I won't shoot gay weddings: am I odd?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ivor
are you logging in and out to make posts
you are shown as offline even though you seem to be posting?!?
 
Marcel said:
However, he can't dress it up as 'old fashioned', it is bigotry, which is the intolerance of a belief different to his own.
Click to expand...

No, I can't see it as bigotry....

If he said "I'm not doing that wedding 'cause I don't like gays", then that would be bigotry. Saying that he feels uncomfortable working a same sex "marriage" is a statement of fact.

Ivor, would you be happy to do a studio portrait shoot with a same sex couple ?

Steve
 
Pirate Neilsouth said:
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Thats funny as.... Even though its BS
Click to expand...

No it's not:

A 1996 study conducted at the University of Georgia by Henry Adams, Lester Wright Jr., and Bethany Lohr indicates that a number of "homophobic" males exhibit latent homosexuality. The research was done on 64 heterosexual men, 35 of whom exhibited "homophobic" traits and 29 who did not. Three tests were conducted using penile plethysmography. While there was no difference in response when the men were exposed to heterosexual and lesbian pornography, there was a major difference in response when the men were exposed to male homosexual pornography.

The researchers reported that 24% of the non-"homophobic" men showed some degree of tumescence in response to the male homosexual video, compared to 54% of the subjects who scored high on the "homophobia scale". In addition, 66% of the nonhomophobic group showed no significant increases in tumescence after this video, but only 20% of the "homophobic" men failed to display any arousal. Additionally, when the participants rated their degree of sexual arousal later, the "homophobic" men significantly underestimated their degree of arousal by the male homosexual video.
Click to expand...

If you want to look it up, the study is:

Henry E. Adams, Lester W. Wright, Jr., and Bethany A. Lohr (1996). "Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?". Journal of Abnormal Psychology Vol. 105, No. 3, 440--445
 
Jelster said:
No, I can't see it as bigotry....

If he said "I'm not doing that wedding 'cause I don't like gays", then that would be bigotry. Saying that he feels uncomfortable working a same sex "marriage" is a statement of fact.

Ivor, would you be happy to do a studio portrait shoot with a same sex couple **?

Steve
Click to expand...

** Answer to above question is no.
 
Reading back through my earlier post, it sounds a little 'knee jerk', so I'd like you to know Ivor that I don't hold your opinion against you...Each to their own and all that.

I still don't unserstand why you felt the need to bring up such a delicate issue, but I'm sorry if I offended you with my comments.

Anthony
 
namllihs said:
I think that the use of the word "Queer" in this instance is offensive.

Queer: Slang: Disparaging and Offensive.
a. homosexual.
b. effeminate; unmanly

Each to his or her own, live and let live. (and I am really old fashioned)
Click to expand...

Now that raises an interesting point, because 'queer' originally meant 'odd', 'strange', 'unusual' and 'gay' meant 'happy', 'flighty', 'carefree' and my late father - who was born in 1921 when both of those words were in common usage with their original meanings - still used them that way right up until he died. Would that make him homophobic?

The thing is that you have to take someone's age into account when you pass judgment on their opinions because people of older generations can't always adapt/accept 'these new-fangled ideas'.

P.S. For those old enough to have studied Latin at school, as I am, does it amuse you that 'homophobia' is such a nonsensical word? It means 'fear of the same' :cuckoo:

In the same vein, why is someone who hates/despises/ridicules Muslims/Islam an Islamophobe, yet someone with the same attitude toward Jews is anti-Semitic? :cuckoo: :cuckoo:
 
I won't shoot gay weddings: am I queer?

Answering literally, if you don't like something, does it make you that which you dislike?
Not likely is it?
If your unsure of your sexuallity I guess thats upto you to "discover" no one else can do it for you sorry....................

And as already been said A few times I have been a guest at a same sex civil ceremony
and a good time was had by all, gay and straight alike :thumbs:
 
Busby said:
Reading back through my earlier post, it sounds a little 'knee jerk', so I'd like you to know Ivor that I don't hold your opinion against you...Each to their own and all that.

I still don't unserstand why you felt the need to bring up such a delicate issue, but I'm sorry if I offended you with my comments.

Anthony
Click to expand...

