots wrote:
Well it worked on you.

Touché
–——————————-——————————————-
Not every ‘guy’ with a camera or ‘gal’ who poses for a camera, needs to be an expert photographer or a supermodel. If you enjoy what you are doing and you’re not causing any harm, that’s all that truly matters.

What I objected to most was the ‘video guy’ calling out “guys with cameras” as being “perverts” for linking their nude pictures to complete albums. I guess the quality of nude photos taken by “guys with cameras” don’t meet the video guys expectations.

Focuspuller wrote:
Some triggered Guy With A Soapbox railing against "Guys With A Camera", as if he invented the term. 

For the record, I shoot nude female models.. If that  makes me a GWAC in a self-righteous blowhard's eyes, I really don't care.

Honestly.

Agree 100%

And since somebody said no one was giving opinions, here's mine, the guy in the video is a feminist cuck who never gets laid and he thinks the cucky idealistic rant may help him to his goal.

Certain Exposures wrote:
I encourage all of you to watch this short David Lynch clip because it is related to the subject and entertaining. His reply starts at 00:28 and continues to the end of the 2 minute video.

I recently read two of his photography books and found this gem while looking up interviews about the material:

https://youtu.be/E6dXuGEUIko?si=qSnu0dF … Y&t=28

EXACTLY!

Certain Exposures wrote:
I encourage all of you to watch this short David Lynch clip because it is related to the subject and entertaining. His reply starts at 00:28 and continues to the end of the 2 minute video.

I recently read two of his photography books and found this gem while looking up interviews about the material:

https://youtu.be/E6dXuGEUIko?si=qSnu0dF … Y&t=28

Are we aware of any documented cases where a renowned creative woman has said the same on camera about her preference for photographing men?

Certain Exposures wrote:
Are we aware of any documented cases where a renowned creative woman has said the same on camera about her preference for photographing men?

How is your portfolio currently picture-less?

Roaring 20s wrote:
Excerpt … “Sorry buddy, women have agency just like everybody else.”

Women absolutely have agency. Just like everybody else, Including guys and gals with cameras.

This includes amateur photographers and models who don’t pay or charge one another, but collaborate purely for the fun and excitement of creating images to the best of their abilities.

Too bad, so sad for all those self-appointed critics who look down on and call out the works of others.

Camera Buff wrote:
Women absolutely have agency. Just like everybody else, Including guys and gals with cameras.

This includes amateur photographers and models who don’t pay or charge one another, but collaborate purely for the fun and excitement of creating images to the best of their abilities.

Too bad, so sad for all those self-appointed critics who look down on and call out the works of others.

exactly, nobody is disrespecting anybody by posing and portraying anyone a specific way, if this was a discussion of an issue about boundaries or communicating boundaries better than lets have that discussion, but that wasn't the OP's discussion at all

it was "this is inherently disrespectful to women as an amorphous group, sexuality is bad, oh yeah I meant this to be about my view of art"

I feel like those talking points would have garnered more consensus 15-20 years ago, it reminds me of that. I don't really see how it is compatible with current views where we don't infantilize women and all pursuits of sexual expression and acknowledgement of being a sexual being are to have no effect on any other movement across society

it's like, pick a lane. even in the comments he's doubling back to making it more about an abstract separation of artistic expression as opposed to all his other points he spent 6 minutes going on about. I'll double down as well, if you want to focus on specific composition styles or just posing nude women, these are all personal pursuits that aren't weighted any differently than the other.