Hey Guys!
I feel, I should interfere at this point. This is not meant to be of the sort you seem to take it. This is my 8 year old daughter playing at the beach. So keep your fingers away, please.
jhg photo wrote:
Hey Guys!
I feel, I should interfere at this point. This is not meant to be of the sort you seem to take it. This is my 8 year old daughter playing at the beach. So keep your fingers away, please.
Fair enough, I agree, but I personally would not display my daughter/granddaughter in this way on a public site.
Sorry, I agree with Bill Sutherland here. My camera would not even be pointed in the direction of an eight year old's behind, let alone posted on the internet.
But (pardon the um, pun) the image is clear and sharp. Makes me itchy, lol.
If she was an older individual, and there were breasts also in the image, I bet you wouldn't get much guff about it.
I must agree with Willa and Bill. As a father of two girls who are now 16 and 23, I find this post to be very uncomfortable. I would definitely question my own judgment if I had taken a photo like this of my daughter, but if I had posted it on the internet I would seek professional help. In my mind a photo of an eight year old on the beach is a photo of a child playing with a shovel and a bucket with a smiling face.
Einar
Like Einar says, it makes you feel uncomfortable. To me, that is a good thing. It makes you wonder doesn't it? Apparently, it's damn hard to distinguish this picture from that of a pretty woman's behind. What might that mean? Does it imply that what we call 'female beauty' is closer to a child appearance than we'd like to admit? Does it mean that the eyes (and minds) of males are so focussed on sex that they get shortsighted? Even if it does not mean any of those things, it is a good thing to wonder why we are so uncomfortable (believe me, so am I) with a picture of a child with only the slightest erotic implication? Note that it's by no means an erotic picture, the erotic part is only in the eye of the beholder. Likewise, it's the reaction of the audience that makes this a very prowerfull picture.
I just love pictures that fool the viewer and leave me in wonder.
There is actually nothing wrong with the photo as an item. It is actually a good shot that fits the assignment, if it was a behind of a fully grown woman. Like Northcutt I was actually thinking about commenting nicely about the shot. But when the author submitted the comment about his daughter, the whole thing fell out of place. After that I most definitely wanted to “keep my fingers away” as requested by the father. Something I as a father can identify with and understand. What I don’t understand is a father submitting a photo like this of his 8 year old daughter. From the response there is no doubt that this is a view to the female body that evokes certain erotic feelings in a male.
While one may question the judgment of the submitter, one should be questioning ourselves for assuming it was an adult woman.
There is nothing in the photo or description that indicates it is a woman (or girl in this case).
The reviewers just assumed it was a woman. Before anyone begins to comment "well it looked like a womans butt" think about what you are saying...an 8 yo girls' bottom looked like an adult female bottom to you.....
As a woman viewing this image my first impression was that it was of a young, fit woman. I then started reading the first feedback posts and saw how much the guys appreciated this 'sexy' image (thinking it was a woman). Once I realized it was of an 8 year old girl I, like a few of them, was distressed.
I've been an artist all my life, so I do know art, and I'm no prude, but as a mother, even if I took this photo of my daughter (or son) I would not post it on the internet. Art is art to artists only, whereas art (like this) is perceived as socially acceptable child eroticism by perverts--so why supply them? There's so many wonderful things to photograph besides children in a pose that invites a sexual response, so why go there? Unwittingly you're exploiting your own child for someone else's sexual enjoyment, but you're so focused on your own 'art' (and this little WA assignment) you apparently don't get it (btw, you'd be wise to explore why--perhaps you were raised in a home were the 'inappropriate' now seems 'normal' to you? Maybe you're just incredible naive? Or you've been brainwashed into believing child eroticism is OK if you call it 'art' ). One in 3 girls is sexually abused, 1 in 5 boys is sexually abused. It's rampant. If FATHERS won't protect their daughters from the prying eyes of perverts who will?
BTW-- If Fred picks this as a finalist, keep in mind he probably doesn't always read the descriptions or threads!! So, if this is a finalist it does not validate the correctness in posting it, that's a separate issue.
