Should I Stop Posting Images?

Millicent Feeblegirlie
I would be proud to know you

Frankly speaking, I don't or can't like the photos, especially the ladyboy series. Probably because of my cultural and educational background - not because of the quality or meaning of the photos. People have some emotional barrier that they can't overcome only by reason. There are always something that we don't want to face. But that's my problem and I don't have right to demand Gerry to stop posting. As everybody says I can avoid clicking the thumbnail. Nobody has forced me to see it and even agree with it.

Apart from the subject matter that I don't like, I respect and admire Gerry's effort and passion for his photography. I wish I would have such. Keep posting your photos - results of your inspiration and perspiration.

to Millicent Feeblegirlie:

Thanks for upping the Quality Quotient of this already very interesting discussion. I'm always highly appreciative of the gift of insight.

butterflydream said:

Frankly speaking, I don't or can't like the photos, especially the ladyboy series. Probably because of my cultural and educational background - not because of the quality or meaning of the photos. People have some emotional barrier that they can't overcome only by reason. There are always something that we don't want to face. But that's my problem and I don't have right to demand Gerry to stop posting. As everybody says I can avoid clicking the thumbnail. Nobody has forced me to see it and even agree with it.

Apart from the subject matter that I don't like, I respect and admire Gerry's effort and passion for his photography. I wish I would have such. Keep posting your photos - results of your inspiration and perspiration.

Click to expand...

very well said, thanks very much for your politeness and honesty

Svend Videbak said:

<I think what is hard for people to understand is that this whole project has nothing to do with sex for me<

I at least assumed that your ladyboy project had nothing to do with sex for you. One must give the benefit of the doubt.

I was happy to see your ladyboy series showing up on APUG. It's not in the least offensive, just straightforward nude portraits of people with slightly adjusted anatomy. Sexworkers. An old photographic theme, one of the oldest. Many ladyboy series have been appearing in the last couple years, seems to be in fashion.

The pictures are not well made, they don't interest me. Your camera doesn't get past the dead eyes and spirit, what photographer could?

It's in the vein of the "social documentary and consciousness" photographic genre, always a morally ambiguous and troubling one when done well.

Click to expand...

I guess the hard to believe sex thing would fit better into the general community of people I deal with, photo people tend to understand the passion of making images better so might understand the no sex thing better.

Do you have links to the images you mention? I would love to see the photographs!

Yes the morally ambiguous thing is there in lots of documentary work. I have always wondered how exactly do you make photographs of the exploited without exploiting them? Photography is a visual medium so you have to be there and capture your message live and in person, your message has to be visual. How do you capture exploitation visually without exploiting?

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa all,

Boy, this is a tough one, gerryyaum.

Click to expand...

uh oh a Thai lady! I was wondering if any Thai people would chime in!

: )

Sawadee khrup khune feeble

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa

If anyone currently registered to APUG can speak with the authority of "walking in the shoes" of the subject matter in question here (or at least try to channel that effect through photography), I don't think they've yet chimed in. I genuinely don't think you're most qualified to play the "lady-boy" advocate here. Not by a long shot. You are, however, best qualified to present your argument and photography as you see fit.

Click to expand...

yes agree, my understanding of ladyboys is very limited, that was part of the reason for making the photographs, an attempt to get clearer understanding of the world of ladyboys in a sex worker world. The sex worker scene is of course a unique category of ladyboy even in Thailand, just as a 100% Thai ladies experiences would be different than a 100% Thai lady who also worked in the sex industry. The scenes world is different than the real Thai world.

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa

I have a few things to share with you and others. Before I do, I support your right to shoot the subject arcs you do and to post them on APUG, online, or in an art gallery.

Click to expand...

Thank you

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa
I don't support, however, the premise that your photography gifts your marginalized subjects with a voice.

I've now looked at a number of the Thai kathoey (literally, "lady-boy") photos you've made available -- but mostly on your web site, not the subscriber gallery (I don't yet hold a subscription). First, other contributors to this discussion have both eloquently and brusquely addressed some valid points I back plainly. I'll start with Stephen Frizza:

[So maybe this is the point at which someone sods the tiptoeing by stomping into this discussion sporting 20-eye, steel-tip Doc Martens ... leather finished of course in some girly colour like black. Or blue.]

