The college course led to university where I studied photography in the art school and graduated with my BA Hons degree

I applaud you! Great story.

All of which is an entirely secondary issue to this thread and the only link is that I am still 100% sure that the reaction would have been entirely different and completely benign had I been a woman. That is evidence of the bias we have against men and children; society finds it very difficult to default to equate men with being caring and/or primary care gives especially when it comes to children. Consequently, a lone middle aged man with a camera at a fun fair will be viewed with suspicion and treated with hostility.

Isn’t it more to do with the fact most sexually motivated crime is committed by men?

I don’t agree with the reaction of the women btw but I think my point is more likely to be the reason they reacted as they did rather than any stereotypes of men not being caring or a primary carer.

Isn’t it more to do with the fact most sexually motivated crime is committed by men?

That’s been suggested before. Here’s my response.

Most sexual crime is committed by men BUT most men do not commit sexual crimes.

Being male is not the causal factor in those men who do commit these crimes, it’s something else entirely. Being male may be correlated, but is fundamentally not causal.

There are a disproportionate number of crimes committed by black men, but most black men do not commit crimes and those that do, do not commit them because they are black.

All Islamic fundamentalist acts of terror are committed by people purporting to be Muslims, but most Muslims do not commit acts of terror and those that do, do not commit them because they are Muslim.

When you falsely attribute one single characteristic as a causal rather than a correlated factor, you’re basically displaying ignorance and prejudice. It is precisely whey racial profiling is so wrong in the policing of a community.

“I care enough about truth, beauty and love to want to record and present this to the world.”

Why didn’t you just tell them that at the start? They’d have probably given you a cuddle…..

It reads to me that you’ve got your head so far up your own ‘artistic’ arse, you’d have been safe from a face punch, anyway.

f you’re in a uniform, you’re invisible.

I was taking some shots of the Hills one starry night, from a local common. Perfectly legal. Hi viz, tripod, the lot. Wasn’t long before the local rozzers drove by. And then back. And then again. I heard their nylon trews and plates of meat swishing through the long grass, and before long was presented with a torch in my face. They wanted to look at my pictures. had been reported as a potential burglar who was standing in the middle of a (public access) grassy field. Problem was that there were some residential houses some way off to the North. I showed them the (frankly so far rubbish) pics of my parked bike with some smudgey stars behind it. I think they were disappointed. I showed them to my website. They wished me well and the torch was removed from my arse face.

So much for hi-viz, it just made me more obvious. Which is why I use it for urban street-shots at night.

The best one was taking a pic of my own property. I got set up about 11:30pm in the street outside the gates, looking up at the full moon, framing the house in silhouette with the lit windows.

An unseen man lurched out of the darkness up some steps at the side of our boundary wall and made towards me in a threatening way. He called me a ‘fackin perv, woz you takin picz ov me avin a piss?’

I explained to him that no, even though he was micturating on my boundary, I had not seen him, I was merely taking a picture of my home. And had not even taken a picture yet as was ridely interrupted. He lurched semi-drunkenly around to look at the house.

‘I don’t believe yoo. Why would you take a picture of a fackin ‘ouse?’ You wanted to take a picture of me nob, you perv!’

‘Go away you silly man.’

He called me a C word a few times then made to point at me to make it stick, but he forgot he was carrying a carrier bag, which then swung and threw him off balance , then did an about face and walked of mumbling to himself.

Pissed up my wall. C…

Anyhow, pleased to join the gang. I’m your local cat-burgling cockwatcher, should anyone wish to hire me for functions or art installations.

Its a sad reflection on society where people see someone in public taking photographs with a “proper” camera and instantly think they’re a child molester / abuser.
Replace the DSLR with a phone and nobody would likely bat an eyelid.
Do the idiots doing the accusing really think that a genuine paedophile is going to be wandering around a fair with the most conspicuous piece of equipment possible to take pictures? No, they’d want to blend in, not stand out. Camera phones are great for this sort of thing, they certainly work a treat down at the local nudist beaches. 😉

I’ve recently been on a photography course and pretty much the same problems were discussed there. Very much a case of use your discretion and be open and honest if questioned. Let them see what you’ve been photographing.

Sadly these days the press like to big up things like this and the hard of thinking take it to heart and believe that in every bush, around every corner a child catcher is waiting to abduct their children. By all means be aware, but try and see beyond the trash that the press want you to believe and think for yourself.

no one is arguing its a great and rational response just that is not a response due to mens role as carers* as you suggest just suggesting the real reason – even if that is a logical leap/fallacy

* whihc is part of your oppressed men view of the world

evidence of the bias we have against men and children; society finds it very difficult to default to equate men with being caring and/or primary care gives especially when it comes to children

its not its evidence of the fact that men are more likely to sexually abuse your kid than a woman so you will get a different response when a woman does it than when a man does it. You can still argue its oppression and sexist[ IMHO its just stupid] if you like but at least you will have grasped why they do it rather than fly off on a tangent rather than DEFEND YOUR STATEMENT

When you falsely attribute one single characteristic as a causal rather than a correlated factor, you’re basically displaying ignorance and prejudice.

