Dreamstime thinks all photographers are male?

lisafx

Premium Member

« Reply #25 on: May 09, 2011, 18:10 »

#link

Quote from: ShadySue on May 09, 2011, 17:32

A couple of weeks ago, someone seemed astonished to see me take a photo with a long lens, "Oh, I thought that was your husband's camera and you were carrying it for him!"
(I'd love a camera sherpa, though!)

OMG. LOL! My husband is my camera/lighting sherpa Cheesy

I know what you mean though. When I used to do weddings, my husband and I would show up at the church early to connect with the minister, church staff, etc., and most of the time they assumed he was the photographer.


	Ignore \| Logged

madelaide

Premium Member

« Reply #26 on: May 09, 2011, 18:16 »

#link

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 09, 2011, 10:45

Sexist! What's wrong with she/he?

There is nothing wrong, but I find it completely unnecessary. This is just one of those "politically correct" things that are in fact useless to prevent any type of prejudice.


	Ignore \| Logged

redfox

New Member

« Reply #27 on: May 10, 2011, 05:42 »

#link

Wow, I didn't realise how many people would post replies on this topic... I thought it was just a funny mistake I found but looks like I've started a decent discussion...


	Ignore \| Logged

BaldricksTrousers

« Reply #28 on: May 10, 2011, 06:53 »

#link

Quote from: ShadySue on May 09, 2011, 17:32

As one of the 10%, what's wrong with s/he in writing, which translates as 'he or she' in speech?
A couple of weeks ago, someone seemed astonished to see me take a photo with a long lens, "Oh, I thought that was your husband's camera and you were carrying it for him!"
(I'd love a camera sherpa, though!)

In my opinion, s/he is not a word, it's ugly, it's unpronounceable, it's indecisive and it's lazy (since there is usually a more subtle way of avoiding the issue by rewording the sentence, there certainly was with the example at the beginning).


	Ignore \| Logged

Megastock

« Reply #29 on: May 10, 2011, 16:59 »

#link

Quote from: michaeldb on May 09, 2011, 15:30

Quote from: Megastock on May 09, 2011, 11:56

Pretty easy to reword to avoid the issue:

"The photographer is required to disable the file permanently from all other places where it is available for sale."

I find that offensive. Cry

It assumes that all submitters are photographers. I am an illustrator, I never stoop to submiting mere photos. (Photography is for people who want to make pictures but who lack skill, talent, and imagination.)

I say we illustrators should sue Dreamstime and lobby Congress to pass laws to protect us from image-discrimination.

You're in luck - Dreamstime is already one step ahead

No need to involve Congress - the new 1 and 3 year extended licenses have updated text:

"The Contributor will be required to disable the file permanently from all other places where he or she may sell it, as soon as possible after the sale occured, but no longer than 72 hours."


	Ignore \| Logged

lisafx

Premium Member

« Reply #30 on: May 10, 2011, 17:27 »

#link

Quote from: Megastock on May 10, 2011, 16:59

You're in luck - Dreamstime is already one step ahead

As usual, they are super responsive to contributor concerns. In this case I think it was a non-issue though.


	Ignore \| Logged

michaeldb

« Reply #31 on: May 10, 2011, 22:49 »

#link

Quote from: lisafx on May 10, 2011, 17:27

Quote from: Megastock on May 10, 2011, 16:59

You're in luck - Dreamstime is already one step ahead

As usual, they are super responsive to contributor concerns. In this case I think it was a non-issue though.

Wow, a happy ending! I love happy endings. Cheesy


	Ignore \| Logged

Microstock Posts

« Reply #32 on: May 11, 2011, 00:19 »

#link

Quote from: lisafx on May 10, 2011, 17:27

Quote from: Megastock on May 10, 2011, 16:59

You're in luck - Dreamstime is already one step ahead

As usual, they are super responsive to contributor concerns. In this case I think it was a non-issue though.

Yes, credit where credit is due. Out of the agencies, they do seem to evaluate contributors needs on a regular basis and I have the utmost respect for Serban entering the forums there and probably reading here. It's a good way of getting an idea of the mood on particular issues. Ok I have to stop now, it feels unnatural giving praise to an agency and I'm starting to feel queasy.


	Ignore \| Logged

fotografer

Premium Member

« Reply #33 on: May 11, 2011, 02:30 »

#link

I would personally much rather be called he than he/she simply because a sentence doesn't read right with he/she. It is correct english to use he if you don't know what sex person you are talking about.


	Ignore \| Logged

anonymous

« Reply #34 on: May 11, 2011, 08:06 »

#link

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 09, 2011, 09:39

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on May 09, 2011, 09:25

I've seen a lot of female photographers and videographers at art exhibition openings and live gigs lately...

besides being usually hot - I've noticed that too - maybe they are smarter than us and manage to get passes for few but interesting assignments, not the boring kind

Wow! Rampant sexism!!!

What's wrong with being "sexy"? (from movie)


	Ignore \| Logged

csproductions

« Reply #35 on: May 13, 2011, 06:41 »

#link

Quote from: Megastock on May 09, 2011, 11:56

Pretty easy to reword to avoid the issue:

"The photographer is required to disable the file permanently from all other places where it is available for sale."

Yeah.... but where's the fun in that??? Tongue


	Ignore \| Logged

etienjones

« Reply #36 on: May 13, 2011, 07:04 »

#link

Back to the original theme

I have noticed that in the last few years female actresses no longer refer to themselves as actresses but as actors . . . . . when did this change? Has it always been like that and I didn't notice?


	Ignore \| Logged

redfox

New Member

« Reply #37 on: May 15, 2011, 02:41 »

#link

Quote from: etienjones on May 13, 2011, 07:04

I think the word actor is gender neutral..but I think you are right that it is becoming more common for females to be called actors


	Ignore \| Logged

BaldricksTrousers

« Reply #38 on: May 15, 2011, 03:14 »

#link

Quote from: redfox on May 15, 2011, 02:41

Quote from: etienjones on May 13, 2011, 07:04

I think the word actor is gender neutral..but I think you are right that it is becoming more common for females to be called actors

It's really rather funny, isn't it? On he/she some people object to "he" being used as gender-neutral because it is sexist, but actresses are rejecting the female specific term for themselves - also on the grounds of sexism - and adopting the term for males.

Authoresses have also rejected the sexist suffix and become authors, but I feel reasonably confident that a female actor would feel slighted if she was referred to as a "screen god" but would delight in being a "screen goddess".

Isn't language fun?


	Ignore \| Logged

Microstock Posts

« Reply #39 on: May 15, 2011, 14:05 »

#link

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 15, 2011, 03:14

Quote from: redfox on May 15, 2011, 02:41

Quote from: etienjones on May 13, 2011, 07:04

I think the word actor is gender neutral..but I think you are right that it is becoming more common for females to be called actors

Yes with English being one of the funnier ones. I live in Bali now and I'm pretty fluent in Indonesian. I really like using it as it's pretty logical and for day to day conversation you can say what you want to say using very few words, often just using one word is enough. Just think of all the money people save on their phone bills. The word they have for him and her is genderless, they just say dia, pronounced deea. Also the word Goddess doesn't exist and neither does landlady, landladies are called landlords too and they don't have actors or actresses and authors or authoresses, they just say stars and writers.


	Ignore \| Logged

Pages: 1 [2]

« previous next »

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors

Topic: Dreamstime thinks all photographers are male?

Microstockgroup Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results