Kathoey sex workers largely thrive on the traffic and largesse of Western men. Having spent time personally in Thailand (Bangkok and Phuket, largely), I know the sex tourism industry is huge and renown. Moreover, as a woman who shares a component of life experiences with kathoey -- whether they rely on sex work for income (or even validation), or do something else entirely for a living -- I can attest that this cycle and style of photography centres on a few key threads which step right up to the line of voyeurism (when not recklessly trouncing right over it).

Click to expand...

how would you define voyeurism? Would this photograph of Diane Arbus’s be voyeuristic?

http://www.sarahcheung.com/diane06.htm

This work partly inspired mine.

http://gerryyaum.blogspot.com/2008/09/ann-27-ladyboy-sex-worker-thailand-2008.html

http://www.gerryyaum.com/SW9.html

http://www.gerryyaum.com/SW8.html


I think that term voyeurism is a bit like the world pornography. It means different things to different folks.

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa
Were this my body, whether I worked in sex trade or not, I would feel vulnerable more by the guy holding the camera than the camera itself -- if not for the fact that he's in control, then also because it's happening in my personal space on his terms, not in his personal space on my terms.

Click to expand...

I think that this would apply better in the situations where I photographed 100% woman workers. I would always try to be as soft as possible to them because they did feel vulnerable as you mention so I tried to use that in the images but also keep the person comfortable in my presence (telling jokes, talking about stuff important to that person etc) of course I was not always successful. Many times in that world there is absolutely no comfort level or trust around a farang (Western) male.

As I mentioned earlier in about 25% of these ladyboy shoots sexual advances were made not by me but by the person I was shooting, so I think they were not feeling that vulnerable, I was the one who felt that way in those situations (grabbing hands and such). There were maybe 2 or 3 of the ladyboys out of the 20 who were shy and vulnerable and that talked very little. When I was in a situation where they were shy, that is the way I made the images, I did not try to make more overt photographs but concentrated on that vulnerability.

Another thing to consider is that many Ladyboys (in the sex industry) are not really shy in regards to farang men with a camera. I lost count on how many ladyboys told me they had made hardcore sex photographs and hardcore sex movies with western and Japanese men (I got the feeling it was a actual company that put the movies together). Do a search for Ladyboy in Google and you will see the results of those companies productions. What I found a bit different is that I was usually told this without asking during the shoot, it was sort of a resume thingy, it was like I was getting a update on their successes.

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa

He won't ever come closer to understanding by taking more pictures. And no amount of taking revealing shots will help other people understand me any better.

Only someone able to intimately comprehend and empathize can, in as little as one shot, grasp and convey to her or his audience where I, the subject, is coming from. That's the mark of a great documentarian.

Click to expand...

I disagree, maybe the understanding would not be that profound but you will continue to understand a little more and a little bit more. For example, I photographed ladyboys in 1996, 1999, 2003, 2007 and this year and I feel I learned a bit each time (the most this time). Of course my limited Thai also limits what we can talk about. Even if I was fluent I would also be limited in my understanding. To say thou that no amount of photography would improve a persons understanding is incorrect in my opinion.
Yes you have to empathize, you have to grasp intimately, but here is the thing! How do you do that? How do you get to that stage? I think you have to go in slow with a open mind, which is what I am trying to do. This is such a different world than mine is, a ladyboys sexuality is very different than mine. The only way to wade in and try to understand is through exposure (making photographs) and talking to ladyboys (that happens during the photographic process). I think you do not have to die to take a powerful picture of death (Robert Capa’s dying Spanish Soilder) You do not have to be dying of starvation to make a powerful photograph of famine (Salgado, Don McCullen). I think to make a powerful photograph of someone who is a ladyboy sex worker I have to learn, empathize and intimately comprehend. I agree with you on this point. The idea thou that you cannot get to that point by the process of making photographs seems 100% wrong to me.

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa

An important sidebar of disclosure: gerryyaum, it's in the way you're shooting your subjects which gets under my skin. I'm someone who shares a direct social-cultural kin with Thai kathoey: I'm transsexual.

