Reading mode: Light Dark

ADULT CONTENT: SF Pride + SHOOT from the hip (LONG)

Go to last post
michaelthorne said:
My 2 boys are exposed with all this and I cant do anything about
it. But gays have all the rights in the world? Makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...
It's called equality, something Bush wants to get rid of by the way. Gays have all the rights? Are you living in the same world? We're fighting just to be treated as equals. And if you raise your boys to think for themselves, then they should be fine. It's never going to be "cool" to be gay, it's not a trend... it's who you are and if your boys aren't gay, they're not gonna "become" gay, trust me.

You either are, or your not. So chill.
 
First of all, great pictures...captured the moment well.

Second of all, since were on the subject of two of the same on an island...if you watch "Jurasic Park" you'll learn that through the caos theory those people stuck on the island would evolve to be able to produce young. After all, everything in movies is real right?

Personally I say live and let live...if you want to kiss a man or a women - go right ahead. As far as taking pictures of it - I think it's ok since camera's are to be expected at any parade no matter what the subject.
 
I agree, he's missing the point. Put any two of the same sex on an island and they won't be able to reproduce. Doesn't take a scientist to figure that out.

--
Mikee
http://www.michaelcatacutan.com
 
To answer all my critics; simple point. The natural argument of logic. Two men can not reproduce life just as two women can't.

Let's just suppose there is a God. Wouldn't he be confused if he created two males or two females only and commanded them to be fruitful and replenish the earth... impossible assignment. Fact is God didn't create two same sex beings. You and I are all here because of natural laws of reproduction.

Let's just for the sake of arguemt say we all turn gay tomorrow. What would happen to life on earth. Eventually, we would all die.

Believe what you like ... say what you like. The fact is, homosexuality is not natural. It's sickening to think that a one man would want to insert his male reproductive organ is an orafice created to release human feces. Its' filthy.

No matter how you look at it... that's perverse.

Again... GAME, SET, & MATCH

http://www.rolcc.tv

Hope to see you Sunday :) or you can watch the broadcast.
 
Doug Ridgway said:
At least he hasn't stooped to taking photos of guys named Hank that
take self-portraits with a champaigne-colored camera! From what I
hear, they're the worst of the bunch! Cheers!
Click to expand...
--

Good lord, let's hope he never stoops THAT LOW!

"Champaign colored," huh? Hmmm...no wonder I bought this camera. I love that stuff!
  • Hank....proud to be "one of the worst!" :)
  • The Hankster
http://www.pbase.com/hankster65/galleries

 
And, the gay guyz or girls on the island will probably adopt the kid the straight couple had and didn't want anymore...unless the island is in Florida...
 
I find the assumption "natural=right" to be a little too simplicistic.

Is Internet "natural"? Is digital photography? Is cancer natural? What can be defined natural after all? Different behaviours are generated to help races survive just in case something really unexpected happens. Homosexuality is surely not useful for survival of the single individual, but from a social point of view I'm not 100% convinced humanity will be better without homosexuals.

Ancient philosophers used to have sex with both men and women but the scripts of Aristoteles (to name an example) were still useful not too long ago to help discover the flow of blood inside veins (the Aristotelic assumption of "if it's there there must be a reason" was used in that case).

I also believe that if gays want to be recognized as "normal" they should avoid walking around naked with funny things tied to their intimate parts :)

Simone

http://www.simonenavarra.it
 
Interesting shots.... these events tend to be colorful (understatement!).

Michael you should try and shoot at the Sydney Mardi Gras, looks similar, maybe a bit more "outrageous" (mind you it is telecast on national TV) and technically challenging as it is held at night.

These events tend to have a great party atmosphere.... (independent of sexuality!).

----
Nick

PS - Originally from Sydney now living in the USA
Michael Soo said:
If you are below 21 years old, please um...you can read through
this post but don't click the last link.... ;-)

So, how do you shoot a bunch of naked people or two men kissing
without them beating you up? Shoot from the hip, of course!!!