No problem.
I only bought up this subject out of a genuine curiousity regarding other photographers views, and I personally think it was well worthwhile.
Cheers.
 
parish said:
Now that raises an interesting point, because 'queer' originally meant 'odd', 'strange', 'unusual' and 'gay' meant 'happy', 'flighty', 'carefree' and my late father - who was born in 1921 when both of those words were in common usage with their original meanings - still used them that way right up until he died. Would that make him homophobic?

The thing is that you have to take someone's age into account when you pass judgment on their opinions because people of older generations can't always adapt/accept 'these new-fangled ideas'.

P.S. For those old enough to have studied Latin at school, as I am, does it amuse you that 'homophobia' is such a nonsensical word? It means 'fear of the same' :cuckoo:

In the same vein, why is someone who hates/despises/ridicules Muslims/Islam an Islamophobe, yet someone with the same attitude toward Jews is anti-Semitic? :cuckoo: :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

Which is why I said in this instance.
 
robmiller said:
No it's not:
Click to expand...

I can see that being a global scientific test :thumbs:. Think i'll go tell my old man he has actual homosexual urges and see what happens. It's just bullcrap to make everyone accept homosexuals! :razz:

I'll stick with the opposite sex thanks :thumbs:
 
Well Thats!! it Im not shooting weddings with fat people in from now on ......How can people be so biased if it was one of their children would they say thats it I dont want to know you sling your hook? are they worried they might get cornered and raped lmao
If people arnt doing anything that effects you directly why make assumptions and judge them without actually getting to know them. If they are paying their hard earned cash I would do my utmost to give them the best service as when all the pomp and ceromony has gone all your left with is pictures and usually debt lol to remind you of that happy occasion
Live and let live :)
btw im straight

Stef :) no offence intended
 
I suppose someone has to step up to the plate so maybe it should be a newcomer.

If Ivortripod would have felt uncomfortable shooting my civil partnership last year I would certainly not have wished him to coerce him into it and I'm not at all bothered about his feelings in that direction.

Queer on the other hand I have a problem with, mostly because in my experience it's usually delivered from a contorted face followed by violence. Fortunately various gay organisations have striven to assimilate the word into our culture and it has lost a lot of its power.

We did not have a professional photographer at our little ceremony, we all stood around and took pictures of each other :)
 
eyeofskye said:
I suppose someone has to step up to the plate so maybe it should be a newcomer.

If Ivortripod would have felt uncomfortable shooting my civil partnership last year I would certainly not have wished him to coerce him into it and I'm not at all bothered about his feelings in that direction.

Queer on the other hand I have a problem with, mostly because in my experience it's usually delivered from a contorted face followed by violence. Fortunately various gay organisations have striven to assimilate the word into our culture and it has lost a lot of its power.

We did not have a professional photographer at our little ceremony, we all stood around and took pictures of each other :)
Click to expand...

Many thanks for your reply,
Cheers.
 
IMO as a photographer, your personal preference should not really be an issue, as your mind should be focused on actually nailing the shot, not your own personal feelings.

I would have no issues if a male friend asked me to do shots of him in the nude, id obviously prefer if it was a really fit female, but id have no issues with it, as all my concentration would be on composition and lighting, and not the fact there is a naked man stood in front of me.
 
Ivor it doesnt make you old fashioned nor queer....in my opinion it makes you quite normal

Let face it i dont need to find proof why my sexual nature is what it is, or march or make a song and dance about it.

Hopefully this site still allows ones opinions not like the world we live in

Getting back to the wedding photography no i wouldnt like it either
 
Lets not drag this down into the gutter...
This has the potential to be a good discussion ;)
 
Good on him for daring to express an opinion. That is the trouble with this world we now live in, we are all censored and too afraid to stand up for our beliefs.

I personally am married, with 2 kids and a Christian so have very clear beliefs on same sex marriages.

I dont let that affect how I interact with people - one of my staff is gay and one of my cousins (both male) is as well. I get on perfectly fine with both of them.

However I would draw the line at even attending my cousins wedding - let alone photographing it (if he did get married) as at the end of the day I believe it to be wrong.

Now that doesnt stop me getting on with either of them, but a line has to be drawn somewhere.
 
I must confess I do not see what difference the sexes of the people makes, at the end of the day it is just portraits. I for one would be very interested in going to a civil partnership I think it would be educational in a lot af ways and would be one hell of a party.
 
ivortripod said:
I personally cannot get used to the sight of homosexual couple's 'weddings'. Obviously I am old-fashioned, but am I queer?

