Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 24, 2009, 11:57 PM   #371
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 350
Default

Calicajun, I think you make a good point as to why the father could have been concerned more than the "average" person (and wow, my heart stopped when reading your story. My dd is SEVEN and gets the mail all the time...) But, do you think what is happening in those articles about banning photography of kids, is reasonable and rational? I think Chato is trying to make the point that, we can damage our society (and therefore our kids) in OTHER ways, too, by overreacting and treating normal behavior as suspect. These fears (in general, not in you specifically) that have become out of proportion to the real risk are changing our society in unhealthy ways. It's almost like racial profiling--someone who has been attacked by a person of a certain race may become more fearful of that race in general. However, that doesn't give them the right to call the police any time someone of that race happens to come around. (I know this isn't a perfect analogy and you could argue that this situation is different, but I hope the point is not lost). This side of it is harder to explain and measure but is still a harm and a risk. We have to weigh that, too, and not just accept that fears are changing our society and our laws.
javacleve is offline  
Old Oct 25, 2009, 12:33 AM   #372
Senior Member
 
SharpShotGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kitsap Penninsula, Washington State
Posts: 1,217
Default

Every body looking at making Hell on Earth and hitting rock bottom cause they think Heaven is in the after life.... when its was suppose to be Heaven on Earth and then some think they have an issue to use what does not need to be used cause the one they think would of gotten life as their savior is not what they even think for they have been looking to make with what they have.....LIVE AND LET LIVE .....
SharpShotGal is offline  
Old Oct 25, 2009, 12:41 AM   #373
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SharpShotGal View Post
Every body looking at making Hell on Earth and hitting rock bottom cause they think Heaven is in the after life.... when its was suppose to be Heaven on Earth and then some think they have an issue to use what does not need to be used cause the one they think would of gotten life as their savior is not what they even think for they have been looking to make with what they have.....LIVE AND LET LIVE .....
The Golden Rule.

Too bad everybody doesn't live by it.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline  
Old Oct 25, 2009, 1:40 AM   #374
Senior Member
 
Calicajun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Quartz Hill, CA
Posts: 3,455
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by javacleve View Post
Calicajun, I think you make a good point as to why the father could have been concerned more than the "average" person (and wow, my heart stopped when reading your story. My dd is SEVEN and gets the mail all the time...) But, do you think what is happening in those articles about banning photography of kids, is reasonable and rational? I think Chato is trying to make the point that, we can damage our society (and therefore our kids) in OTHER ways, too, by overreacting and treating normal behavior as suspect. These fears (in general, not in you specifically) that have become out of proportion to the real risk are changing our society in unhealthy ways. It's almost like racial profiling--someone who has been attacked by a person of a certain race may become more fearful of that race in general. However, that doesn't give them the right to call the police any time someone of that race happens to come around. (I know this isn't a perfect analogy and you could argue that this situation is different, but I hope the point is not lost). This side of it is harder to explain and measure but is still a harm and a risk. We have to weigh that, too, and not just accept that fears are changing our society and our laws.
Under most conditions taking pictures of my kids (when they were little and cute, not so sure now about cutre) in public didn't bother me even after that incident. Just trying to explain why other people can become worry about pictures being taken of their kids when they don't understand the reason. Not everybody is a photographer and not every place is an appropriate location to take a picture. I do agree that the way things are going we are losing or going to lose a lot for freedoms. But going around saying that I have a camera and can shoot whatever and whenever I want is my right not matter what you think. Is not helping to keep our ability to take picture in public. There has to be consideration made on both sides and I believe in starting that with the photographer by having understanding for the other person's feelings.
Calicajun is offline  
Old Oct 25, 2009, 12:15 PM   #375
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calicajun View Post
Under most conditions taking pictures of my kids (when they were little and cute, not so sure now about cutre) in public didn't bother me even after that incident. Just trying to explain why other people can become worry about pictures being taken of their kids when they don't understand the reason. Not everybody is a photographer and not every place is an appropriate location to take a picture. I do agree that the way things are going we are losing or going to lose a lot for freedoms. But going around saying that I have a camera and can shoot whatever and whenever I want is my right not matter what you think. Is not helping to keep our ability to take picture in public. There has to be consideration made on both sides and I believe in starting that with the photographer by having understanding for the other person's feelings.
This fear of photography is a reltively new phenomonon. Basically didn't exist when I was a kid. Child abuse, with the exception of the organised kiddie porn industry, simply doesn't use normal photography to commit crimes. (Taking a picture of a normally dressed child and then using it to get off on, is not a crime.) Nor does it particulerly bother me if that's what is being done. No one is this scenario is being harmed.

