MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Attacked because of a keyword - what can he do?  (Read 2036 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 17, 2021, 04:46 »
0
I woke up this morning with a facebook message about a Shutterstock batch of mine.  The series is of a black woman with african braided hair, which I call "afro hair" in the description of the images (because the model called it that way).  She is doing her hair looking into a mirror, so I cannot just ignore her hair in the description.
These images had reasonably good sales for 3 years already, and now I get this message on facebook :

  • Please change your labeling of your photography on shutter stock as it is it is not even kinda racist.  You referring to a woman of color as having a afro hairstyle is completely disgusting. I spend hours looking for photos. and can't find them because of your complete race base labeling. I am attempting to convey the problem without anger.but there is not excuse. your whole photo shoot has not one afro. and to refer any women of color as default having an afro is completely racist. there is no way its a mislabel because afros are a thing specifically. thats the equivalent of me calling you from Belgium an asian.  for your benefit please update this soon it will support your pocket and creative directors looking through hours of shittly named photos.  I will check in on your progress in a few days before reaching out to shutterstock direct.


The message is from a person in North Carolina, and he obviously knows I'm not American.
I'm not asking how to reply - I already replied that I don't understand his point, because to me, to the model and to my Ghanese friends, this hairdo is called an afro hairstyle.
My reply was very friendly and polite, as I don't want somebody to get nasty on my FB business page or anywhere else.


But I do have 2 questions :


To the American Microstockers :  is calling this an "afro hairstyle" offending??  Here in Belgium, even between black people, it is not, but maybe in American culture it is ???
To all :  if he contacts Shutterstock about it, what do you expect their reaction would be?  Do nothing?  Delete the images?  Tell me to change the wording?  ??







« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2021, 04:59 »
+12
Why are you even worried about this?

Just ignore it and block that dipshit you are just being trolled.

However if your model does not have an afro hair style as she has braided hair then I'd remove the keywords as it is misleading.  You might want to consider corn rows.

And no afro hair style is not offensive.

As to shitterstock they won't give a sh-it


MxR

« Reply #2 on: February 17, 2021, 05:06 »
+8
Block this stupid people

« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2021, 05:11 »
0
Why are you even worried about this?


Well, I prefer discussing this with him through FB messaging and keep the discussion away from my studio clients.  If he keeps on being angry after my friendly reply, I will block him, but my first try is a nice and peaceful one.


Thanks for your suggestion about the corn rows - I looked them up, but that's not quite what my model's hair looks like.
Here's one of the shots of this series :


Would you call that afro hairstyle ? 

« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2021, 05:16 »
+2
Braids or plaits also braided, however they can be described as an afro with braids


https://therighthairstyles.com/30-best-black-braided-hairst/

As to your dipshit terminally insulted facebook contact they obviously didn't check shitterstocks latest "afro" offerings as it includes white women/caucasians

I would just send him a thank you message and advise them the key words have now been amended.

Then block the idiot.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2021, 05:21 by Bad Robot »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2021, 05:20 »
+8
I tend to think of 'afro hair' (as in an 'afro' hairdo) as being more 'natural', i.e. not braided, but I can't see how your photo could be either 'wrong' or 'offensive'.
Don't feed the troll. They're just winding you up. Some people have nothing else to do.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2021, 05:32 by ShadySue »

« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2021, 05:32 »
+2
Glad to hear I did not use officially offending words!  The model is from the UK, not American, so I wasn't sure if there were cultural differences on this topic.  If he writes again, I'll tell him there's a difference between an incorrect and a racist word, and if he's searching for incorrect keywords at Shutterstock, he'll find billions of them ...

« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2021, 06:06 »
+3
Glad to hear I did not use officially offending words!  The model is from the UK, not American, so I wasn't sure if there were cultural differences on this topic.  If he writes again, I'll tell him there's a difference between an incorrect and a racist word, and if he's searching for incorrect keywords at Shutterstock, he'll find billions of them ...

There is nothing offensive about using the word afro.

Afterall if someone is "afro-caribbean" you use the word "afro"






« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2021, 06:23 »
+1
Also agree you should just ignore it and move on. This kind of performative wokeness hurts no one as much as it hurts the people doing it. In fact it is often (but by no means always) a ploy by bad faith actors to make legitimate concerns seem frivolous.