I'm going to add my two cents here, as the grandmother of a 12 year old girl, and the Godmother of a 6 year old girl. I didn't realize the image was of a child at first either, but still thought the pose was a bit edgy. Now that I know, I can only imagine how embarrassed the first couple of 'posters' must be after realizing what they were commenting on.
Worse, I can't imagine how humiliated the child (and her Mother) would be if they knew what the image had evoked in those posters. At least I would be.
I do NOT blame those guys...they had no idea of the age of the model. I feel badly for them! The pose is provocative, whether intentionally or unintentionally, in my opinion. The most appalling thing is that a father would post that type of photograph of his own child. I don't think we have any perverts as members here, but I guarantee you it won't take them long to find that photo. That horrifies me.
I'm going to come right out and say it....I think it is over the line, not because of the pose, but because of the age of the model. The fact that it was posted by the child's father astounds me, and I can't imagine that there is that much of a cultural difference between what is considered child pornography here, and in Germany.
I'm sorry to be so blunt, but I wish this image had never been posted here.
Her father is the person responsible for posting this image and If you asked the child about this matter she might well be a little bewildered, but if you asked her opinion in a few years time her response might well be somewhat different. Perhaps it is time for the 'responsible' person to comment now in view of what has been stated above.
Definitely messed up, and it astounds me that a father would take and display this sort of thing. Furthermore, all this discussion, and no response from the author? Do you think this is real or just someone trying to create a stir for fun? Seems a bit odd he'd begin his post with a "Hey Guys!" when responding to people making somewhat forward comments about his young daughter. Just a thought...
The initial comments by the guys were appropriate...in that it was assumed that a shot of that nature would be of a model that was of consenting age. I am uncomfortable with an eight year old represented in this way...or any child for that matter.
Sorry for upsetting some of you.
The photo was taken in a joyful atmosphere at the beach, just as a fun shot in a series of several other more "conventional" beach shots (with shovels!).
It did - unfortunately - not occur to me what reactions it would provoke. I think, if the first two posters had not taken it so sexual, its character would have been preserved.
I have to admit, that I should have assumed such reactions, but was simply too naive to expect them. I must agree, the world is too bad to allow posting harmless pictures without finding someone to turn it into the opposite.
Furthermore, I would like to remind some of you as commenters to think about your tone here. Saying "seek professional help" is a nice description for calling some else insane. Would you do on the phone?
It is also irritating how fierce the reactions of some are on this topic, while photos of people shooting automatic firearms just for fun (some months ago) seem to be the most normal thing on world to shown on this forum.
Please note that I am not a native speaker and that it is difficult to find the correct wording here, e.g., "Hey guys,..."
In addition, I have to note, that the photo does not show anything naked or whatsoever, but just a swimming suite with lots of sand. To avoid further irritation, the photo has been withdrawn from this contest.
Regards
Jürgen
I am glad to hear your response and that your intent was merely naive and unassuming. You sound like a loving father actually, so I am relieved.
That you are taking the photo down shows integrity. I salute you for doing the right thing, and I lament with you that predators and perverts have made the world a very different place for all of us. A N.Y. City detective I heard about said that fifteen years ago his job included a mix of murder, drug busts, etc. Now, 99% of it is sexual predator cases! It's a different world.
The ultimate victim here is what should be art isn't art anymore. The whole world has lost its innocence. It's not our attitude that made the photo inappropriate, it's our awareness of how the world has changed that fueled the concern. That you did not share that awareness was also cause for concern. Suggestions about you maybe needing professional help does not imply you are insane but would benefit from gaining insight into what makes you more naive than others? Your intent was pure, but the world is not! The fierce reaction was understandable since none of us know you or your motives, and the protection of children in general is a first concern.
I hope this clears it up a bit for you? There's an expression, "Don't shoot the messenger." We were merely the messenger.
). One in 3 girls is sexually abused, 1 in 5 boys is sexually abused. It's rampant. If FATHERS won't protect their daughters from the prying eyes of perverts who will?