Your story is an example of real danger, not just abuse, but real life threatening danger. Those who kidnap and rape children simply strike at random; the actual kid they are attacking is a non-entity to them.

But most actual acts of child abuse, are done by those who are known to the family. Some pedophiles will worm their way into a family for the sole purpose of slowly "grooming" the child for abuse.

This irrational fear of photography will continue to grow unless it's challenged. And this fear includes far more than photography. It's an irrational fear that every stranger is a potential pedophile rapist and killer, while the actual number of these kind of people is very low. As I pointed out, many times more children die each year from real dangers.

How can we deal with the larger problem, in which photography is only the most obvious manifestation? A problem to which our collective reaction is making far worse? A community in which the neighbors are happy to associate with children is in fact the best protection against all kinds of pedophiles - Yet the message we are sending is that if you look at a child, talk to a child, let alone photograph a child, you are a potential menace. How many people consiously or unconsicouly make an effort to avoid children altogether because of the fear of being labeled a pervert, a pedophile? Heck, you can be labeled a Bank Robber, and many wouldn't give a damn.

In the case of this thread, at BEST, the police could have run this guys plates through a computer and determine that he had no record of child abuse. Why then the call? Any call from the police with the implication of being a child molester has to be terrifying to the one who gets it. Two more people who will never look at a child again. And those who read this thread, some will also say, "Heck no, I'm not even going to look at a child let alone photograph one. If the goal is to protect our children, isn't this self defeating?

Nor does this even begin to discuss the effects on children of being taught by their parents that every stranger is a menace in disguise.

Dave
Chato is offline  
Old Oct 25, 2009, 2:04 PM   #376
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

As you can see, this problem far transcends photography. But photographers are on the front lines of this hysteria, and if we take a stand, it will go a long way to opening public discourse...

Quote:
"It's an everyday drama at primary schools up and down the country - but according to London teacher Kate Abley, a child wetting himself in the classroom is no longer a molehill, it's a mountain. "One male teacher refused to change children - he'd get other teachers to do it," says Abley. "Another teacher would call the child's mother to come in and deal with it." Those teachers who were prepared to change a child's wet pants were supposed to take another adult into the changing rooms, to keep an eye on them.

"The whole thing was completely impractical." There's a growing panic among childcare professionals about touching young children in their care which, says a group of academics at Manchester Metropolitan University's Institute of Education, is causing concern and uncertainty about what's OK and what's not when it comes to innocent physical contact with youngsters. In research they are planning to publish later this year, academics Heather Piper, John Powell and Hannah Smith describe how some child carers are reluctant even to put a plaster on a child's scraped knee.

Very young children have to treat their injuries themselves - with the nursery worker or teacher giving instructions on how to open the box, take out a plaster and stick it on. If a child's parent is nearby, he or she is summoned to deal with the injury. Piper describes it as a crazy situation. "Many people are behaving in completely ludicrous ways. What is cast into doubt is the process of normal nurturing - the way adults are with children." Comforting a child when they're upset, putting a plaster on them, changing their wet pants - all these everyday ways in which adults care for young children are now seen as suspect.

"Children are used to being cared for by adults, being picked up and having somebody put their plasters on. If they go to places where adults don't touch them, this must be quite horrifying," says Piper - she cited the example from one playgroup in her research where there was "no touch that was caring at all"."
[17]

"Many adults are afraid to interact with children for fear of being labelled as paedophiles, a report has claimed. Think-tank Civitas said the "escalation of child protection measures" had made everyone from sports coaches to Santas seem like "potential child abusers". The Home Office said there was no evidence that vetting had deterred volunteers or eroded trust. It plans to tighten the rules further, so all parents hosting foreign exchange students will face background checks. In its report, Licensed to Hug, Civitas said that child protection regulations had "succeeded in poisoning the relationship between the generations".