My portfolio contains a large amount of diverse content and I can tell you that a sizeable percentage of buyers still use the term Afro American (about 20% of the people using black), so it is perfectly valid term for buyers with or without the hair style. Buyers should be using it in combination with natural and hairstyle and maybe some NOT clauses if they want to isolate just Afro hair (not sure if Shutterstock search uses boolean phrases, if not thats on them not you).

« Reply #9 on: February 17, 2021, 06:30 »
+1
Why are you even worried about this?


Well, I prefer discussing this with him through FB messaging and keep the discussion away from my studio clients.  If he keeps on being angry after my friendly reply, I will block him, but my first try is a nice and peaceful one.


Thanks for your suggestion about the corn rows - I looked them up, but that's not quite what my model's hair looks like.
Here's one of the shots of this series :


Would you call that afro hairstyle ?
That is not an afro hairstyle, those are braids

« Reply #10 on: February 17, 2021, 06:32 »
+3
I don't think the person who complained was offended by the word "afro", like some seem to think. She was offended by the misuse of  it and thought it would imply that all african women had "afro" hair, when afro is the term for a certain hairstyle:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro

The woman in that picture is not having afro hair. She is having braided hair.

It's sometimes a bit hard to understand what one person finds offensive and why, especially if it doesn't affect you. If someone mislabeled german hair as "blond hair" or whatever, I wouldn't feel offended by the possible implicaton that all German women had blonde hair, even though I don't, but people of ethnic groups that have suffered from discrimation are more sensitive to these things.

I think more problematic here is really that you tagged the picture with wrong keywords as there is no afro hair to be seen there. However, if you used the keywords "afro american woman" and "braided hair", at least on Shutterstock, the search for "afro hair" would have lead to the same results, so it doesn't really seem to matter?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2021, 10:54 by Firn »

« Reply #11 on: February 17, 2021, 06:38 »
+3
Probably any change you do it will be not be good for this person. He want to see you as a racist and never admit that the racist is him.
The only way to get "acceptable" keywords for him is to ask him to do this work by himself. Delegate this task. If he considere that "blond, hair, lesbian, chinese..." is more appropriated go for it. A logical discussion is not possible with idiots.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #12 on: February 17, 2021, 06:41 »
+1

« Reply #13 on: February 17, 2021, 06:43 »
0
I think more problematic here is really that you tagged the picture with wrong keywords as there is no afro hair to be seen there. However, if you used the keywords "afro american woman" and "braided hair", at least on Shutterstock, the search for "afro hair" would have lead to the same results, so it doesn't really seem to matter?


Great, that's what I should have replied to him! 

« Reply #14 on: February 17, 2021, 06:47 »
+7
You melted some snowflakes. Good job.
What you should do? Block the snowflake and forget about it.

« Reply #15 on: February 17, 2021, 10:00 »
+4
I agree that that isn't what I'd expect if I searched on "afro", as I think in the US that typically refers to the sort of natural big hair style of the 70's.  But I wouldn't have been concerned about it enough to write.

« Reply #16 on: February 17, 2021, 11:07 »
+6
Ignore this nonsense.  Just some cancel-culture keyboard warrior.

I know quite a few people with afro-hair.  They all refer to their hair as "my 'fro" or "my afro".

Its descriptive.  There's a trend these days to ban accurate, descriptive words.  Don't fall for it.


« Reply #17 on: February 17, 2021, 11:49 »
+3
Also agree you should just ignore it and move on. This kind of performative wokeness hurts no one as much as it hurts the people doing it. In fact it is often (but by no means always) a ploy by bad faith actors to make legitimate concerns seem frivolous.

My portfolio contains a large amount of diverse content and I can tell you that a sizeable percentage of buyers still use the term Afro American (about 20% of the people using black), so it is perfectly valid term for buyers with or without the hair style. Buyers should be using it in combination with natural and hairstyle and maybe some NOT clauses if they want to isolate just Afro hair (not sure if Shutterstock search uses boolean phrases, if not thats on them not you).

"Performative wokeness".  Perfect.   Do you have copyright on this, or can I start using it?

