Jump to content
  • Sky
  • Blueberry
  • Slate
  • Blackcurrant
  • Watermelon
  • Strawberry
  • Orange
  • Banana
  • Apple
  • Emerald
  • Chocolate
  • Charcoal
love2scrap

Silence the women - "peace on earth" christmas card

Recommended Posts

love2scrap

http://www.dailydot.com/lifestyle/family-holiday-portrait-duct-tape/?fb=dd

Here's the photographer's page https://m.facebook.com/hannahhawkesphotography/ where she defends herself.

Cant believe how many people on facebook are saying "Get over yourselves, this is a joke!" Not funny at all.

Edited by OnceUponATime
adding tags

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViolaSebastian
16 minutes ago, love2scrap said:

http://www.dailydot.com/lifestyle/family-holiday-portrait-duct-tape/?fb=dd

Here's the photographer's page https://m.facebook.com/hannahhawkesphotography/ where she defends herself.

Cant believe how many people on facebook are saying "Get over yourselves, this is a joke!" Not funny at all.

Wow, I was prepared to see their hands over their mouths or something like that.  That would have been in bad taste and unfunny, but not degrading.  But they have duct tape on their mouths and the binding with Christmas lights (how festive :pb_rollseyes:)--something that's typically used to control and silence victims of rape, torture, kidnapping, etc.  How a father, of all people, would think that this is an appropriate joke to make at his daughters' and wife's expenses is utterly beyond me.  And the little boy giving the thumbs up?  Why isn't his mouth duct taped, too?  Disgusting, why don't they just tell him verbally that he's better than his sisters, because that's certainly the lesson his parents are teaching him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SledCat

I didn't even notice their hands were bound, until it was pointed out in the article. Ugh. There are no words for how vile I think the photo is. I wonder if the photographer thought it was her chance at "going viral". I guess it worked on that level, but... :my_confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViolaSebastian

I understand that it was taken at the request of the family, and had I been the photographer, I'm not sure I would have taken the shot.  I'd love to hear a professional photographers take on it--was she obligated to take the shot, no matter how distasteful?  Or can photographers decline that sort of thing?

Edited by ViolaSebastian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catey

*gets ready to get mobbed*

 

Well the kids in it is distasteful to me.

 

BUT

In the grand scope of the world TO ME not that big  deal.

I am sarcastic by nature, have a slightly off sense of humour so perhaps that is coming into play here but I have seen things that were way more offensive than that. I wonder if there would still be an out roar were it the husband that was gagged?

I still respect your opinion and see where people are coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SledCat
37 minutes ago, Catey said:

*gets ready to get mobbed*

 

Well the kids in it is distasteful to me.

 

BUT

In the grand scope of the world TO ME not that big  deal.

I am sarcastic by nature, have a slightly off sense of humour so perhaps that is coming into play here but I have seen things that were way more offensive than that. I wonder if there would still be an out roar were it the husband that was gagged?

I still respect your opinion and see where people are coming from.

It's interesting, my first thought was, I wonder what the opinion would be if the roles were reversed in this photo? Would I feel the same way? I don't think it is all that funny either way. I think that is a good question though, Catey.

Just because we have seen far more offensive images doesn't mean that this particular image isn't offensive. That's just the way I see it. Though, I am open to different opinions and changing my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
princessmahina

I think it's absolutely repugnant. 

And yes, I think it would be just as repulsive if it were a man duct taped and bound like that. Things that promote one gender over the other like that are harmful, especially when there's implied violence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
love2scrap

@ViolaSebastian the photographer has taken down the photo on her fb but written in her own defense:

 After being silent, now isn't that ironic, I would like to speak! I have been called every name in the book, and have received some very hateful and vulgar comments and messages. I would like to say that as a female I do NOT and have never promoted violence to women! I do not support abuse, or the degradation of women. My controversial photo was taken by request by the family, and was in no way meant to promote abuse. This photo was taken with humor in mind, and was meant as a comical Christmas photo. I personally know this family, and have known them for many years. They are not abusive to their children in any shape or form. Also, I would like to add that no one was harmed during the process! So everyone have a very MERRY CHRISTMAS and MAY GOD BLESS you and yours!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catey

I am an Artist. It is how I make a living.

I see photography as a form of visual art.

I don't believe in the censorship of art.

I also don't personally enjoy many expressions of art I see, however I support people in the right to express their creativity.

Had this been written out "I want a peaceful Christmas so I will be binding and gagging my wife and female children" I would feel the outrage.