Please note that no offence whatsoever is intended by this post, I am being honest and would just like to know what TP members think.
Click to expand...

Are you queer? Who knows.

Are you a bigot? Yes.

Is "old-fashioned" a euphemism for "bigoted"? Yes.
 
ivortripod said:
I personally cannot get used to the sight of homosexual couple's 'weddings'. Obviously I am old-fashioned, but am I queer?
Click to expand...

Taking queer to mean unusual or odd, then I have to say yes, I find your reaction to same-sex couples distinctly odd. I don't have a problem with people being odd, mind you.
Personally I can't get my head around the concept that people feel uncomfortable with same-sex partners, which is why I find your position odd. It's just two people who are together, what's to get uncomfortable about that doesn't also apply to heterosexual couples?

My only concern is the blanket nature of your not shooting same sex couples (civil partnerships nor studio work you say) I assume it's because they make you uncomfortable? If, somehow, a same sex couple didn't make you uncomfortable for whatever reason, you wouldn't object to photographing them out of sheer principle, would you? Are there heterosexual couples you wouldn't want to photograph too as they make you uncomfortable (albeit a different cause of the uncomfort)?

Not shooting people who make you uncomfortable is perfectly fine, but a blanket ban born of principle, thats a very different thing, I would say it was wrong (and illegal).
 
SpudGunner said:
Good on him for daring to express an opinion. That is the trouble with this world we now live in, we are all censored and too afraid to stand up for our beliefs.

I personally am married, with 2 kids and a Christian so have very clear beliefs on same sex marriages.

I dont let that affect how I interact with people - one of my staff is gay and one of my cousins (both male) is as well. I get on perfectly fine with both of them.

However I would draw the line at even attending my cousins wedding - let alone photographing it (if he did get married) as at the end of the day I believe it to be wrong.

Now that doesnt stop me getting on with either of them, but a line has to be drawn somewhere.
Click to expand...

Theres nothing wrong with expressing his opinion. But from a professional point of view, you cant allow your personal sexual preference sway your decision to offer a service.

The problem with sexuality these days is people are more or less allowed to discriminate and get away with it, escpecially using religion as an excuse.

Yet if it was a religion do disaprove of black people, it would be unaceptable.
 
eyeofskye said:
I suppose someone has to step up to the plate so maybe it should be a newcomer.

If Ivortripod would have felt uncomfortable shooting my civil partnership last year I would certainly not have wished him to coerce him into it and I'm not at all bothered about his feelings in that direction.

Queer on the other hand I have a problem with, mostly because in my experience it's usually delivered from a contorted face followed by violence. Fortunately various gay organisations have striven to assimilate the word into our culture and it has lost a lot of its power.

We did not have a professional photographer at our little ceremony, we all stood around and took pictures of each other :)
Click to expand...

I think photographers should choose the work that they do, and should walk away from subjects that they are not comfortable with (as they will not create the best result for the client), but I also think that it is sad that you did not have a pro at the wedding.

welcome to the forum - i have had a look at your photos - nice site and photos :)
 
I am in the unfortunate position that I do not know any same sex couples well. If I was approached to shoot a wedding for them I would recommend they look elsewhere due to the comfort factor but I would like the opportunity to get to know them and thus feel comfortable with them. I would have to ask if there were any special preferences they wanted as far as photographs were concerned on their big day as I wouldnt have a clue (althogh I should imagine they wouldn't want to be treated any different to any heterosexual couple)

But I would have the same issues with any couple.
 
Monkey said:
Theres nothing wrong with expressing his opinion. But from a professional point of view, you cant allow your personal sexual preference sway your decision to offer a service.

The problem with sexuality these days is people are more or less allowed to discriminate and get away with it, escpecially using religion as an excuse.

Yet if it was a religion do disaprove of black people, it would be unaceptable.
Click to expand...

I have to say having a principle is all very well but to be practical...

If I had gone to a photographer to shoot my civil partnership who was secretly disgusted by the whole business I would not wish the law to force him to take the job and keep quiet about it. How could you ever expect the photographer to artistically portray the emotions and mood of the event feeling like that. I would far rather he was able to politely turn down the job.