Click to expand...

so your transexual but not Thai! I have met some farang men online who went to Thailand to have surgery and also who had relationships there because of the more relaxed atmosphere. It is a pleasure to meet you, I hope you will help me understand the transgender world better. I thought it was odd your written English was so good! ☺

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa


I came out at high school age, over half my lifetime ago. Because to survive in this world means I must stay deathly quiet about it to most people, I equivocated as this thread evolved before finally entering it with this solitary comment. Furthermore, I chose to post this under a different registry than my regular login. This is something I really didn't want to have to do, but I do so to maintain my reputation and my credibility here on APUG. I also do so to maintain my own privacy and personal boundary space both online and offline. It's a small, ever more permanent, more Googleable world.

Click to expand...

partly understand where your coming from. I have had several gay friends in my life and most all are in the closet in the Western world. I also did a bit of photography with transexual people here in Canada. One of the things I like best about Thailand is the relative acceptance Thais have in this regard.

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa

First, there is a token involved here. In your words, gerryyaum, "I just look at them as interesting people, with complex personalities some of whom are friends." They are "interesting" because you see them for their "sexual identity"

Click to expand...

yes probably true, because in other ways they are the same as me so I already understand that part so it is not that interesting to me. I guess I find the parts of them that are unique(sexual identity?) the things I am most interested in.

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa

first, which you find "fascinating". I have read in your words how you express a fixation on your subject's reasons from "chang[ing] from male to female or partly so," and this illustrates how you get stuck at the corporeal -- rather than the intellectual or spiritual -- in your subjects.

Click to expand...

yes agree with that, but that is also functional in nature. How the heck do you say COPOREAL OR SPIRITUAL in the Thai language? I sort of talk about what I can talk about with the subject. We talk about things like how old they were when they knew they were a ladyboy, how their families felt about it, how their friends felt about it. We talked about boyfriends and relationships about the surgeries they had about how they felt about being a ladyboy etc. The whole COPREAL or SPIRITUAL discussions are a bit to advanced for my Thai language abilities.

I would love thou to talk about these things with you thou, so I hope this conversation will continue here on the thread or in PMs (still need to look up the word Copreal in the dictionary thou).

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa

I argue that this isn't the right angle to be taking to convey their "voice", but this project is your work, and that's your call to make.

Click to expand...

yes you could be right here, more thought required on my part. I do thing thou that strong portraiture can be made in the the shooting situations I was involved in.

feeblegirlie said:

Sawadee kaa

From your life experience, and in the many years and dollars you've determinedly pursued this subject matter, it appears you remain stuck on the fixation of kathoey women for what they've done to take some control over their bodies and their lives, given their own set of social-economic barriers to make do.

Click to expand...

In 1996, I think I made about 4 ladyboy portraits outside a bar.
In 1999 I made maybe 10 point and shoot portraits outside a bar and a few on the street.

http://www.gerryyaum.com/P13.html
http://www.gerryyaum.com/P20.html

In 2003 I photographed 2 ladyboys, one was a sexual come on situation so I backed off and shot no more ladyboys that year.

In 2007 I think I shot 7 or 8 ladyboys in studio, that was balanced with an equal number of woman and almost an equal number of men.

http://www.gerryyaum.com/SW13.html

In 2008 I concentrated totally only ladyboys, 4 woman and 20 ladyboys. So I would not say I spent many years and dollars on a fixation, it sort of has been a growing interest over time. I had 2 weeks to make images this time so I decided to go in a newish direction.

I think the comment regarding making do is a bit naïve. I thought that way early on also. The situation for sex workers in the Western sex worker industry has a certain amount of choice. Ladyboys working the sex scene have alternatives ways to make do. In Thailand you will see ladyboys in all areas of society from working the local 7/11 to professional folk.

The word Kathoey is a word I generally avoid as it is considered impolite in the ladyboy world. I always refer to ladyboys as she or ladyboy, those terms are more respectfull in my experience.

A bit tired now, will finish this up tonight at work! Thanks for your input I have enjoyed this post very much, you have an insight that I obviously do not! It is bound to help the photography in the future!