« Reply #18 on: February 17, 2021, 12:22 »
+4
Ignore this nonsense.  Just some cancel-culture keyboard warrior.

I know quite a few people with afro-hair.  They all refer to their hair as "my 'fro" or "my afro".

Its descriptive.  There's a trend these days to ban accurate, descriptive words.  Don't fall for it.

The only real issue is that the woman doesn't have afro hair in the photo. I would argue the keyword is still valid outside of the hair as people search for Afro American (and buyers almost never use hyphens or quotation marks).

The weird thing is the person jumping to "you're a racist" from Anyka getting the name of a hairstyle wrong.


« Reply #19 on: February 17, 2021, 12:29 »
+2
Also agree you should just ignore it and move on. This kind of performative wokeness hurts no one as much as it hurts the people doing it. In fact it is often (but by no means always) a ploy by bad faith actors to make legitimate concerns seem frivolous.

My portfolio contains a large amount of diverse content and I can tell you that a sizeable percentage of buyers still use the term Afro American (about 20% of the people using black), so it is perfectly valid term for buyers with or without the hair style. Buyers should be using it in combination with natural and hairstyle and maybe some NOT clauses if they want to isolate just Afro hair (not sure if Shutterstock search uses boolean phrases, if not thats on them not you).

"Performative wokeness".  Perfect.   Do you have copyright on this, or can I start using it?

Fill your boots up. "tokenism" and "dumb-dumb left" are there for you too if you want to use them. This kind of nonsense is a distraction from actual necessary concrete or systemic change and makes movements easy to mock, straw man or co-opt by people who just learn all the correct vocabulary and do nothing concrete.

« Reply #20 on: February 17, 2021, 14:11 »
0
Quote
The weird thing is the person jumping to "you're a racist" from Anyka getting the name of a hairstyle wrong.

absolutely


btw,
what are the expectations of creative directors for 0,1 ?
why not offer them 50% for doing the proper keywording

« Reply #21 on: February 17, 2021, 16:41 »
0
Also agree you should just ignore it and move on. This kind of performative wokeness hurts no one as much as it hurts the people doing it. In fact it is often (but by no means always) a ploy by bad faith actors to make legitimate concerns seem frivolous.

My portfolio contains a large amount of diverse content and I can tell you that a sizeable percentage of buyers still use the term Afro American (about 20% of the people using black), so it is perfectly valid term for buyers with or without the hair style. Buyers should be using it in combination with natural and hairstyle and maybe some NOT clauses if they want to isolate just Afro hair (not sure if Shutterstock search uses boolean phrases, if not thats on them not you).

"Performative wokeness".  Perfect.   Do you have copyright on this, or can I start using it?

Fill your boots up. "tokenism" and "dumb-dumb left" are there for you too if you want to use them. This kind of nonsense is a distraction from actual necessary concrete or systemic change and makes movements easy to mock, straw man or co-opt by people who just learn all the correct vocabulary and do nothing concrete.

Exactly.  This sort of play-acting just makes everything worse.  I associate with people who really don't know the real, complicated history of the issue - or much history at all, really.

« Reply #22 on: February 17, 2021, 16:46 »
+6
This brouhaha makes me glad I mostly shoot critters.

Not a single wild burro I've ever photographed has come back to complain that I didn't call him/her a wild donkey.   :D
« Last Edit: February 17, 2021, 16:48 by marthamarks »

« Reply #23 on: February 17, 2021, 17:06 »
+1
This brouhaha makes me glad I mostly shoot critters.

Not a single wild burro I've ever photographed has come back to complain that I didn't call him/her a wild donkey.   :D


Haha, this one made my day!

« Reply #24 on: February 17, 2021, 17:41 »
+5
... I mostly shoot critters
and you haven't heard from PETA?
 
« Last Edit: February 17, 2021, 17:43 by cascoly »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
4925 Views
Last post July 19, 2007, 16:26
by maunger
9 Replies
4503 Views
Last post September 03, 2008, 20:14
by hoi ha
11 Replies
3338 Views
Last post August 30, 2013, 07:16
by ShazamImages
0 Replies
1924 Views
Last post October 21, 2014, 08:20
by grace
17 Replies
1366 Views
Last post October 13, 2020, 03:08
by dino

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle