Warning: Graphic images - 1Dn Mark IIn jpeg exposure latitude

[PIXSurgeon]

...Just look at how EVERYOBODY wades and deflects the question by resorting to ALL SORTS of rationalizations and "half-assed-truths" that would potentially explain our CHILD's behaviour.

Once again: READ, LOOK, ANALYZE my question below. It has a RAT'S ASS to do with our children. It has to do with OURSELVES, it has to do with how WE (the PARENTS) would react in such moment. It has to do with our core value system (which is what, at the end of the day, models our behavior, our expectations, and ultimately our society).

If someone is brave, honest and transparent enough, they just have to answer and describe THEIR reaction, and not fantasize or rationalize medieval or Freud-ean pseudo-theories about our kids reaction...

You guys are beginning to slowly (and decisively) step on your own tongue...

...THIS is how I measure it the degree of "SANITY" (not artistic
excellence, which you probably got "confuzed" about, somewhere in
the discussion):

...Assume your four-years old stumbles accross an image like this,
and starts browsing the whole collection, and looks at the blood,
the scratches, etc., and suddenly you realize (because you did not
know) that he is looking at them...

My question to you: What would be your first, natural reaction?
What would you do? The answer to this question will reveal your
true value-system, your core-fabric...

I am ANXIOUSLY awaiting for you, Petteri, and anyone else around
here, to answer this question. All you need to be is HONEST and
TRANSPARENT, regardless of your answer.

Choose your "path"...

 

[rami]

...to expect (or event want me) to "forgive" this

so it is you!! at last you came! we have been waiting for more than 2000 years! and you showed up in the canon forum! it must mean something!

 

[PIXSurgeon]

"Is that blood on his face?"
"Yep."
"Why is he bleeding? Did someone hurt him?"
"No, I think he hurt himself."
"Why did he hurt himself?"
"I'm not sure. It could be he's sad or angry and wants everyone to
see how sad or angry he is. Maybe he feels that hurting himself is
the best way to show everyone how sad or angry he is. Sort of like
you do sometimes when you're angry and throw yourself on the floor
and scream and beat it with your fists."
"But I don't bleed!"
"No, and it's a good thing too. You shouldn't hurt yourself so bad
you bleed."

"Daddy, Daddy: I want to know what that's feel like... I want to bleed like him. It would be cool to show that to my friends... Whoa!"

And hgere goes Petteri's theory: "Windows has found an irrecoverable system error and must reboot now. Sorry for any inconveniences..."

Now, DO YOU (and all) get the picture?

And so on. You get the picture?

 

[rami]

"Daddy, Daddy: I want to know what that's feel like... I want to
bleed like him. It would be cool to show that to my friends...
Whoa!"

man, you need a doctor.

 

[PIXSurgeon]

"Daddy, Daddy: I want to know what that's feel like... I want to
bleed like him. It would be cool to show that to my friends...
Whoa!"

man, you need a doctor.

...You need a brain, bro. (to think trough about the implications of things...)

Happy shooting!

 

[Mark Smith145430]

"Daddy, Daddy: I want to know what that's feel like... I want to
bleed like him. It would be cool to show that to my friends...
Whoa!"

Sorry but that has to go down as one of the most stupid things I've ever heard.

Now, DO YOU (and all) get the picture?

You paint a very vivid one, but one I find very sad, not because you have a point (you don't or at least not the one you think you are making) but because you actually think you are acting in a civilised way (which you're not).

 

[Petteri Sulonen]

PIXSurgeon wrote:
[snip]

"Daddy, Daddy: I want to know what that's feel like... I want to
bleed like him. It would be cool to show that to my friends...
Whoa!"

Pix, kids don't work like that.

And hgere goes Petteri's theory: "Windows has found an
irrecoverable system error and must reboot now. Sorry for any
inconveniences..."

Now, DO YOU (and all) get the picture?

I get the picture that you don't know jack about what makes kids tick.

Petteri
--
[ http://www.prime-junta.net/ ]
[ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]

 

[Petteri Sulonen]

I don't have kids myself (yet), but my younger sister is eleven years younger than I am. I remember very well what she was like when she was four.

And no, Pix, kids don't cut themselves just because they saw some pictures on the Net. Kids cut themselves when they're suffering. (It's not that uncommon among teenagers, actually.)

Petteri
--
[ http://www.prime-junta.net/ ]
[ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]

 

[rami]

...You need a brain, bro. (to think trough about the implications
of things...)

Happy shooting!

That is a very inteligent way to deal with disagreement. you sound like a crazy religious freak that tries to scare people- I mean, seriously, you sould like this people that walk in the streets dressed all in white and think that they are some profit- you sould a better subject for photography than these freaks up there- just imagining you screaming this capital letter statements you made there- so will not be a good idea to "you need brain" others- even a brain can disfunction.

 

[Petteri Sulonen]

The "assume your four-year-old" bit that is.

Surely you, Pix, don't feel that only stuff appropriate for four-year-olds should be published or exhibited? Truly, I hope you don't.