Photographing this sort of event is a bit different from basic freedoms such as housing and policing.
 
money is money, and a subject is a subject.

if was more comfortable at taking weddings Photos i would do either...
 
jonnyjogpants said:
money is money, and a subject is a subject.

if was more comfortable at taking weddings Photos i would do either...
Click to expand...

Very true, I was a hairdresser for a long time and without gay guys popping in(no pun intended) business could have been boring ( i swear I am not trying to put a slant on this post). If gay guys are as fussy about their pictures as they are when it comes to hair then I'd be very wary. I suppose as a professional photographer it is your duty to do the best for them whatever the sexuality and remember if they came to you then do your best whatever your preferences. If ever I was good enough I would go for it in a New York minute.
 
Hacker said:
I think it's a bit harsh to call someone a bigot when they feel uncomfortable when they cannot get used to the sight of homosexual couple's 'weddings', I don't know how old ivortripod is but many people from a certain generation do feel uncomfortable with this subject and they shouldn't be castigated so abruptly. It's very similar to when a discussion about race or ethnicity comes to an abrupt halt when the term racist is used which is why you see and hear "I'm not racist but...." so often. In our modern, litiguous society people are often frightened to have a frank and open discussion in case they get labelled, which then takes the focus away from the original debate.

Personally, I don't have a problem with gay weddings/civil ceremonies but what I don't like is when overt displays of any race/creed/religion/persuasion is rammed down my throat (hmmmm, poor turn of phrase methinks :lol:)

No offense intended of course, just stating what it is :)
Click to expand...

I think that was very well said Colin.. you hit the nail on the head..


Marcel said:
OK, actually I think bigot may have been too harsh a term to use, and for that I apologise.
I think perhaps I misread the post and his intentions.

I did read it as an intolerance, rather than a discomfort. Discomfort is acceptable. There can be many reasons behind it, for example, his upbringing, surroundings, past experiences socially etc.

If it is simple discomfort and he simply doesn't wish to record it, then fair enough, that's his choice. He tolerates it, but it is uncomfortable seeing it. That's merely a viewpoint and a choice then, just like me not liking ugly women ;)

So no...not queer, just a bit fruity :p
Click to expand...

:clap: Nicley retracted Marcel, i must say i was a little taken aback with the first post but, i take my hat off to you for this explanation.. its much more realistic..

Albedo said:
Are you queer? Who knows.

Are you a bigot? Yes.

Is "old-fashioned" a euphemism for "bigoted"? Yes.
Click to expand...


This is the problem, people jump on the PC band waggon and call everyone a Biggot, or a racist, or Fattist!(Im fattest byw!! LOL) I got a big belly!!

Anyway, iv been feeling that our rights to free speach are being erroded a little each day with comments like that.. these days you hardly see anyone supporting England in an overt way without people thinking their yobs or NF skin heads! but its fine to support anyone else..

Im ok with gay people, but im still a little squeemish about the overt goings on.. but in the whole i see the fun side to it..

Im often at events in the west end and the gay areas like Compton st ect.. its all very light hearted and fun.. even if im NOT too keen..

I was with Julian Bennett last night! we chat often and we were joking about him stalking me!! lol.. its all a lot of fun.. (He is a presenter from Queer eye for the straight guy)

Iv highlighted the Queer bit as thats another thing.. Its used all the time but only certain people are alowed to use it.. Like the 'N' word.. these words, if they find them SOOO offencive then they shouldnt be used at all..

I dont like the word Biggot either, unless of course the person being called it IS a Boggot.. and not just expressing an opinion in a respecfull way..

Right.. off to the photography section.. :thumbs:
 
Ivor last time I saw your wedding pictures you lost one of the people except for the hat which remained in place - so if would it matter what their sexuality was....:lol:
 
I forgot to say, Id do a gay wedding.. i think it'd a great laugh..
 
i think gay weddings are awesome :D, would much rather shoot a wed for two girls or two guys :D:D:D!!!!
 
marko400d said:
EDITED
Click to expand...

This is the problem with the world today, people here are expressing their opinions as grown up mature people.. and then you go and say that! its that sort of reaction that causes problems in the first place!

People have opinions.. that dosnt make them pathetic..
 
Exactly. That is the problem some people cannot have a sensible reasoned conversation, they have to result to insults.

If you have nothing useful to say then I really do wish your words (and typing would fail you).

Saves me having to read your drivel. So what is wrong with being a Christian exactly?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top