A non-violence rule?

[Permagrin]

There is a thread running featuring a photo series of a simulated murder.

Now we have rules against drug photos and other things that are illegal, but glorifying violence, or abuse of women is not against the rules.

I'm just posting this because I think it should be. I realize you can see it on your television but it doesn't make it right, or art, or really anything except glorifying abuse.

Which is not only distasteful, it's wrong.

Just an opinion that I am hoping will be heard.

[Pekka]

Please report the thread.

[Pekka]

Thanks, the thread is removed and OP PM'd.

[Permagrin]

thank you Pekka.

[rhys]

My goodness... How utterly deplorable!

In my younger days I was keen on photographing models in seedy-looking alleyways with a portable red lamp hung over a doorway but simulated murder takes the biscuit.

By the way, I've seen real murder photos - not pretty. I don't think fake murder should be shown anywhere lest it glamorise murder in the same way Hollywood has glamorised drugs and violence.

[Tee Why]

Don't mind simulated drug use and certainly don't mind nudity (I'm no prude), but depicting killing/hurting others is too much for me as well.

[Trainboy]

I saw the thread, but decided not to comment...seemed a little graphic even to me.

[bill boehme]

I am glad that I did not see it, but disturbed that it even existed in the first place.

[dpastern]

Try watching Ginger Snaps ;)

There's a time and a place for that sort of theme and I agree that it's not really suitable to POTN.

Dave

[condyk]

Will the same removal apply for the 'hunting' scenes that crop up now and again where we see some poor animal with a bullet in its head, tongue lolling out the side of its mouth?

[carianoff]

Was this about the Kill Girl thread? If so this was an overreaction. But I have to take the side of someone who has over 20,000 posts. You of anyone would understand what should be on this site.

[halesowenkid]

MURDER......

Nowdays it's portrayed, & sometimes glamourised on the TV & in the press.

We don't need to follow suit on this forum!

[grumpyhaggis]

So should this be allowed?

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=419571&highlight=boxing

.....just asking! ;-)

[Permagrin]

lol...that isn't exactly what I meant...I guess a more appropriate title for this thread would have been: glorifying criminal acts

I wasn't talking about sports or ect...just the criminal side of things. And I know we don't all agree on this. As I stated in post #1, it was just an opinion that I was hoping would be heard.

[PeteJaffa]

So should this be allowed?

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=419571&highlight=boxing

.....just asking! ;-)

Obviously art has lost its freedom.

A guy taking a full knee to the head worries me more than a totally staged act of violence.

[Jon]

While this is forum is open to the public, it's privately owned and operated. Pekka is the ultimate arbiter of what's acceptable at his forum. In this instance, he decided the images were not appropriate. Freedom of expression means you're free to exhibit your art anywhere you can find a willing host. It does not mean that you have a right to exhibit it anywhere you choose.

[Pekka]

To me the difference between kickboxing images and staged murder images is that kickboxing is sports, it is not criminal by law, and blood in it is a consequence (thus title warning is in place). In the other photo set blood and gore was the intention and target was a human object subjected to violence.

I know there are genres of art which use violence, blood and gore as means of expression. Because this site is free for all (all ages, all backgrounds, all nationalities, all people) and you do not always know what is inside a post I do not want that kind of material here. If you want to see it there must be other sites out there dedicated for that material.

[belmondo]

A while back, a member posted a photo that mimicked the style of the old true crime magazine covers. It was a staged photo of a tough guy with a gun menacing a seemingly terrified woman. While not obvious to some, it was done largely for fun. The woman, it turns out, was his mother. Clearly she was a good sport.

Granted, there are differences between my example and the photos that stimulated this discussion Or maybe there aren't.

We have to be careful what we ask for. If we want non-violence rules, they will have to be very carefully crafted to avoid overreaching. Even though the example I mentioned was a parody, it wouldn't be allowed under any rule that prohibited even the depiction of violence. (I do find it ironic that some people would actually prefer images of actual violence to those that are staged. That would be photojournalism, and that's okay, right?)

Photography is not just about birds and landscapes; it's much broader than pretty images. We have to be careful not to overly limit the avenues of creativity for our members, even at the risk of allowing images that might offend the sensibilities of certain individuals. Stifling artistic expression and discouraging experimentation are not positive steps in my opinion.

I believe the moderators are generally in touch with contemporary societal values, and are able to make judgment calls on the propriety of an image without being restricted by a written rule which might otherwise tie their hands. If we create a rule for violence, what do we tackle next?

IMHO, we don't need a rule. We need to trust the moderators and administrators of POTN to decide what crosses the line. To do otherwise will require a definition of that line, and that would be a near impossibility.

[rhys]

Gee... I wonder how my photo of my cat eating a bird that he'd just caught would go down under the non-violence rules :p

[Permagrin]

this has gone so completely different from the original intent. So this will be my final post on this thread.

I was not recommending "censorship" of art, simply the moderation of something that glorified a vile act. I felt that the simulated attack/murder of the woman was not appropriate for POTN and said so. While it is just an opinion, it IS my opinion, I've stated it and do not intend to change my opinion.

I do feel that it is quite different from sports where people willingly participate, knowing the possible consequences. Sport hunting, while I do not agree with it, is not illegal. Animals hunting for dinner is nature taking it's course. It is not illegal.

Pekka and the mods are free to do what they want. As for this thread title, again, it probably should have been titled something else, since a "non-violence" rule was not my intention but an actual rule against glorifying criminal acts..

Yes, photography is more than birds and landscape. However, photographing a war zone (photojournalism of actual events, tragic happenings) is a far cry from the simulating murder for a "cool photo shoot". In my opinion, that's not art, it's just sick.

Again, that was the intent of this thread. Not censorship. Whatever road it takes from here, I've stated what I think and am finished.

[dpastern]

Permagrin - don't feel bad about voicing your opinion - you did the right thing.

Dave

[cdifoto]

I dunno. I thought that set was funny. Because to me it read as if it was the girl attacking a guy to kill him but it backfired and she got it in the end.

Either way, you say you don't mind violence where both parties are willing participants. What about that set? Clearly it was staged so clearly both were willing participants.

I don't think your argument holds much water and I disagree entirely with the removal of it. It shocked me and disturbed me for sure, but that was the intent of the series. I also didn't see that set as glorifying a criminal act. The "murderer" wasn't given a trophy at the end or anything even remotely rewarding. Would you have felt better if the last image was of the criminal being executed for his crime?

[Michael_Lambert]

The one thing with a such an open board full of so many different personailities is that no one will ever see something the same way someone else can, we will sit there and try and project our views of a paticular image however no one is ever going to see it the same way.

Now with violence in general its all personal taste of what level of violence is acceptable in society, myself i would never post anything here i would not want my own children to see and show there friends however that is just me.

The one thing everyone must remember is that every post has the http://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/buttons/report.gif do not be afraid to use it, If you feel a post is out of line hit it leave your comments if the moderators of this board feel the same way they will take actions if they don't chances are they will let you know.

regards,