joefromchicago
 
  5  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 08:56 am
Here is, I think, what started this all:

wandeljw wrote:
It occurred to me that Chai and Arella's reactions may be connected to unfortunate personal experiences in their own past. I do not want to devalue their honest personal feelings.


Followed immediately by this colloquy:

hingehead wrote:
Again it's my personal reaction but I find that remark condescending.


wandeljw wrote:
(It is not necessary to give your opinion on my remark about Chai and Arella having honest feelings. Chai and Arella can speak for themselves on that.)


hingehead wrote:
As I said, it's my opinion - and I'm sure you meant it with the best of intentions but I read it as condescending - as in 'you must be damaged by some past experience to think a picture of a women with that expression, alone with a dozen men staring at her is in anyway creepy'.


After which we get this unsolicited comment:

Setanta wrote:
That was a really shitty, patronizing thing to have said. Congratulations, Bubba . . .


To which the original poster replied:

chai2 wrote:
Thank you set.

I wanted to say something just like this, but I couldn't think of how to phrase it where I wasn't going to get the responses of "you don't know that"


And this fillip:

chai2 wrote:
Actually, I found the remark insulting as well, and condescending.


After which we have this:

Green Witch wrote:
Staged or not, I think we project our own life experiences onto the interpretation. As a woman, especially when I was in my teens and 20's, being leered at made me feel uncomfortable and soiled. It was not flattering or fun.


Of course, at this point all hell broke loose. Green Witch's condescending statement that women might view the photo differently from men because of their own personal experiences was met with a hailstorm of protest. She was accused of being "patronizing" and "contemptuous," and advised to precede all of her remarks with "in my opinion" so that she wouldn't appear to be speaking for everyone. Her remarks were called "offensive" and "abusive," and she was even called a "troll" and told she was acting like an ass.

Oh wait, no, none of that happened. This is what happened:

chai2 wrote:
Well said.


And:

chai2 wrote:
Greenwitch is so right when she says a lot of men just don't get certain aspects of this.


So what have we learned here today, kiddies? When a woman says that her interpretation of a piece of art is informed by her personal experience, that is "so right." On the other hand, when a man concedes that a woman's interpretation of a piece of art might be informed by her personal experience, he's shitty and patronizing.

Did I say that this was the funniest thread ever? I mean it was the most educational thread ever!
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 09:12 am
@Arella Mae,
I said it's an entertainment, not that I don't take it seriously.
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 09:14 am
@DrewDad,
Sorry DrewDad I misunderstood.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 09:14 am
@Arella Mae,
No problemo.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 09:20 am
@joefromchicago,
Well, I'd say there are some things that diffentiate Wandel's and Green Witch's responses.

Green Witch did not first flat-out state that other people were wrong, and then try to minimize her opponents.

She did not call other people "hysterical" for disagreeing with her, either.

Nor did she demonstrate contempt.

Bottom line, Green Witch did not act like an ass, so no one called her an ass.
JTT
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 09:36 am
@hingehead,
The blowups don't show a face that is happy and carefree.

Considering the proximity of the curb [and all the actual facts that were presented surrounding the event] I think that it shows a face anticipating making a step off said curb.

0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:03 am
@DrewDad,
Methinks you've got your timeline screwed up DrewDad, but that's okay because there have been a good number of people who have shown contempt for the facts in this thread.

Quote:
She did not call other people "hysterical" for disagreeing with her, either.

Nor did she demonstrate contempt.


Neither did JW.

Quote:
Hysterical was not a reference to your reaction to the photo.

As far as your reaction to the photo, I criticized your characterization of the woman as "scared shitless" to be an exaggeration.

Post: # 4,707,041 page 6


Quote:
Chai, in the original post:

Contrary to what the article tries to dispel, no matter how long I look at this photo, the creepitoid factor remains at 10 on a scale of 1-10.

In fact when I actually pay more attention to certain men in the photo, my feelings of violation, being fearful and shamed rises to 14.

The first paragraph of the article reads....

A stunning young woman walks down a street in Florence, her head held high. All around, men playfully gawk at her grace and beauty. Just then the camera shutter snaps. "American Girl in Italy" is among the most popular snapshots of all time, and it's turning 60 years old this month.

