p.3 #2 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
I really wouldn't give it a second thought. It was probably really about the money, because why would they even sign the contract if the gender thing was really an issue? And if it was the gender thing, so what. People will hire or not hire you for all kinds of silly reasons. You could be too old or too young, or too good looking, or not good looking enough. Unless you hear it all the time, which it sounds like you don't, who cares?
p.3 #4 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
Tell them that if it would make them feel better, you'll show up in a nice pants suit, a bra and pumps.
It's about the money.
Still, it does remind me that MWAC's are marketing themselves as being more "sensitive" because they are female. The tell brides they are more "in touch" with their feelings. They'll giggle like schoolgirls and even throw in a tear or two if it will close the deal. Just look at their how to videos.
Jun 27, 2012 at 01:24 PM
marti.g3 Offline • • • • [X]
p.3 #5 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
It goes both ways. I've gotten bookings because they wanted an experienced male photographer, not Molly Jane with a camera.
p.3 #6 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
Manzelle wrote:
This.
+1 The images you have on your site got their attention. I'm sure your work wowed them. Now BS is pushing them the other way. They will have subconscious fears if they hire you. I NEVER want that from a client.
p.3 #7 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
Put on a wig and shave your legs if you really want the job? There are plenty of other environments where a gender bias is present, and females do have an easier time of some things for weddings...
p.3 #8 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
If I were a women (which I'm not) and I was getting married (which I did), all things being equal (which they never are) I'd hire a gal over a guy. A wedding is an intimate day and A. I'd feel more comfortable being myself around a gal, and B. I'd assume (rightly or not) that the female photogrher was more aware of intimate moments, details, and other such wedding stuff, than the guy.
On th ether hand if I really liked a guys work I'd probably go with him. The best would be a couple team. I'd love if my wife would shoot with me. One day (maybe).
p.3 #9 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
I do disagree with the "that is b*llshit, if you like your work they like your work" view. How often is it said people should make sure they hire someone they want to be around all day at their wedding? For some people that is a women I don't have a problem with that, I do think it was silly of them if that was a requirement getting to the point of a face-to-face meeting and not knowing the photog's gender though!
p.3 #11 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
Come on, will the bride want to hire a super hot girl to take photos for the wedding, then every man (including the groom) is so attracted to the hot camera girl, instead of the bride?
The most important thing is the photos. People will look at the pictures taken, not the photographer who takes it.
Jun 27, 2012 at 06:44 PM
DavidWEGS Offline [X]
p.3 #12 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
I just think girls are better than men, that's all there is to it.
p.3 #13 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
Advice I've heard before that applies here: make sure all parties who are responsible for paying will be present at the meeting. I sometimes forget to cover that rule, but this is a good reminder. Sounds like you got through the gender misconception without a problem!
p.3 #14 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
You may actually have grounds for a discrimination lawsuit. If you turned them down because they we gay, or black or white or any of those characteristics that would be discriminotory, you would probably have heard from their lawyer already. Discrmination is a 2 way street! Especially given that you have a signed contract.
p.3 #15 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
marti.g3 wrote:
It goes both ways. I've gotten bookings because they wanted an experienced male photographer, not Molly Jane with a camera.
That's Molly Jane Marie...
p.3 #17 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
deepbluejh wrote:
They go home to deliver the news to dad (who is paying). The next day I get a call saying they are reconsidering and would like to meet with another photographer before making their final decision. They say "you're really out of our price range", and also "I kind of wanted a female photographer".
What are your thoughts on gender preference like this?
I think you're chasing a phony objection.
I think what happened is the primary decision maker, the guy who's paying, wasn't sold. He wasn't at the consult so he couldn't be, and the mom and daughter hand him the over budget invoice and so naturally he says no to it.
People have a hard time just saying no, so they come up with excuses to justify themselves. In this case, the excuse is about gender. Obviously the bride and mom were just fine with you being a guy otherwise they would've not booked at all if it were that important to them. They only expected to be meeting with a woman because of your name, not because that's what they required. You would've heard them say, "we have to think it over" or some such thing if they didn't want you.
Fact is they didn't have to think twice about it, did they? Fact is they booked on the spot AND happily went over budget to get your services.
If it's not that important to them, then WHY is it important to dad that the photographer be a female? Especially since dad probably hails from an era where photographers were male so it would be quite normal for him to expect the photographer be a guy.
So they throw a gender objection at you, but it's probably not the real objection.
You have to speak with dad and speak to their real objection with him, which is more likely about going $500 over budget. Make sure the bride and mom's there with you to influence dad in your favor.
p.3 #18 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
deepbluejh wrote:
Not many people have this issue, but I guess with "Jamie" for a name, I am in a unique situation.
I showed up to a meeting this past Sunday to meet with a bride and her mother (who was spearheading the wedding planning). Practically the first thing out of mom's mouth was "Oh, I thought you were a girl".
...
I kind of laughed it off and we went about the meeting as we usually do. Meeting went very well and they signed at the end. It's worth noting what they wanted was out of their price range (just), but they booked anyway. They went about $500 over budget for me. We filled out and signed the contract. They were going to send a check the following day.
They go home to deliver the news to dad (who is paying). The next day I get a call saying they are reconsidering and would like to meet with another photographer before making their final decision. They say "you're really out of our price range", and also "I kind of wanted a female photographer".
The price thing doesn't surprise me, I get that often. But the "not being a girl" thing is something new for me. I guess the people who are truly bothered by it typically don't contact me (I have a picture of myself on my website) - therefore I don't see it.
At any rate, I told them to take their time and make a decision they are comfortable with. Honestly, I give them about a 60% chance of backing out at this point.
What are your thoughts on gender preference like this?...Show more →
I think that you could successfully file a lawsuit over gender-discrimination. Plenty of precedents for this.
Not that you should. If they feel more comfortable with a female photographer, so be it.
p.3 #19 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
DavidWEGS wrote:
I just think girls are better than men, that's all there is to it.
That reminds me of a line from the late, great Brother Dave Gardner. If you're not from the South, you may not have heard of him. He was a '50's/'60's hipster comedian. He once observed:
"Women are smarter than men. Yes, it's true, because they have always possessed what men have been seeking."
Jun 28, 2012 at 09:20 AM
marti.g3 Offline • • • • [X]
p.3 #20 · Clients disappointed that I wasn't a woman.
zalmyb wrote:
If I were a women (which I'm not) and I was getting married (which I did), all things being equal (which they never are) I'd hire a gal over a guy. A wedding is an intimate day and A. I'd feel more comfortable being myself around a gal, and B. I'd assume (rightly or not) that the female photogrher was more aware of intimate moments, details, and other such wedding stuff, than the guy.
On th ether hand if I really liked a guys work I'd probably go with him. The best would be a couple team. I'd love if my wife would shoot with me. One day (maybe)....Show more →
You really assume a lot without having the facts. Just because it's a female doesn't mean that she would be more in tune or in touch. You have no way of knowing that. Are you hiring a photographer or a psychologist ?