While in the past, adults would have helped children in distress or rebuked those misbehaving, there was now "a feeling that it is best not to become involved", it said. Report author Prof Frank Furedi, of Kent University, said: "From Girl Guiders to football coaches, from Christmas-time Santas to parents helping out in schools, volunteers - once regarded as pillars of the community - have been transformed in the regulatory and public imagination into potential child abusers, barred from any contact with children until the database gives them the green light."
Special Article: Adverse effects of hysteria - NewgonWiki
Dave
Chato is offline  
Old Oct 25, 2009, 4:57 PM   #377
Senior Member
 
kazuya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,006
Default

i think most people here are speaking about this one individual event, your generalising to much.
kazuya is offline  
Old Oct 25, 2009, 5:23 PM   #378
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kazuya View Post
i think most people here are speaking about this one individual event, your generalising to much.
This event affects no one but the OP. The context of this event affects all photographers, and society as a whole. We cannot discuss just this event, and expect to understand the broader issues.

Dave

Last edited by Chato; Oct 25, 2009 at 5:24 PM. Reason: typo
Chato is offline  
Old Oct 25, 2009, 6:30 PM   #379
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

The problem here is that if you don't see what's coming down the road, we're all going to wake up to a dysfunctional society of emotionally handicapped people. Photographers, like it or not, are on the front lines of this.


Quote:
Man sees two year old alone; drives by. Did pedophile hysteria cause a child's death?

The toddler wandered from her nursery school, Ready Teddy Go, through a door left open. A bricklayer named Clive Peachey drove past her in his truck. At the inquest, he stated, "I kept thinking I should go back. The reason I didn't was because I thought people might think I was trying to abduct her."

Instead, he assured himself that the parents must be "driving around" and would find her.

A few minutes thereafter, Abby fatally fell into an algae-covered pond.

-------
Last summer, an Illinois man lost an appeal on his conviction as a sex offender for grabbing the arm of a 14-year-old girl. She had stepped directly in front of his car, causing him to swerve in order to avoid hitting her.

The 28-year-old Fitzroy Barnaby jumped out his car, grabbed her arm and lectured her on how not to get killed. Nothing more occurred. Nevertheless, that one action made him guilty of "the unlawful restraint of a minor," which is a sexual offense in Illinois. Both the jury and judge believed him. Nevertheless, Barnaby went through years of legal proceedings that ended with his name on a sex offender registry, where his photograph and address are publicly available. He must report to authorities. His employment options are severely limited; he cannot live near schools or parks.

Arguably, the law would have punished Barnaby less had he hit the girl or not cared enough to lecture her. Perhaps that's the equation that ran through Peachey's mind.

Again, Barnaby is an extreme case. But ordinary people make decisions on how to interact with children based on such high profile stories.
http://indecent.newsvine.com/_news/2...a-childs-death
This article goes into the "Make up your minds catagory."

Quote:
The Profit Motive Behind The Sexualization Of 'Tween Girls
By News Staff

At Abercrombie & Fitch, little girls were sold thong underwear tagged with the phrases "eye candy" and "wink wink." In Britain, preschoolers could learn to strip with their very own Peekaboo Pole-Dancing Kits, complete with kiddie garter belts and play money. And 'tween readers of the magazine Seventeen discovered "405 ways to look hot" like Paris Hilton.

This kind of sexualization of 'tween girls - defined as those between the ages of 8 and 12 - in pop culture and advertising is a growing problem fueled by marketers' efforts to create cradle-to-grave consumers, a University of Iowa journalism professor argues in her new book.

"A lot of very sexual products are being marketed to very young kids," said Gigi Durham, author of The Lolita Effect. "I'm criticizing the unhealthy and damaging representations of girls' sexuality, and how the media present girls' sexuality in a way that's tied to their profit motives. The body ideals presented in the media are virtually impossible to attain, but girls don't always realize that, and they'll buy an awful lot of products to try to achieve those bodies. There's endless consumerism built around that."

continued...

http://www.scientificblogging.com/ne...of_tween_girls
Dave
Chato is offline  
Old Oct 25, 2009, 9:00 PM   #380
Senior Member
 
VTphotog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Extreme Northeastern Vermont, USA
Posts: 4,214
Default

So, to refute the hysteria caused by people responding to extreme examples on one side of the issue, you post links to hysterical people responding to extreme examples on the other side of the issue. Way to calm things down.

brian
VTphotog is offline  
 
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:41 AM.