These are taken from San Francisco Pride Parade earlier today.
Please DO NOT judge my composition and technicality from the photos
as MOST of them are under extreme lightning conditions and ONLY ONE
photo out of all of these went through any post processing. (I'm
getting really lazy these days)

In addition to that, quite a few of these photographs were shot
from the hip. Good thing I'm a snooker and pool player, I estimate
distance, angles and especially AIM very well and some of the shots
actually came out better than I EVER thought possible!!!

Well, let's look at the post processed photo first, shall we? This
is a shot of what looks like a homeless man, really fantastic
facial characteristic. So, I had to post-process this one.



Now for a few other samples that went through no post processing
whatsoever, no USM, no levels, nothing. Just normal RAW to JPEG
convertion is all. The next photo is the very first set of riders
at 10:30am when the parade started. This is just a regular pan
shot. Nothing special.



The next image is dedicated for the women in this forum...although
I can't guarantee that he is single OR even straight. LOL!!



Old man in Chinatown playing Er-Hu. Gave him a dollar and he was
glad to pose for me. No, he wasn't winking. I think he has some
problem with his right eye. Nice guy though.



This funny gentleman climbed up a pretty tall postbox and was
yelling out at the top of his lungs about the Commander in Chief
being very "happy" to send young men to die in Iraq...



A stall selling S&M and leather stuff. I manual focused to blur
out the entire image to take this shot. I like it a lot for its
abstract feel, don't ask me why.



This woman works for MAC..she isn't wearing anything
except...paints, sparkling paints...



The next two photos are the best "photography on the hip" I've did
all day. I really like it! Shot it from the hip cuz I was only
using my Canon 28-135mm...can't get far enough and didn't want to
look obvious that I'm photographing.





ALMOST got a photo of these two gentlemen kissing...my reflex just
ain't fast enough, unfortunately...



This is their dog...



The rest of the images are here. WARNING, nudity!
http://www.soocool.com/gallery/photo.php?photo=2214&u=5954~0
  • MS


http://forum.soocool.com - SF Bay Area Photography Club for field
trips
http://www.soocool.com - Explore life beyond the norms
Click to expand...
--
Nick
 
The argument isn't about reproduction, it's about bias against gays. It's a result of some of the ignorant comments that were made by certain people objecting to the pictures in this thread.

Sexual attraction exists in nature in order for the species to reproduce. I find no argument there. On that point, we agree...just like we agree that Canon makes a fine camera.

But what you can't seem to grasp is that gay people are just like you, in that we have attractions to others and in most cases, hope to find our one true love with whom we'll share our lives. The difference is, and it's the only difference, for some biological reason, our attraction is to the same gender.

I think Pride events are great, but they do bring out the exhibitionists, and people sometimes point to that as an example of gays. Sorry, but the great majority of us have no interest in parading around with our asses hanging out of leather pants. But for those who do, enjoy ! :)

And please don't get into plumbing issues. What men do to men very often happens between men and women.

If you can explain to me why you're straight and why I'm gay, in medical terms, then proceed to convince me that I somehow chose to be this way, then it'll be game, set, match.

Until then, stop judging us; you're way underqualified.

--
Jay

http://members3.clubphoto.com/jay229854/guest-1.phtml
 
kennebunkport said:
I find it interesting that in a recent post, someone was commenting
on how much the Dreblers seem like a close group; then I read this
divisive thread.
Click to expand...
I disagree.....the neighborhood is fine.

I said my digital rebel neighborhood was a dysfuntional neighborhood. Looks pretty normal to me here. With all neighborhoods you will have gays vs. straights, good vs. evil, right vs. wrongs. etc. vs etc. If we were all the same it would be an aweful boring world.

I "dont" agree with homosexuality and i'm not a homophobe. I have known lots of gay people, i dont like what they do but its not my job to judge them either. I wouldnt want that job.

I do agree it is a sin in Gods eyes, I also agree I am a sinner myself, we are all sinners. To say you are without sin is a sin. I have a personal relationship with God, its my relationship, not anyone elses....all mine. I really dont want to be a part of any religion, i'm not a religious man but i do know my sins are forgiven...past, present and future.