Petteri
--
[ http://www.prime-junta.net/ ]
[ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]

 

[PIXSurgeon]

...stupid than this (you wrote):

"...I doubt if these photos would have any effect on a 4-year old, because the child probably wouldn't realize what he's looking at. Some bloody scratches. Big deal..."

Now, THAT is an idiotic assessment of today's children. In fact, I am not sure who is being more "childish": your underestimation of their perception / reasoning or... your poorly-put-together, fragile-as-dust argument.

ANY weel educated kid, today, knows that his body has and needs an important amount of blood, and it circulates ALL OVER his body. ANY well educated kid knows that blood is red and works INSIDE your body (not outside)... At least mine knows.

What you are suggesting is even more stupid, in my opinion (no pun intended).

Happy shooting!

 

[PIXSurgeon]

...and no one has really answered the question, in order to face him/herself in the mirror, and come to a final / valid conclusion.

There things in life that are ABSOLUTE, SACRED, UNQUESTIONABLE. And keeping your body's and life's integrity (which is one of the most precious gifts on this universe) is one of them.

So folks get it, some other don't, and many simply get lost in the wake of such simple and elemental things.

Still, my question is (and will remain) unanswered, because most folks here will simply have to swallow their words in order to reconcile their actual reaction, and their own words...

 

[Petteri Sulonen]

...and no one has really answered the question, in order to face
him/herself in the mirror, and come to a final / valid conclusion.

I gave it my best shot, but I don't know if there are any final conclusions to be reached.

There things in life that are ABSOLUTE, SACRED, UNQUESTIONABLE.

"Only Sith think in absolutes."

And
keeping your body's and life's integrity (which is one of the most
precious gifts on this universe) is one of them.

Sez who? You?

Let's see how consistent you are. Do you find that all of the following are ABSOLUTE, UNQUESTIONABLE violations of the SACRED?

• Breast implants
• Tattoos
• Earrings
• Piercings

...and let's not even get into smoking, drinking, and Kentucky Fried Chicken.

If you do not find some of these ABSOLUTE, UNQUESTIONABLE violations of the SACRED, would you please explain why, and how you reconcile this with your stated premise?

So folks get it, some other don't, and many simply get lost in the
wake of such simple and elemental things.

Which is kinda odd, if they are so simple and elemental.

Still, my question is (and will remain) unanswered, because most
folks here will simply have to swallow their words in order to
reconcile their actual reaction, and their own words...

Pix, you lost me here completely. What exactly are you saying? From where I'm at, you're the one dodging the questions, not me or anyone else.

Petteri
--
[ http://www.prime-junta.net/ ]
[ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]

 

[PIXSurgeon]

The "assume your four-year-old" bit that is.

Surely you, Pix, don't feel that only stuff appropriate for
four-year-olds should be published or exhibited? Truly, I hope you
don't.

...I know what is the answer to my question. I already know what 99% of the people would do.

The point is not the answer per se, but the extent to which anyone's actions here match his/her words.

Your question above reveals a fracture on your own value system. That is, because we are "adults", we do not have to inhibit content.. while if you deal with kids, other things are "not appropriate"...

WHAT IN THE WORLD makes you believe that just because your body grows older and your genitals appear covered by pubic hair, we can now "relax" and let go stuff that, in any case, continues to be in conflict with the very essence of our existence, and our own beings?

And this takes you to an ever harder question: HOW IN THE WORLD do you expect our wong to follow a clean, constructive path or reference when, on the other hand, we (as adults) undo what we have explained them as being "not appropriate"?

WTF is that fallacious, cynical reasoning? Should I really believe that you are Ok. with the content shown here and there is no problem is spreading it?

My last bit of hope...

 

[Mark Smith145430]

...stupid than this (you wrote):

"...I doubt if these photos would have any effect on a 4-year old,
because the child probably wouldn't realize what he's looking at.
Some bloody scratches. Big deal..."

Now, THAT is an idiotic assessment of today's children. In fact, I
am not sure who is being more "childish": your underestimation of
their perception / reasoning or... your poorly-put-together,
fragile-as-dust argument.

ANY weel educated kid, today, knows that his body has and needs an
important amount of blood, and it circulates ALL OVER his body. ANY
well educated kid knows that blood is red and works INSIDE your
body (not outside)... At least mine knows.

What has that to do with your argument?

What you are suggesting is even more stupid, in my opinion (no pun
intended).

have you lost the plot? where did I write that? talk about stupidity! not only do you not know what you are saying you don't know to whom you reply!!!
Go take a walk in the fresh air or something
Mark

 

[PIXSurgeon]

And
keeping your body's and life's integrity (which is one of the most
precious gifts on this universe) is one of them.

Sez who? You?

... I say it. ME, ME, ME. Ands if you want more "MEs", please, let's embrace my challenge and address the open audience as I proposed you. Let's gauge the temperature.

Let's see how consistent you are. Do you find that all of the
following are ABSOLUTE, UNQUESTIONABLE violations of the SACRED?

• Breast implants
• Tattoos
• Earrings
• Piercings

...and let's not even get into smoking, drinking, and Kentucky
Fried Chicken.

