David Alan Harvey kicked out of Magnum

[Cholentpot]

So did the mirrors show the operation scares?

He came to da door in a dress.

I'd post the link to the relevant clip but I'm afraid of being cancelled.

 

[Vaughn]

Would that be self-cancelling or self-correcting then?

 

[BradS]

well, this thread went in a bizzare direction.
not a dull day

 

[logan2z]

well, this thread went in a bizzare direction.
not a dull day

Sirius hung a sharp left and it's been heading in that direction ever since

 

[Cholentpot]

Would that be self-cancelling or self-correcting then?

You asked for it

Great movie.

 

[Vaughn]

I liked the All in the Family episode when the Marbourgh Man shows up.

 

[jvo]

I see it differently...society, businesses, and public media has supported the harrassment of women...largely by being silent about it. Women are finally getting a fair case because of the change in reporting.

+++++++++++++++++++++

 

[mooseontheloose]

I see it differently...society, businesses, and public media has supported the harrassment of women...largely by being silent about it. Women are finally getting a fair case because of the change in reporting.

+++++++++++++++++++++

I agree, but it's not just the reporting that has changed. Social media has been a game-changer, giving women, POC, and other groups a strong enough voice to be heard. And when the voice is loud enough, it makes these men (and the silent co-conspirators who did nothing even when they knew of the allegations) accountable - whether through shame, the loss of profits, whatever.

Yes. Obviously.

EDIT:
and what about mistreating men?

but, but but...here's the real meat of the question, what exactly characterizes mistreatment? what is and what is not misreatment? and has that changed?

Are you serious? A very simple question - if DAH, or any other man, had said to you the things he said to these women, suggested that you stay in a hotel room next to his, touched you in an unwanted way, or masturbated during a video call, would you have thought that was normal? How about 30 years ago? We may not have had video calls back then but trust me when I say, men have found ways of doing this in front of women for a long time (I can still clearly remember the first time it was done to me).

Thirty years ago was 1991 - I can you tell you, being 17 at the time, that whatever is considered mistreatment or harassment or assault now, would have definitely been thought so back then as well. It was only acceptable (or normal) to the men who could get away with it, and most of them got away with it. And the "women harassing men" sounds a lot like "fine people on both sides" or classic "whataboutism". Give me some concrete examples of women doing this, in the same numbers of men harassing women, and then we can talk. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but to imply that it happens in somewhat equal measure is absurd and misogynistic at best.

 

[BradS]

Are you serious? A very simple question - if DAH, or any other man, had said to you the things he said to these women, suggested that you stay in a hotel room next to his, touched you in an unwanted way, or masturbated during a video call, would you have thought that was normal? How about 30 years ago? We may not have had video calls back then but trust me when I say, men have found ways of doing this in front of women for a long time (I can still clearly remember the first time it was done to me).

Thirty years ago was 1991 - I can you tell you, being 17 at the time, that whatever is considered mistreatment or harassment or assault now, would have definitely been thought so back then as well. It was only acceptable (or normal) to the men who could get away with it, and most of them got away with it. And the "women harassing men" sounds a lot like "fine people on both sides" or classic "whataboutism". Give me some concrete examples of women doing this, in the same numbers of men harassing women, and then we can talk. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but to imply that it happens in somewhat equal measure is absurd and misogynistic at best.

Please read all of the posts in the thread before replying late to an earlier post (see for example, #93). Thanks.

EDIT: and just for the record so that there is no ambiguity...To my way of thinking, the behavior that you have described above goes well beyond sexual abuse - it enters the realm of criminal psychopathy. Its right up there with setting live cats on fire.

 

[Arthurwg]

Some years ago I watched a group of gigantic sea lions on a beach in California. A male wandered among them until he found one that he liked. Although she protested the male just went ahead with mating. Maybe DAH was like that.

 

[Vaughn]

BradS -- she rightfully called you out on the rhetorical question you asked, which I also did earlier. Both times you have retreated with bland excuses and diversions.

Arthurwg -- I hope you are not suggesting that DAH was only acting 'naturally' or something along that line.

 

[BradS]

BradS -- she rightfully called you out on the rhetorical question you asked, which I also did earlier. Both times you have retreated with bland excuses and diversions...

...and now you are being abusive.

 

[Vaughn]

...and now you are being abusive.

Being truthful -- sorry if that hurts.

And I am not surprised in the way you responded to mooseontheloose -- very typically male response to a female...and not in a good way.

 

[Richard Man]

I am waiting for the "funny" people who will again chime in, and say, "oh no, see how this thread has been derailed!!!"

It is so damn nice to be able to live in a privileged bubble.

 

[Cholentpot]

I thought I was getting somewhere with John Wayne.

