Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Andrew Molitor's article on Women in Photography: LuLa Endowment Winners  (Read 889 times)

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13684
    • http://myrvaagnes.com

Andrew,

Thanks for this excellent article and the research you did to prepare it.
As a previous winner of one of the LuLa grants, I have to say that you have described the strong points of the LuLa Endowment very well, and I'm delighted that so many good women photographers have discovered the LuLa Endowment.

Women are a tiny minority on the LuLa Forum, but those that have participated have, IMHO, contributed significantly. I suspect that some may be turned off by the petty feuds that appear from time to time on technical photographic issues and on politics.

In my own circle of friends, three of the best photographers I know personally are women: Karin Rosenthal, Elaine Fisher, and Ellen Fisher (not related to each other.)

-Eric
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes    (A sampler of my new book is on my website.)
http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website (Server is back up). New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

amolitor

  • Contributor
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 138
Re: Andrew Molitor's article on Women in Photography: LuLa Endowment Winners
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2017, 09:34:00 PM »

Thanks, Eric!

In industry, some people call these "bright spots," successful examples of a change you wish to see occur more often.

A big part of change management is simply to notice those bright spots and to point them out.

I would very much like for the luminous endowments to become a template, widely replicated. That's basically why I wrote the piece, and I have done my little best to promote it.

If you, anyone reading, think there's anything valuable in it, please feel free to promote it any way, any how. Direct people toward me and foist work off on me as necessary!

This is something I believe in deeply.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10235
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Andrew Molitor's article on Women in Photography: LuLa Endowment Winners
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2017, 11:48:58 PM »

I don't want "women in photography." I don't want "blacks in photography." I don't want "Serbs in photography." I want human beings in photography. I want photographers.

amolitor

  • Contributor
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 138
Re: Andrew Molitor's article on Women in Photography: LuLa Endowment Winners
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2017, 12:05:33 AM »

I think you would find that to be roughly the thrust of my piece. It's not about specifically woman-ing it up
 It's about doing things in a good way in the first place for everyone, and lo, the women and the serbs just turn up.
Logged

OmerV

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46
    • Photographs
Re: Andrew Molitor's article on Women in Photography: LuLa Endowment Winners
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2017, 10:41:02 AM »

I don't want "women in photography." I don't want "blacks in photography." I don't want "Serbs in photography." I want human beings in photography. I want photographers.
Nice quixotic sentiment. You should read the New York Times article on Harvey Weinstein to get an idea of what women are still having to deal with. Photography is a male dominated field in which women are too often still portrayed as mere objects. It's just a guess, but I doubt female photographers are on equal opportunity footing. Things are changing but slowly, such that legislation like Title IX and civil rights acts will undoubtedly stay in place for a while.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17059
Re: Andrew Molitor's article on Women in Photography: LuLa Endowment Winners
« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2017, 10:52:51 AM »

Nice quixotic sentiment. You should read the New York Times article on Harvey Weinstein to get an idea of what women are still having to deal with. Photography is a male dominated field in which women are too often still portrayed as mere objects. It's just a guess, but I doubt female photographers are on equal opportunity footing. Things are changing but slowly, such that legislation like Title IX and civil rights acts will undoubtedly stay in place for a while.

You missed by a mile: photographers are not on an equal footing of any sort, never mind questions of gender which itself, today, is also something under broader scrutiny and debate. How many genders are there these days?

The old certainties had a lot going for them: they brought stability where change is of value only to opportunists and charlatans.

Objectification of women: well, who do you think makes a wad of dough off that? Not those poor, skinny fashion supermodels, those pneumatic international chicks you see in every Grand Prix and especially at Monaco? Man, "objectification" has made the world go round as long as there has been a world with people on it. Come to think of it, without it and its associated glamouring-up etc. there would probably be no current generations at all. The greatest consumers of objectification are women! Their surviving quality fashion magazines are redolent of it; it tempts them to buy everything from suncream to shoes. Amongst the most lucrative jobs women can find many are in that world - and boy, is the competition fierce! Don't, for a moment, think of them as being victims: they know very well what they are looking for. That some fall into drugs and early demise is irrelevant: those same predisposed people would find their needle on the corner of any old street in any old town. And that applies not only to the ladies, either.

My experience of the sweeter sex is that it is infinitely more clever than the male. If ever there was cause for a wry laugh it's there in the people who feel this need to protect them: they can run rings around most of us with just a smile. They don't need muscles.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2017, 11:13:18 AM by Rob C »
Logged

OmerV

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46
    • Photographs
Re: Andrew Molitor's article on Women in Photography: LuLa Endowment Winners
« Reply #6 on: October 06, 2017, 11:21:34 AM »


The old certainties had a lot going for them: they brought stability where change is of value only to opportunists and charlatans.
  :) Rob, you got me. I donít know how to respond, brother.  :) ✌️

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17059
Re: Andrew Molitor's article on Women in Photography: LuLa Endowment Winners
« Reply #7 on: October 06, 2017, 02:37:55 PM »

  :) Rob, you got me. I donít know how to respond, brother.  :) ✌️

</(

The above is what happens when you try to write ;-) with the computer set to work in English, when the default is actually Spanish. Of course, this is a new development for me because for years I was accustomed to working the keyboard (a Spanish one by acer) in English, and all was well except for the damned autospell thing that sometimes took upon itself to underline everything I wrote in red. But not always, which made life complicated.

However, on a recent visit, a family member decided to help me get with it, as it were, and changed the default setting to English. Now, unless I remember first, every time I start the machine and want to write, I end up with the wrong keyboard... which means I start and finish at the same moment. Is that quantum physics?

Not that I accuse my relative of being either opportunist or charlatan, but the moral is clear: change screws with you. To show that my idea is the right one, there is even a swamp pop rock song to complain about everything not remaining the same. Of course, there is obviously another that complains in the opposite direction, on the grounds that everything the singer's lady cooks tastes the same: fish or fowl or pudding. Maybe she was a charlatan and deceived him of her culinary prowess prior to the nuptials. There is also a song about peanut butter, but in the circumstances, I wouldn't recommend going there.

Stability is good, especially in politcs, as is now evident even to the dead or the locked.

Rob
Pages: [1]   Go Up