As for you shots Michael, sticking to photography here......all i will say is as usual you take great pics.

As Mr. "Fred" Rogers always said "Its a beautiful day in the neighborhood".
R.I.P. Mr. Rogers
 
interesting and engaging. Not like some of the other responses.

A person's sexual orientation in no means suggests they can not be beneficial to a society. As a matter of fact, there are many great contributions made to humanity by homosexuals.

I speak from a spiritual context as I'm a Christian and the canon of scripture teaches clearly that homosexuality is "un-natural".

My first post to this thread was not wise and has caused a flurry of responses. However, I still hold to the belief that homosexuality is a violation of the natural laws of human reproduction. Within the confines of this argument alone; natural = right.
Simone M. Navarra said:
I find the assumption "natural=right" to be a little too simplicistic.

Is Internet "natural"? Is digital photography? Is cancer natural?
What can be defined natural after all? Different behaviours are
generated to help races survive just in case something really
unexpected happens. Homosexuality is surely not useful for survival
of the single individual, but from a social point of view I'm not
100% convinced humanity will be better without homosexuals.

Ancient philosophers used to have sex with both men and women but
the scripts of Aristoteles (to name an example) were still useful
not too long ago to help discover the flow of blood inside veins
(the Aristotelic assumption of "if it's there there must be a
reason" was used in that case).

I also believe that if gays want to be recognized as "normal" they
should avoid walking around naked with funny things tied to their
intimate parts :)

Simone

http://www.simonenavarra.it
Click to expand...
--

 
so one straight man and one straight woman on a deserted island without anyone else.

so they have a bunch of babies.

then what? INCEST?

ok: so they have incest? so their lack of genetic diversity causes deformities, eventually the whole bunch are dead beyond the 3rd generation.

end of story.
Mjack1957 said:
since it's soooo very hard for you to comprehend.

Man + woman = possibility of producing another human life.

Man + Man = 0 possibility of ever producing another human life.

Woman + woman = 0 possibility of ever producing another human life.

Now unless you're extremely obtuse or suffering from brain damage,
you CAN understand my argument. It's a natural argument.

End of discussion. Point well made. GAME, SET, MATCH :)

--

Click to expand...
--
fish pics at http://fish.mirrorz.com

300D owners: please help propogate these links on your sig

300D tips and russian hack at http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tricks.html

300D FAQ at http://www.marius.org/fom-serve/cache/3.html
 
we just forget how to act? We as humans know what right. We have to make ourselves be what we are not intended to be or do.

Gays try and look like the opposite sex most of the time. Why? Its because they like the opposite sex thats why.

I would say to those who feel the need to be immoral and gay need to grow up. Not the ones who know right from wrong.
JohnNYC said:
Keep up with the times Mjack........its not 1957
anymore.........its the year 2000!!!

Ro1
Mjack1957 said:
here's something for you to ponder.

Now I know this has nothing to do with photography and I'm hesitant
to post it. I'm trying to stay with photography and not get into
moral values here.

But suppose you were to take two people who were homosexuals and
place them on a deserted island for a scientific experiment. Two
males or females... it wouldn't matter. All things being equal and
provided there was plenty of food and adequate shelter, what would
happen over the process of time?

Would the island repopulate or die? Would it thrive and live? You
be the judge "sweetchops".

Using just plain old common sense, the natural conclusion of the
experiment should tell you something.

--

Click to expand...
--
'Say CHEESE'
Click to expand...
 
I'm not the judge. Only God can do that. To judge means to arrive at a foregone conclusion without any supporting evidence or factual data.

Can you please point out to me where in any of my previous posts I've done that. And by the way, even if anal copulation is performed between a man and a woman it still violates "the natural use" of the human body. Again, my views are from a Christian standpoint and are based on the dictates of scripture. I don't expect to have an over whelming swell of support from the forum. My views are my own and I'm strong enough and secure enough in them not to care of others disagree.
kennebunkport said:
The argument isn't about reproduction, it's about bias against
gays. It's a result of some of the ignorant comments that were
made by certain people objecting to the pictures in this thread.