In essence, YES. The difference here is the degree of "constructiveness". We are, indeed, violating these principles, but the effects are less evident or the message sent "less destructive" (that's the difference). But, in any case, you are CORRECT, and we are also dealing with cultural left-overs.

If you do not find some of these ABSOLUTE, UNQUESTIONABLE
violations of the SACRED, would you please explain why, and how you
reconcile this with your stated premise?

Well, it is very simple: I do not have:

• Breast implants
• Tattoos
• Earrings
• Piercings

nor I get into get into smoking, drinking, and Kentucky, Fried Chicken, etc. All these our kids are seeing, and that's their reference (you should see their friends faces and drooling when they come and taste our home-made food which is so FREAKING RARE to have parents cooking at home around here... :- )

That it may later be shaken / broken / destroyed, it may... but it will not because of me or my wife (for sure). I will not carry the weight of such inmense lack of responsibility (that is, for a disfuntional core values system).

Which is kinda odd, if they are so simple and elemental.

...Because people take the basics for granted and... they just forget!

Pix, you lost me here completely. What exactly are you saying? From
where I'm at, you're the one dodging the questions, not me or
anyone else.

...Check my post, below...

Now, if you excuse me, a delicious lunch awaits me in our kitchen (courtesy of my wife) and the smell already calls for a "pause" here. I know it's a bit late here (1:55pm EST, Florida) but, in any case, see you after lunch!

Petteri
--
[ http://www.prime-junta.net/ ]
[ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]

 

[PIXSurgeon]

have you lost the plot? where did I write that?

Nowhere. You never wrote it, as I mistakenly mixed-and-screwed your name with someone else:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=20200488

So, yes, I will concede you that, in this case, I am responsible for the "stupidity".

Sorry! :-/

 

[Mark Smith145430]

have you lost the plot? where did I write that?

Nowhere. You never wrote it, as I mistakenly mixed-and-screwed your
name with someone else:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=20200488

So, yes, I will concede you that, in this case, I am responsible
for the "stupidity".

Sorry! :-/

Apology accepted.
relax man!
Mark
http://photo-utopia.blogspot.com/

 

[Mr Steve]

...stupid than this (you wrote):

"...I doubt if these photos would have any effect on a 4-year old,
because the child probably wouldn't realize what he's looking at.
Some bloody scratches. Big deal..."

Now, THAT is an idiotic assessment of today's children. In fact, I
am not sure who is being more "childish": your underestimation of
their perception / reasoning or... your poorly-put-together,
fragile-as-dust argument.

ANY weel educated kid, today, knows that his body has and needs an
important amount of blood, and it circulates ALL OVER his body. ANY
well educated kid knows that blood is red and works INSIDE your
body (not outside)... At least mine knows.

Hi Pix, I wrote the above, not Mark. Give credit where credit is due. I take your criticism as a compliment, considering the source. A child who reacts like I suggested may be a very bright and "educated" 4-year old, but just not "educated" about the absolute sanctity of human life and blood belonging inside the body. Kids often get scraped up daily, and they see bits of blood all the time.

Mr. Steve

 

[Petteri Sulonen]

The "assume your four-year-old" bit that is.

Surely you, Pix, don't feel that only stuff appropriate for
four-year-olds should be published or exhibited? Truly, I hope you
don't.

...I know what is the answer to my question. I already know what
99% of the people would do.

Dodging another question, I see.

The point is not the answer per se, but the extent to which
anyone's actions here match his/her words.

Your question above reveals a fracture on your own value system.
That is, because we are "adults", we do not have to inhibit
content.. while if you deal with kids, other things are "not
appropriate"...

Yes, I do feel that. As adults, we've built up ways of conceptualizing the world and dealing with it. Kids need help learning to deal with it. I don't so much feel that there are too many things that kids absolutely, incontrovertibly should not see, but I do feel that there are many things that kids need help dealing with if they do see them.

WHAT IN THE WORLD makes you believe that just because your body
grows older and your genitals appear covered by pubic hair, we can
now "relax" and let go stuff that, in any case, continues to be in
conflict with the very essence of our existence, and our own beings?

Because I think the very essence of our existence and our own being is a very hard thing to pin down, or disentangle from cultural norms, preferences, and habits.

And this takes you to an ever harder question: HOW IN THE WORLD do
you expect our wong to follow a clean, constructive path or
reference when, on the other hand, we (as adults) undo what we have
explained them as being "not appropriate"?

So, do you feel that everything that's appropriate for adults is also appropriate for kids?

What about sex, for example?

WTF is that fallacious, cynical reasoning? Should I really believe
that you are Ok. with the content shown here and there is no
problem is spreading it?

Yes, I'm OK with the content shown here and I believe there is no problem in spreading it.

However, I do feel that it would not be a good thing if four-year-olds came across it unsupervised on a regular basis.

To pick a concrete example, I can imagine taking my four-year-old to a hardcore punk rock concert, but I sure as hell wouldn't let them go to one on their own.

My last bit of hope...

me rolls eyes

Petteri
--
[ http://www.prime-junta.net/ ]
[ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]