I see a woman who looks scared shitless and about to break into a run. The guy in the necktie to her left looks like he's grabbing his junk and saying something vile. The one next to him looks like he's already invading her space, and is going to in the next instant step forward and block her way.


The facts for that situation were right there along with the photo. Despite that, it immediately raised a 10 on a scale of 10 in Chai's mind. Then when she "actually pay[s] more attention to certain men in the photo", what happens?

her "feelings of violation, being fearful and shamed rises to 14".

And you seriously think JW had no reason to suggest that there was no exaggeration?



DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:09 am
@JTT,
She's discussing her feelings.

If he then calls her feelings "exaggerated," then he's being invalidating. (Basically, he's telling her how to feel.)

Psychological invalidation is a form of abuse.
JTT
 
  2  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:14 am
@DrewDad,
So you'd rather not discuss the actual facts of the situation, eh, DD, how things actually unfolded?

Quote:
She's discussing her feelings.

If he then calls her feelings "exaggerated," then he's being invalidating. (Basically, he's telling her how to feel.)

Psychological invalidation is a form of abuse.


Yup, I doubt that there isn't a prosecutor in the world that wouldn't love to have Chai on the stand giving her cool level recitation of what transpired.

I've not noted you to be particularly concerned with H20man's or Okie's feelings.

Dare I say that you have been a bit hysterical on this thread?
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:18 am
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
Dare I say that you have been a bit hysterical on this thread?

Only if you want to be a troll and an ass, yourself.

Calling someone hysterical is psychologically invalidating as well.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:22 am
@DrewDad,
Given this post, I have to upgrade that to "more than a bit" hysterical.

Isn't a troll someone who comes into a thread, and jumps all over someone with no regard to the facts? Why are you ignoring the facts and taking this tack? Isn't that the very definition of hysterical?

DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:26 am
@JTT,
I see that I have you on ignore for good reason.

TTFN

(And no, that's a flamer. A troll is someone who deliberately tries to antagonize someone. You fit the bill admirably, when you continue to call someone a name after you've been told that it is inappropriate.)
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:28 am
@DrewDad,
Lol at the downvotes. U mad, bro?
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:33 am
Don't feed the troll, DD, you'll just encourage it.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:41 am
@DrewDad,
Quote:
Lol at the downvotes. U mad, bro?


Are you talking to yourself, DD? You've quoted yourself. Threats of resorting to 'ignore', replying like H2Oman - all indications of growing hysterics?

I don't do down votes, never have, never will. But I notice that you and the dumbass who you let get you into these hysterics both want to avoid discussing the facts.

Odd that, seeing as how you both seemed so big on it just a few pages ago.

Quote:
A troll is someone who deliberately tries to antagonize someone.


Well then, that's not me because I've only been pointing up the facts, those pesky little things that you are hell bent on avoiding.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:44 am
@JTT,
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 10:51 am
@DrewDad,
JW is going to have to retract his retraction about you being a moron, DrewDad.

The facts, lad, the facts.

[Has anyone's avatar ever been so dead on?]
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 11:01 am
@JTT,
I'm afraid you've lost all credibility with me at this point.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 11:09 am
@DrewDad,
Actually, H2OMan, um sorry, I mean DrewDad, that came as soon as I pointed out some facts that you clearly don't want to address?
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  5  
Reply Thu 25 Aug, 2011 11:22 am
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:
Green Witch did not first flat-out state that other people were wrong, and then try to minimize her opponents.

Neither did wandeljw.

DrewDad wrote:
She did not call other people "hysterical" for disagreeing with her, either.

Neither did wandeljw.

DrewDad wrote:
Nor did she demonstrate contempt.

Neither did wandeljw.

DrewDad wrote:
Bottom line, Green Witch did not act like an ass, so no one called her an ass.

Bottom line: there are several people on this thread who owe wandeljw an apology.
 

Related Topics

Beautiful Animals - Discussion by Roberta
Aloha! - Question by boomerang
Photo lovers -- take a look at this.... - Question by boomerang
Michael Belk's modern Jesus photographs - Question by boomerang
LIGHTHOUSES OF THE WORLD. - Discussion by farmerman
Is taking his picture legal? - Question by aquestion
Amazing History Photos - Discussion by hopelessjoe
Poor travel pictures, well loved. - Discussion by ossobuco
Just a Photo - Discussion by Pitter
Knockout landscape photos - Discussion by ossobuco
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 05:58:47