Childs play

Here's the Bottom Line:

Photos are meant to elicit emotion.

If they do that they've done their job, and imvhffo are good photos.

And that is IT.

End of Story

People have different opinions about everything.

Each persons opinion is worth this:

1 divided by the number of people on the planet. Which is about 7 Billion (7,000,000,000)

1/7,000,000,000 is a VERY small number

Even if 100 Million people share the same opinion, that opinion is worth 100Million divided by 7,000Million

So their opinion is worth 100/7000 = .01428 .....lol

PS. For some reason a small number of people have imposed their 'Opinions' on the general population.
That's because they have a MegaPhone, i.e. the internet.

And they resemble and act like a mob.

And mobs are dangerous........and I hate mobs, and mob thinking.

In highschool we used to call that a 'Rat Pack' ....where a bunch of people gang up on someone.....

And THAT Ladies and Germs........is what is Abhorrent!

PPS. One more thing:

Every opinion is based on information that person has received.
If that information is garbage/untrue, then their opinion is also garbage and not valid.

z

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19353162
Moderators have read the reports regarding the first photo in this thread. It's been discussed and found to adhere to POTN's rules.
I am happy to discuss further via PM if anyone needs to, but please do not do so here.

Thank God. We've got enough freaking censorship as is......

z

We had this very discussion on the G&N discussion thread.

And to be clear, I think it should be ok to say that you don't like an image and you should be able to say why without being attacked for it. But if your opinion is itself an attack, well you are likely to get what you gave. And in this case I understand why someone might not like the first photo. Not sure I understand why the objection was voiced with such venom. I like the picture fine because I see it for what it is. I know a toy when I see one. What I love is the rest of the images that follow. Things that I do not see here in my privileged/affluent part of the world. Beautiful images that show me what I will probably never be able to see for myself.

I think the eyes and expression says it all

You accept what you have

Hard sell - using whatever resources you have

kezug wrote in post #19350418
No one else seems to want to comment. I wonder why. However, I will.

This is appalling, this is wrong, there is nothing artful about this. If this is real, then this reality is fake. If you want to hang this on your wall, fine. However, I dont want to see this on a public space or web site.

This picture was posted once before and I cant remember if it was banned by the site or not, but it should me. I remember that it stirred emotions in me and not in the way of art. This is just wrong. Plain and simply, wrong. If you dont agree with me, that is your right. However, I know where I stand.

I have reported this.

Attack? Wow, I dont think so.

I stated an opinion, and surely my little post, something that has a weight of ".01428" according to someone who spent precious time calculating my posts worth, has drew more ire than that image. Wow.
Sorry, a toddler/baby with a gun (toy? hmmmm, doesn't look like a toy to me, but I don't own guns so maybe I am just ill informed) does not sit well with me. Especially with today's society and gun violence, which is terribly worse than 30 or 40 years ago. Gun "play" like this was something I don't like. I reported it because to me, this is a baby holding a gun. To me, "to me", I felt this was wrong. I also used the web sites option to report it. I did not hear from any moderators, none, for the longest time (I think I reported this Feb 28), nothing was mentioned until March 08.

Anyway, seems like 1 person's opinion is worth a lot of vocalization from others. A post, being worth ".01428", so, I guess I should just go away, forever.


Are we only supposed to like, applaud and "WOW" every photo? Boring to me. And, forgive me for letting a photo stir some emotion.

Good discussion IMO.

I played with toy guns all the time, growing up. My friends and I would even make guns out of matchboxes, where the inner sliding portion of the box would slide out to release a rubber band that was stretched across the top of the box, and the rubber band would fling a wad of paper across the room.

I used to read Commando comics (anyone who grew up in a British Commonwealth country would probably know what I am talking about) and would pretend I was one of the characters in the stories. Luckily, I had a good family and childhood and at no point did I confuse the good vs. bad fantasy roleplaying with real life.

I have no problem with the photo. The photo is merely capturing a snapshot in the child's life. It is not glorifying guns, any more than a photo of a minor smoking a cigarette (I've seen those photos all the time, coming out of rural Indonesia) is intrinsically glorifying smoking.

Right, we use to make hatchets out of an emty tin and a stick that really could inflict more damage than the gun in the shot.

Ken Robertson wrote in post #19357201
Right, we use to make hatchets out of an emty tin and a stick that really could inflict more damage than the gun in the shot.

and sling shots with #5 crushed stone or SOMETIMES steel ball bearings...

kezug wrote in post #19357167
Sorry, a toddler/baby with a gun (toy? hmmmm, doesn't look like a toy to me, but I don't own guns so maybe I am just ill informed) does not sit well with me. Especially with today's society and gun violence, which is terribly worse than 30 or 40 years ago. Gun "play" like this was something I don't like.

As you stated, you don't own guns but there are numerous indications that this is a toy and not a real firearm. The screw holes on the side with the screws holding the two halves of the toy together. No gun is made that way. The ejector port, extractor, slide and frame are all one piece. Again, no firearm could be made that way.

Not sure what you mean when you say that gun violence is worse, suppose that depends on where you are located, but in the United States, Gun violence is actually less than in the past, but it is more sensationalized so it may seem like more when the numbers are actually down. But your feelings that playing with this toy is objectionable are personal to you and valid for you. I have often wondered what the reaction would be if someone objected to pictures of nude women, tied and covered with faux blood or nude men wearing makeup, high heels and bustiers. I doubt anyone will ever dare voice such an opinion for fear of the backlash.

Ken Robertson wrote in post #19354934
You accept what you have

Hosted photo: posted by Ken Robertson in
./showthread.php?p=193​54934&i=i55184914
forum: People

I am fascinated by this picture because this young woman is, in her own way, strikingly beautiful. That is to say, her features, when considered individually are near perfect, and her eyes are different than most of the rest of us, but from my understanding, the human brain is able to compensate for such a difference so that her eyesight, while not perfect is likely functional, and probably more so than my 91 year old grandmother. So if we accept her for who she is, she is beautiful

What keeps going through my head, is that Ken captures the essence of a person's soul in every picture that I've seen. Whether the subject is family friendly or not, or if it is a slice of life that is controversial, I see art in these images. Personally, I recognize the sensitivity around a young child and a gun, and also the significance of art and how it strikes an emotion. I am a gun owner and a strong advocate for safety. I don't know that I would have found myself in a situation with a child playing with a realistic looking gun. But, in my opinion, Ken, all of your images in this thread are profound, each in their own way.

Great stuff here Ken. I spent over a year in the Philippines when I was a kid, it was wonderful, the people were wonderful. I read somewhere that people with the least tend to be the happiest.