Indeed you are but it is was not motivated by the one you claimed

Trouble is Geetee – your wish for “mens rights” is down to a complete lack of understanding of the issues and a worrying lack of basic knowledge – hence your ill-informed rant about parental leave recently and others.

If you want to go on about stuff like this you need to do some reading and learning

There are a disproportionate number of crimes committed by black men, but most black men do not commit crimes and those that do, do not commit them because they are black.

All Islamic fundamentalist acts of terror are committed by people purporting to be Muslims, but most Muslims do not commit acts of terror and those that do, do not commit them because they are Muslim.

And yet there’s huge areas of the country where black men or Muslims will be treated with suspicion and fear simply for being black, Muslim or both. Just as a middle age bloke taking pictures surrounded by children will be.

I am absolutely not saying this is right but it does happen and is the reason you were treated as you were. Ignorance and fear.

Try being a white male of english / protestant descent living in Scotland – I think you will find everything is my fault. any time someone is or has been oppressed its me or my ilk doing it

sorry chaps

Try being a white male of english / protestant descent

SHUDDERS 😉

Try being a white male of english / protestant descent living in Scotland – I think you will find everything is my fault is set up around me, us WASPs have exploited and oppressed others for generations.

FTFY

On second thoughts, it’s off topic and I really can’t be bothered.

I really can’t be bothered.

What you really mean is that you have been double teamed by Junkyard and TJ on left wing shit and you know you have no chance. 🙂

gobuchal – see what I mean – apparently its all my fault. Even you agree

*sobs quietly*

I’d love to meet TJ and Junky – I think they should recruit us into one of those Heineken adverts.

Whatever their reputation may or may not be, I believe that they’re almost certainly good people motivated by passionate beliefs, which coincidentally is precisely what I think about Jeremy Corbyn (and I’m giving very serious thought to voting for him).

Ta Geetee.

I would happily meet you as for TJ Never say never again

I was taking some photos in Bath yesterday, just checking through them and to my horror I noticed there was a child in a pushchair in this one!
Should I hand myself in to the police for reeducation?

What I find most interesting in this thread is people complaining about the geetee’s comparisons then come up with their own comparisons like this:

because that is nothing like taking general shots of something which just happen to have people in. Taking that to the logical conclusion it would be against the law (not particularly picking on you here JY, not originally your comparison, this was just where I found it being expanded in a potentially illegal direction).

Meanwhile your trip to the shops is only comparable to LH in the same way geetee’s candid photography is comparable to professional journos if it is timed and on a racetrack. Because the absence of official accreditation / hi-viz / flak jacket is the only difference between what geetee is doing and the professionals he cites – fundamentally they are doing exactly the same thing. So if you think one is OK and the other isn’t then it really would be useful to define what the difference is which leads to that.

There does seem to be a bit of an element of “soul stealing” in some of the comments. The idea of photoshopping porn seems a particularly ludicrous argument – sure maybe you can, but it seems an incredibly pointless thing to do to photoshop one stranger’s face in place of another and even more pointless to use proper camera kit to do so when a phone would do a perfectly adequate job (I note the suggestion is even made of using a phone). Yet nobody even notices all the pics being taken on phones any more – I’m betting those women all had lots of pics of strangers’ kids on their phones! All sorts of hypocrisy going on.

FWIW I don’t even own any “proper” camera kit, and it’s years since I’ve taken a photo on anything other than my phone, so I don’t have any particular personal investment here – nobody seems bothered by using a phone to take pics.

I just realised! Every weekend for the past 6 or so years, I’ve been taking photos of 8-14 year old boys… I got moaned at once in all that time (in Leigh Park, my home turf from my yoof) and nothing else but thanks. I must look trustworthy, me.

it would be against the law

which one – possibly harassment but the paps do it? genuine q btw

fundamentally they are doing exactly the same thing.

what like i am driving and LH is driving ??? it is the same if you only look at one factor but, as you note with me and LH, there are many differences if you look and make a proper comparison. Do the same with the photographer.

So if you think one is OK and the other isn’t then it really would be useful to define what the difference is which leads to that

my view is that if you take candid photos then you must expect that you will get a reaction from time time to time. If you are not a professional photographer, and obviously so, then you must also expect a reaction.
One can take candid photos for a multitude of reasons – ranging from being a voyeur ( NOT ACCUSING THE OP OF THIS AT ALL) to its the only way to record a historically significant incident to you will get money for a breasts out photo of a royal to you enjoy it and its all innocent and above board [ as in the OPS case]. They are all the same if we ignore the differences.

In essence i dont think they should have reacted as they did, some form of reaction at some point is inevitable if you do what the OP does[ and he does it very well from the photos I have seen] and his comparison ranging from rape to comparison to photos of historical significance is unhelpful and OTT.

as you note with me and LH, there are many differences if you look and make a proper comparison.

You’ve got longer hair….. beyond that I’m struggling a bit. 😆