I see this as a goofy family picture that while insensitive I doubt was an effort to  propagate the suppression of women.

If there was a negative backstory to the family I would see this differently but as I do not know one I see this as crass at best but I honestly do not feel that it was done from a malicious place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jasmar

I don't always believe there has to be a concerted, intentional effort to perpetuate ugliness like this; it's just as repugnant regardless of intent, IMO. I'm of the "some things aren't funny, no matter what" camp.

This is a form of violence against women. It strikes me the same way as blackface/mammy "humor," or as any any other group on the losing end of a power differential. 

That photo isn't art. It isn't attempting to provoke people into reexamining their subtle prejudices. It doesn't try to communicate anything important, or grand, or provocative. It's a stupid, ignorant, ugly attempt at misogynistic humor. I don't have any problem with it being pulled or protested against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bal maiden
35 minutes ago, Catey said:

I am an Artist. It is how I make a living.

I see photography as a form of visual art.

I don't believe in the censorship of art.

I also don't personally enjoy many expressions of art I see, however I support people in the right to express their creativity.

 

I don't believe in censorship of art either, but some art is just shit and/or stupid, and people calling it shit and stupid en masse is perfectly fine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
libriatrix
5 minutes ago, Jasmar said:

I don't always believe there has to be a concerted, intentional effort to perpetuate ugliness like this; it's just as repugnant regardless of intent, IMO. I'm of the "some things aren't funny, no matter what" camp.

Bingo. I don't care whether that father is actually patriarchal and abusive; I don't care how much of a joke it was supposed to be or if the mother involved found it funny too. None of that matters because taking the photo and spreading it around is another blow struck against valuing women as people.

Every woman who sees that who's been silenced feels silenced yet again -- maybe in a minor way but "this is how we die, by a thousand papercuts" -- every small silencing piles on top of the last. The silencing being minor and small actually increases the likelihood of no one stopping it, and eventually enough small silencings are enough to damage and demoralize deeply.

Every person who sees the picture and laughs and passes it on as a joke contributes to the silencing of women. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlyme

I think this is the value of public discourse. I'm sure the family just meant to be funny. I'm sure that they don't approve of violence. It's probably their innocence in these areas that actually enables them to be insensitive. It's kind of an unconscious programming (not to sound like I'm talking conspiracy theories-I just mean that we all come from cultural background that are still on paths of development , trying to define what a good human is, and out growing old beliefs that we now see in a different light from generations past.) that they are revealing in themselves that they could, now that there is light shed on them, grow past. Unfortunately people generally respond defensively... But others can use it I suppose. 

 

It's really an awful picture. And that the little boy is all thumbs up, It's a terrible message. I hope as time goes on and they have a chance to think about it they will tell their daughters that this was not OK. 

 

ETA I'm an artist too. And I don't believe in censorship. But I do believe in honest reactions. People have a right to say what they want in art, but they don't have the right to tell other people how they should feel about it. Frankly, the look on the little boys face makes me feel a little ill. If that's how you want people to see your family in your holiday greeting, party on. You nailed it! 

Edited by onlyme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shoobydoo

Something being "art" doesn't make it beyond criticism. An awful lot of art school professors would be out of a job if it did. And, if an overwhelming number of people have the same reaction to something you've made, especially if it's not the one you were expecting, maybe you should reconsider what you've made and how you've made it. 

ETA: Not that I think this really represents the feelings of the photographer. It's easy to say "I don't want to do this particular job/x/y/z" until you have to pay rent and put food on the table.  A huge, huge number of artists wind up doing things they're not entirely comfortable with because they still need money to survive.

Edited by Shoobydoo
Nonsensical grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hisey
3 hours ago, Catey said:

I am an Artist. It is how I make a living.

I see photography as a form of visual art.

I don't believe in the censorship of art.

I also don't personally enjoy many expressions of art I see, however I support people in the right to express their creativity.

Had this been written out "I want a peaceful Christmas so I will be binding and gagging my wife and female children" I would feel the outrage.

I see this as a goofy family picture that while insensitive I doubt was an effort to  propagate the suppression of women.

If there was a negative backstory to the family I would see this differently but as I do not know one I see this as crass at best but I honestly do not feel that it was done from a malicious place.

No one is saying this photographer's "art" should be censored. They are saying they find the "art" disgusting and repulsive. Why is expressing disapproval the same as censorship? That sounds like fundy-talk.

It's true that the parents in the picture may have been "expressing their creativity," as you say. I'm not sure I would call it art, but whatever.

However, the kids in the family had no choice. They are not expressing their creativity. They are doing what their parents told them to do.

Did the father tie those little girls' hands together? Do you feel that's "art," tying a second-grader's hands with cord? Who put the duct tape on the kids' little faces--their dad, probably? Putting duct-tape on an eight-year old's mouth is "art"? Making a joke at her expense is "art"? 

It's great you are an Artist (though I'm not sure why you used capitals). But that's something that anyone can call themselves. Do artists have carte blanche to take pictures that denigrate little girls? But regular folks don't? How do you know this photographer is even an artist? Maybe she is a SAHM with 1-2 photography clients a year.

Or do you mean the parents are artists? Well, you aren't an artist just because you have an unusual idea for an Xmas photo. Being an artist takes hard work, dedication, practice, skill. Not just an unusual idea and a call to a photographer.

You say that you'd be offended if they'd written "I want a peaceful Christmas so I will be binding and gagging my wife and female children". But writing is a form of art, too. Why hold one form of art to a different standard than other? ("Oh, they are binding and gagging them in a photograph, oh, then that's OK. I thought they were writing about it. That would've been awful.")

I'd be interested to know if those little girls even understood the joke. Did they see the card? Did someone explain it to them? How'd that go?

Little girl: Mommy, why did Daddy put duct tape on my mouth for the Christmas photo? And tie up our hands?

Mom: Well, honey, Dad and Brandon think we talk too much. So, in the card, they have us gagged and then they are happy. They also think we touch too much stuff, so Dad bound our hands, too. Now the guys are really glad, because the girls in the family can't talk or touch anything! Isn't that a funny joke? Wait till Grandpa sees it!

Doing things that involve hurting children is not art. Or Art.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nastyhobbitses

See, if it were a "peace on earth" joke that involved showing the kids being quiet in some way (not bound and gagged), that would be a bit tasteless and unoriginal, but not an outright horrible joke. This? This is just repugnant. What's he going to tell his daughters in a few years? This just says to his daughters (and to his wife, though she's an adult and could choose to do this picture), "I think that the world is a better place when you shut up" or "you are to be seen and not heard, but your brother is allowed to yap all he wants".

Also, I don't want Daesh to be the new Godwin's Law, but I feel like a photo showing you with your wife and daughters bound and gagged while you pose above them like a hunter posing with his kill and your son gleefully gives a thumbs-up is a little....Daesh-y. That or a little Ramsay Bolton-y if you want a nerdier comparison.

The family was free to choose this photo, but they are not free from criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AmazonGrace
Quote the photographer said...:

 They are not abusive to their children in any shape or form.

Um, yes they are... this photo session seems emotionally abusive to me. Not only to the girls, the little boy must be getting some odd ideas as well.

3 hours ago, Shoobydoo said:

Something being "art" doesn't make it beyond criticism. An awful lot of art school professors would be out of a job if it did. And, if an overwhelming number of people have the same reaction to something you've made, especially if it's not the one you were expecting, maybe you should reconsider what you've made and how you've made it.

ETA: Not that I think this really represents the feelings of the photographer. It's easy to say "I don't want to do this particular job/x/y/z" until you have to pay rent and put food on the table.  A huge, huge number of artists wind up doing things they're not entirely comfortable with because they still need money to survive.

Yeah but apparently the photographer  posted the photo on her own facebook page. Pretty sure if she objected to the photoshoot but only agreed to do it as a financial necessity, she would either not have posted it at all on her own site or posted it with a different caption that implied some jobs were weirder than others.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flossie

If my husband had come up with this idea for a family Christmas card I would have been hurt, offended, and angry.  I would not have gone along with it, nor would I have allowed my kids to be in such a photo.  It sends the wrong message entirely.

As for the photographer, while she was free to take or refuse the job, she defends her part in the matter by saying she knew and was friends with that family, so she probably didn't want to offend them by refusing their request.  She makes it sound like it's OK since she knows them and knows that they don't harm their children, and the children weren't harmed during the photo shoot (like duct tape is a cinch to get off skin and lips).

But the thing that stood out to me and made me think the photographer herself didn't see anything wrong with the photo was the fact that she posted it on her website!  "Hey look at this example of the kind of work I do!  See how nicely spaced I put the prisoners, I mean the mom and little girls?  Doesn't the light react beautifully with the matching gags?  Don't you think binding their hands with Christmas lights is a nice touch?  Did you catch that cute little boy giving a thumbs up?  Doesn't the dad look proud of himself?  What a beautiful family picture.  I can do one up for your family, too.  The humiliation is free."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sera's Arrow

I've seen something similar to that (holiday potrait featuring taped mouth + tied up with lights) really recently in a set of family holiday photographs my friend had done with her kids. One of the group pictures had the two older kids (a boy and girl) who were loosely draped with the lights which were given to the youngest kid (a toddler girl) to hold like she lassoed and captured two varmints. The grin she has in the photo was perfect for it, heh. There was also no "Peace on Earth" caption in sight.

Same basic idea, only it was the kids who got themselves ready for it and the two oldest couldn't wrap themselves in the lights fast enough, according to the oldest two.  They had fun doing it as well. There was no hand/foot binding and the "tape" bothered me at first so I asked the oldest girl if it hurt to take it off. She said that it was old and wasn't as sticky so no, it didn't hurt. I get squicked when I see duct tape over the mouths of kids - it reminds me far too much of a little skull found in a swamp in Florida.

There's art done right and art done wrong. If only the girls were tied up with the boy holding the lights, my opinion would change... same if it was the boy tied up and the girls holding the lights.

Edited by Sera's Arrow
Added a few bits, removed a few others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polecat

I expected to have conflicted feelings on this. I talk a lot. A LOT. I've always been chatty around people with whom I'm close (although I'm a shy introvert by nature -- go figure). So I could see my husband joking about putting duct tape over my mouth for "peace on earth." And then I thought about what that would look like ... my husband and sons surrounding me with my hands bound ... and it struck me how really, truly distasteful that would be. I am pretty sure the family intended their picture to be funny and probably because the wife and daughters are chatty. But it's just not. It looks too much like silencing and subjugating. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViolaSebastian
8 hours ago, Catey said:

I see this as a goofy family picture that while insensitive I doubt was an effort to  propagate the suppression of women.

I'm not sure how anyone can look at the expression on those two little girls' faces and think this is a goofy family photo.  They look miserable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peas n carrots

First thought in my mind was daddy is a serial killer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
formergothardite
9 hours ago, Catey said:

I am an Artist. It is how I make a living.

I see photography as a form of visual art.

I don't believe in the censorship of art.

I also don't personally enjoy many expressions of art I see, however I support people in the right to express their creativity.

Had this been written out "I want a peaceful Christmas so I will be binding and gagging my wife and female children" I would feel the outrage.

I see this as a goofy family picture that while insensitive I doubt was an effort to  propagate the suppression of women.

If there was a negative backstory to the family I would see this differently but as I do not know one I see this as crass at best but I honestly do not feel that it was done from a malicious place.

This makes absolutely no sense. The message is still exactly the same. Why is it "goofy" and not an "effort to propagate the suppression of women" when it is a photo, but something worthy of outrage when it is spelled out. Writing and photography are both forms of art, what is the difference? In the end, the picture sends the exact same message as if it were written out. It doesn't matter if they meant to be malicious, it is still an awful message to send. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
princessmahina
2 hours ago, Sera's Arrow said:

I've seen something similar to that (holiday potrait featuring taped mouth + tied up with lights) really recently in a set of family holiday photographs my friend had done with her kids. One of the group pictures had the two older kids (a boy and girl) who were loosely draped with the lights which were given to the youngest kid (a toddler girl) to hold like she lassoed and captured two varmints. The grin she has in the photo was perfect for it, heh. There was also no "Peace on Earth" caption in sight.

Same basic idea, only it was the kids who got themselves ready for it and the two oldest couldn't wrap themselves in the lights fast enough, according to the oldest two.  They had fun doing it as well. There was no hand/foot binding and the "tape" bothered me at first so I asked the oldest girl if it hurt to take it off. She said that it was old and wasn't as sticky so no, it didn't hurt. I get squicked when I see duct tape over the mouths of kids - it reminds me far too much of a little skull found in a swamp in Florida.

There's art done right and art done wrong. If only the girls were tied up with the boy holding the lights, my opinion would change... same if it was the boy tied up and the girls holding the lights.

What the everloving fuck is wrong with people? The holidays are supposed to be a time of love, not gagging and binding your spouse and/or children!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polecat
3 minutes ago, princessmahina said:

What the everloving fuck is wrong with people? The holidays are supposed to be a time of love, not gagging and binding your spouse and/or children!

And yet you would not believe the number of pictures of children who are screaming hysterically on Santa's lap -- they get passed around with an, "Isn't this too cute?!" and a "Look how funny!" People can be mind-bogglingly mean-spirited during this time of year. Or maybe this time of year just brings out the "best" in them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.