Closed Threads

[George Fulton]

With all due respect, it is a matter of a title and a child.  The situation of the shoot does not matter at all.  You have labled someone with a derogatory term by accident.  It is a simple matter of making a mistake and needing to correct the wrong done to a child.  I have difficulty in understanding why something so simple can't be fixed.  The title given to her removes her honor and makes her bear the title of sexual plaything or whore.  You did not mean the offense but out of pride or arrogance continue to stick to it.  That is what many of us have a hard time understanding.

a
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118571\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Alex has put this well. Like Alex I feel certain it was not Michael's intent to slander this girl. However, like Alex I believe that this is what has been done. I have not participated on this forum yet, so it won't come at a loss but I will remove myself from this forum and you will not hear from me on this issue or any issue again.

For the record, my comments are not imposing my morality on others. This is a matter of simple matter of our dignity towards others, especially a child who likely has little idea she has been labeled a seductress of men.

It would be nice if you could see this, but you will not get it. Again, if this were your daughter, I believe you would.

[michael]

I and the vast majority of people who have written to me about it or discussed it with me in person simply don't agree that this is an any way a slander.

Some of you do. Fine.

How about we agree to disagree? I don't understand why some people feel that they have to impose their judgements on others.

This is getting tedious. I feel obliged to respond, but I'm simply repeating myself.

It's a matter of opinion and perspective. I really don't think that anyone should imagine that they can impose their sensability on me, when I have made it clear that I simply don't agree with your perception of the situation.

If the majority (or even a large number) of people were to tell me that I should reconsider, I would give it some further thought, but since about 95% of those who have written (literally by the hundreds) don't find the title in any way offensive, I'm satisfied to leave things as they are.

I'm sorry that some poeple feel offended. I think that this is due to a misinterpretation, but regardless, I am not about to make a change simply to accomodate a small minority who might disagree.

Can we move on now?

Michael

[John Camp]

<<I and the vast majority of people who have written to me about it or discussed it with me in person simply don't agree that this is an any way a slander.>>

You're right about that. Slander is spoken.

<<How about we agree to disagree? I don't understand why some people feel that they have to impose their judgements on others.>>

Fat chance. You've gotten yourself stuck in one of the PC quicksand bogs. They will repeat themselves until the end of time; they're not making a point, they're running for office.

<<This is getting tedious. I feel obliged to respond, but I'm simply repeating myself.>>

You're the publisher of this site, not an elected representative. When you closed the previous thread, you should have kept it closed. That's not censorship, that's editorial discretion. Censorship is imposed by people who can put you in jail. If I called you a dirty @*#!#, and you cut it, that wouldn't be censorship, that'd be good taste.

<<It's a matter of opinion and perspective. I really don't think that anyone should imagine that they can impose their sensability on me, when I have made it clear that I simply don't agree with your perception of the situation.>>

So why argue any longer? Are there any more points to make? I think all of them have been made at least eight times.

<<If the majority (or even a large number) of people were to tell me that I should reconsider, I would give it some further thought, but since about 95% of those who have written (literally by the hundreds) don't find the title in any way offensive, I'm satisfied to leave things as they are.

I'm sorry that some poeple feel offended. I think that this is due to a misinterpretation, but regardless, I am not about to make a change simply to accomodate a small minority who might disagree.

<<Can we move on now?>>

That would be your decision, wouldn't it? Remember the bullfight thread? This is another one. The people who believe something must be done "at all costs" won't stop on their own.  So close the thread. If you want an excuse, I could write a reponse that attacks everyone in really ugly terms; it's not like many of them don't deserve it. Nothing like a bunch of half-baked bs from both sides to turn a nice website into a sinkhole.>>  

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=118593\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]


JC (IMHO, of course)

[seany]

It never fails to interest me how we humans respond to criticism and the lengths we go to to justify our actions,this is indeed a classic example of the defense of the indefensable by Michael.
On the one hand he defends his right not to be lectured on morality and then says he would be prepared to reconsider the matter if enough people were to disagree with his position,surely if he is convinced he is right in this matter it should not make a differance how many agree or disagree, or is his morality dependant on the opinions of the majority? no offence Michael but I must disagree with you on your line of reasoning and also on your decision not to retract a very unsuitable "title" for the picture.

[Don Libby]

I totally agree with you Michael - please can we now just close this chapter and move on?  No I don't mean close the thread because someone else will take further offense and start yet another thread.  Come on people hasn't the dog been whipped enough?  Everyone has stated opinions of this.  

If you don't like something make your point but then move on but to continue to drag this out is beyond tiresome.

I'll get off my soapbox now ......

[michael]

Enough.

I'm closing this thread because I agree that it's all now gone far enough.

If someone wants to say something NEW on the matter, start a new thread. But just pontifcating about how you're right and I'm wrong ain't gunna cut it any more, and will lead to the message being deleted.

We should all have better things to do with our time than debate this any furrther.

Subject closed.

Michael

ps: If you continue to be offended by this issue, then maybe you should just find another place to hang out that doesn't upset you as much. I can think of at least one other web site's forum where personal accusations are tolerated.

pps: The bullfighting reminder is a good one. I'd forgotten about it. The fanatics on the subject didn't retreat on that one till I pulled the plug.

ppps: I was unaware that this was going on until a few minutes after this last post went up. It now looks like the folks at DPReview have had a poll and decided by a ratio of 94% in favour, that my Lolita title was NOT offensive.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp...essage=23291307

Not that it changes anything (other than jibeing with my own rough talley on the emails that I've received on the topic). So – let the 6% of so who are offended accept that they are not going to make me change my mind (which I'm not sure I would have done even if the numbers had been reversed) and let's let it go at that.