Sexual attraction exists in nature in order for the species to
reproduce. I find no argument there. On that point, we
agree...just like we agree that Canon makes a fine camera.

But what you can't seem to grasp is that gay people are just like
you, in that we have attractions to others and in most cases, hope
to find our one true love with whom we'll share our lives. The
difference is, and it's the only difference, for some biological
reason, our attraction is to the same gender.

I think Pride events are great, but they do bring out the
exhibitionists, and people sometimes point to that as an example of
gays. Sorry, but the great majority of us have no interest in
parading around with our asses hanging out of leather pants. But
for those who do, enjoy ! :)

And please don't get into plumbing issues. What men do to men very
often happens between men and women.

If you can explain to me why you're straight and why I'm gay, in
medical terms, then proceed to convince me that I somehow chose to
be this way, then it'll be game, set, match.

Until then, stop judging us; you're way underqualified.

--
Jay

http://members3.clubphoto.com/jay229854/guest-1.phtml
Click to expand...
--

 
with the secretive nature of the photography. You say you shot from the hip and very much tried to be covert in your photography. You even brag about getting images this way, comparing it to envisioning shots while playing pool.

That bothers me more than the content of the photos, even though these guys are walking around with their peckers hanging out. I don't understand why they felt the need to strip naked to march for gay rights, but they had the courage of their convictions.

It's a little strange to read your defending these photos' merits AFTER the fact when you apparently didn't believe strongly enough in the merit of taking them to be upfront about it in the first place.

If I have an image or a cause I don't believe in enough to be upfront in capturing photos, I don't press the shutter button.

I trust that you are a moral and decent photographer but this gallery does little to convey that.
 
You're absolutely right about one thing, the level of your ignorance is just off the charts. You think that being gay is unatural and that I'm choosing to be gay? Choosing to have less rights and choosing to live a life where I cannot hold my partners hand in public unless I want to be stared at? Choosing to not get benefits of a mariage, choosing to not expand my family history by not being able to have kids... choosing to have to go through all the drama of having to tell my parents... etc. if you really think that gay people choose to have to go through all that and more, you, i'm sorry to say, are the ignorant one.

--
Mikee
http://www.michaelcatacutan.com
 
kennebunkport said:
I think Pride events are great, but they do bring out the
exhibitionists, and people sometimes point to that as an example of
gays. Sorry, but the great majority of us have no interest in
parading around with our asses hanging out of leather pants. But
for those who do, enjoy ! :)
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more... I've always said that if I could go somewhere to protest that "Not all gay men are queer as folk" without offending those that are, I would.

--
Mikee
http://www.michaelcatacutan.com
 
Can anyone explain to me why it is OK to post pictures of naked gay man and it is a big sin (on this and other forums) to include a picture of a naked female model. Are the rules different if they apply to homosexuals?

Michael
 
Why is it that the left world wants everyone to be tolerant until we who do not like something speak out. It is unnatural to us and many of us find it utterly discusting. We have a right to call it as we see it without being called names or told to grow up.

All that Michaelthorne is saying is that this should be done indoors. And since when is public nudity allowed anyway?

G
Mikee said:
Mikee said:
My 2 boys are exposed with all this and I cant do anything about
it. But gays have all the rights in the world? Makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...
It's called equality, something Bush wants to get rid of by the
way. Gays have all the rights? Are you living in the same world?
We're fighting just to be treated as equals. And if you raise your
boys to think for themselves, then they should be fine. It's never
going to be "cool" to be gay, it's not a trend... it's who you are
and if your boys aren't gay, they're not gonna "become" gay, trust
me.

You either are, or your not. So chill.
Click to expand...
 
Yes because its descrimation if you dont let them but immoral if they are straight.
Go figure?
mfurman said:
Can anyone explain to me why it is OK to post pictures of naked gay
man and it is a big sin (on this and other forums) to include a
picture of a naked female model. Are the rules different if they
apply to homosexuals?

Michael
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top