 

[marcmarc]

I've been more or less following this story since it broke. It appears DAH had two problems. One was his pictures of underage prostitutes and the other his behavior and conduct towards young women taking his workshops. For now I want to see what peoples opinions are on where the line should be drawn as to what is ethical and what is not regarding documentary work and photojournalism. We all know that photographs can have an immediate impact on us in a way the printed word cannot. That's why these photographic professions exist. It's so they can show the world what is going on. Sometimes that calls for bearing witness to the darker sides of humanity. In the case of DAH and his prostitute pictures, if I recall, these were taken decades ago, in the '70's or 80's. So they have been around for decades and only now are they controversial? Is it because they were offered for sale and tagged with questionable terms? Are we to believe that these photographs were being marketed to pedophiles? What input did DAH have in all of this? Did he choose the pictures to be offered for sale? Did he choose the tags for people looking for such subject matter? Also lets not forget that child prostitution has been photographed before. Again, if I am correct I believe Mary Ellen Mark photographed prostitutes in India and some of them may have been under age. Does the fact that these were taken by a woman make them acceptable? If so, how? I can't help but think there's more going on here than what what Magnum is letting on. Now this is just my opinion but I've noticed that Magnum has been struggling financially over recent years. I even recall an article that mentioned they were giving thought to licensing out their name to a variety of products like camera bags.I've also noticed that over recent years the photographers who are being chosen to join the agency tend to take a more fine art approach to photography over the more traditional straight photojournalism they were founded on. If this is the case and Magnum is trying to re-invent themselves as more of a fine art agency and with the decision to start selling members work it may have been a misstep that DAH's work might be looked upon differently now then it was when he made the work. So is it art and if so is it exploitative?

 

[Richard Man]

Hi Marc(marc), yes, in fact when the story initially broke, my first thought was Mary Ellen Mark's Falkland Road series. The main problem, or at least the reason it surfaced was the Magnum just put the entire archive up willy nilly, without consideration of such thing.

As for financial conditions, in fact, it was DAH who told us a decade ago that Magnum should be OK financially for "a long while" because certain rich tech bro bought just about the entire archive set of prints (and probably donated to his alma mater), so it was a win-win for everyone involved: Magnum got cash, the tech bro got a tax write-off, and the museum has a nice photo collection. I think the acceptance of more fine art photographers probably just reflect the nature of the photography world.

 

[marcmarc]

Hi Marc(marc), yes, in fact when the story initially broke, my first thought was Mary Ellen Mark's Falkland Road series. The main problem, or at least the reason it surfaced was the Magnum just put the entire archive up willy nilly, without consideration of such thing.

As for financial conditions, in fact, it was DAH who told us a decade ago that Magnum should be OK financially for "a long while" because certain rich tech bro bought just about the entire archive set of prints (and probably donated to his alma mater), so it was a win-win for everyone involved: Magnum got cash, the tech bro got a tax write-off, and the museum has a nice photo collection. I think the acceptance of more fine art photographers probably just reflect the nature of the photography world.

Makes sense, thanks.

 

[Wallendo]

I don't know the photographer's intent when he took photographs of underaged prostitutes, but, based on the article linked in the initial post, the agency showed significant moral failings in the way the images were promoted and sold. Whereas the original images may be considered photojournalism, marketing the images as fine art with labelling including "under age" skirts uncomfortably close to child pornography. The fact that these images were offered for sale for many years reflects quite poorly on Magnum. In fact it seems that a good deal of the agency's outrage is simply deflecting criticism away from their complicity in this whole mess.

 

[Vaughn]

That is my reading of it also, Wallendo. Magnum basically got into the child porn business. $$$ And I would say with their eyes wide open.

 

[Arthurwg]

[QUOTE
Arthurwg -- I hope you are not suggesting that DAH was only acting 'naturally' or something along that line.[/QUOTE]


Well if he was he is not alone. I think this has been revealed as commonplace.

 

[George Mann]

[QUOTE
Arthurwg -- I hope you are not suggesting that DAH was only acting 'naturally' or something along that line.

Well if he was he is not alone. I think this has been revealed as commonplace.

No matter how much the politically correct crowd may want to interfere with manly behavior, they will never truly succeed with making the sun set in the east.

You'all have been debating on a man's supposed behavior while only having one side of the story.

 

[warden]

Some years ago I watched a group of gigantic sea lions on a beach in California. A male wandered among them until he found one that he liked. Although she protested the male just went ahead with mating. Maybe DAH was like that.

Perhaps that’s why they don’t allow gigantic sea lions to conduct photo workshops.

 

[George Mann]

Perhaps that’s why they don’t allow gigantic sea lions to conduct photo workshops.

Meanwhile, our race is on the verge of extinction, in a world where wrong is right, and right is wrong!

 

[Richard Man]

No matter how much the politically correct crowd may want to interfere with manly behavior, they will never truly succeed with making the sun set in the east.
....

So "men" can never learn not to harass women or behaving badly? Nice to know your attitude.