See you later in Part 2

gery.. i think this thread is a great service to u. i have not gone through all the discussions, but through the big part, i see a very good points and criticism .. and even if some criticism feels a bit too emotional and on going to personal level, i still think some valuable and constructive points can be outlined.

the project u show here is difficult for full scale discusion so far, cause as i understand from u, it is only partly presented so far. i have to say, that, personally, this is not the way i built my own projects, but that doesnt mean that yours is wrong of course... unlike some posts that talk in the manner as though there is a good way and a bad way to build projects, showing examples of master and celebrated photographers that fall in concensus these days by definition of being "masters" and accapted part of photo-documentary history ... so that alone is not fair.. to say that "mary elen mark is better example", or diane arbus - well, as can be seen, it is not that sharp and clear when it comes to "respect", "voiyerism" etc etc ....

i would like to point out one thing though ...
we can see a docu-photography more or less the way u present - streightly... just show the subject ... this realsitic presentation is used in photography quite successfully for many years in various fields and subject matter (example, the realism of edward burtidky, or gorsky etc)... i do respect the artisitic values in this type of photography...
but from the other hand, there is a more complex or more charizmatic way to present things ... to play with them ... to play with motives, to play with situations, to be more personal, more sacrcastic, more dramatic, more alegoric etc etc (not neccessarly everything together of course)... here, one adds a new dimentions to the work (and body of work) compared to the plain presentation or expositzia (the simple classsic type exposition like in classic novels etc).

for example, in one of my current projects - "collage of israeli women faces", i do not necessarly present my sitters/models "realistically". i think it is not tat interesting, and i think i do nt want to get into the typical simple and one dimentional docu-photographic work ... what i do, is taking some motives, and building from my sitters a "personage". so, not biography, but while i do relate to their authentic power, it is more a mix of my sitter singularity that i shape during the project into something playfull, imaginary, sociologic and psycologic with actulia issues presented and discussed on the subliminal level ...
example:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
here, i take a friend, a very beautiful woman, who is actually a "bohema star", poet journalist and writter, and simply put her into this photographic situations.... quite imiidiatly it was clear, and even here on apug, where i have not described my project, a mamber knew to relate to the motive of "hollywood glorification", and besides the photographic qualities, the subliminal critics of the current social norms of "woman" "beauty" "woman example and identity" is clear ... i dont "glorify" with photoshop silky plastic style a model that doenst neccessarly knows to express a simple idea in two continuous sentences ... i glorify a woman whos beauty is inherent with her intelect and the other way around ... so i play with an idea, a bit poetically in style, and sometimes maybe even a bit alegorically etc ....

now, of course i dont say that u should do the same... im not sure i would do this if i were photographing project like yours ... but some playfulness, some shaping of the content, some voice etc might be concidered for the project, unless u want to stack to the plain realistic presentation...
by the way, this criticism of "one-dimintionality" of docu-photographic works applies not only to u, but to many images of those who considered as masters, and their images are taken sometimes as granted. i just feel, that sometimes, it is a little bit dull ....

Gerry, I looked at most of your pictures, on your site, and found the followings (IMO, of course):

1) You’re looking for something, and each year you get closer and closer, and maybe soon you’ll find it. You found the ideas, but not the message. So, there’s still some work to do, to built (or better said to discover) a more complex structure than an idea. The evolution I mentioned concerns the fact you dropped the white background of your studio, to get into their rooms, but now you have to get into their lives (you didn’t yet, but you are very close).

2) I very much appreciate your photography, including the street one, for its honesty: you do not use and abuse the people you photograph. Many big names of the photography did it, and I hate when I see such photographs. It is the reason that makes me, for example, to dislike Capa but love Cartier-Bresson (their work I mean). In regard with this criterion, I don’t find your work offensive at all, but as I said, very honest.

Note to APUGers: Plz, don’t develop on my comments on Capa and Bresson. It’s not the place here. Thanks!

3) Still something offends me when I look to your work, but not the photographs themselves (I like them), not your attitude as a photographer (I just said I like it too), not the fact you are posting them here (this site is not for employers, but for photographers - so, who don’t want to offend his employer should take care himself and not browse it at work, because he cannot bias us all with his employer's tastes). However, what offends me in your pictures is the life your subjects are living. And I suppose this offence is something you are looking for, it’s the idea behind your work, it’s its content. Well, this is a good thing, so congratulation for offending me this way! Still, don’t forget what I wrote at the 1st point here above, because you still haven’t offended me enough!

Well, these being said, I wish you good luck with this long project, and keep honest!