Melissa Lynnette wrote:
I call an Italian!  But only if his mother makes gnocchi.

You don't want an Italian man! They're whiny momma's boys!

*runs and hides*

I'm probably going to get my ass chewed for this post. Does it make a difference before you Italian men start grilling me if I tell you I'm Italian!? Lol...

Edwiina wrote:
After running around london ive constantly being told "you know, you will only get work part time because of your skin tone" "black models dont get much work" "its really hard for a black model" I finally got signed to Agency X (which i wont name). First thing they told me was that i was gonna be a part time model because im black and its not goin to be easy...

so what?  it isn't the agency fault, they book per client demand.  models are primarily utilized as product and service messengers to draw in highly targeted vertical customers, not just something used for creating pictures.  you don't fit with their clients.  they would probably say the same thing to a short, fat bald guy too.  it has nothing to do with color, it has everything to do with product or service identification that reaches the highest cume.  it's bottom line, nothing else.

the sooner everyone realizes that's how and why models are booked, the sooner everyone will realize why everyone is discriminated against in one form or another.

--face reality

TXPhotog wrote:

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You should go look at a magazine rack today and then come back and we can contiue the thought.

Have YOU looked at the magazine rack today?  Honestly?  All of it?  If not, don't tell me how often I have to look.  I do it quite enough, thank you.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I dont think it is me who is being intellectually honest here.

I agree, but I'm surprised to see you admit it.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Any data is skewed to or for the person or organization who is gathering it for whatever reason.

So what is the reason for the "skewing" in the newmodels.com study, and what direction is it skewed?  How do you know?

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I am speaking about the fashion ondustry mags, which is what I thought we were all talking about,

So "Jet" is suddenly a fashion industry magazine?  When did that happen?  Maybe you're right, I need to check out the mag racks again.

No, that's not what you were referring to, or you wouldn't have specified excluding a magazine that would have been excluded anyway based on content.


Last time I was in a Barnes and Noble it was in New York City, in the fashion district.  Two weeks ago.  But I'm comforatble that the local stores carry a representative sample of what is on the market.  Hell, I can even get Italian Vogue here off the rack.


Why thank you very much.  You now admit that they should be included if the count is to be accurate.

Again, I HAVE DONE THAT.  I AM VERY MUCH AWARE - far more than you are - OF THE OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE TO MODELS BY RACE.

You continue to tell me to do it again, simply because you don't like the answer.  Sorry, doesn't wash.

Look Tex, your the kind of person that will never see the problems of race in the magazine industry. If you can sit there and write that you have looked at a magazine rack lately and you see a fair distribution of race across the rack then your just kidding yourself and being dishonest in your arguement. You can leave Jet in or out it wont make much difference in the equation. That you think you know more about the fashion industry than me is your belief. How we view the issue of race in large part depends on where we live and are raised. I was raised in the Northeast and in the UK. You I assume were raised in TX or you choose to live there. A state where a black man was dragged to his death for being black, Two different cultures. And before you say it it doesnt matter if they were tried and found guilty, it just wouldnt happen in the northeast any longer we have grown past that part of the problem. I dont think you are more aware of anything than me quite the opposite really. We have Italian Vogue here as well it doest mean you see what is right in front of your eyes, it seems to me that you wont see is more like it.
As for skewed data, why collect it unless you wish to make a point,your point or theirs. Therefore it must be skewed if only by the simple way in which the data was collected.
Can you tell me how,who,where and when this data that you hold up as the answer to the issue was raised collected and sorted?
I find most of what you have written here to be an ignorant,blind useless, defense of racist standards. You dont so that leaves each of us in the same place in which we started, you in Texas and me in Ct.

Rossi Photography wrote:

You don't want an Italian man! They're whiny momma's boys!

*runs and hides*

I'm probably going to get my ass chewed for this post. Does it make a difference before you Italian men start grilling me if I tell you I'm Italian!? Lol...

But....but....I want gnocchi!!  ::Tear!::

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Look Tex, your the kind of person that will never see the problems of race in the magazine industry. If you can sit there and write that you have looked at a magazine rack lately and you see a fair distribution of race across the rack then your just kidding yourself and being dishonest in your arguement. You can leave Jet in or out it wont make much difference in the equation.

True, one magazine will not make much difference.  So many mags, so little time.  But whole classes of magazines, of which Jet is one, which cater to minority readers, is a different matter entirely.  You want them excluded, which buttresses your claimed position.  It's an inconvenient fact that such magazines exist, and provide opportunity to black and other minority models, when you want to complain about claimed lack of opportunity.  Again, let's be honest, shall we?  You don't get to pick and choose the data you want to consider.  It's a big market out there.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
That you think you know more about the fashion industry than me is your belief.

Well, yes, actually it is.  I can back it up with good experience, reason and research.  Every time I mention that, you ignore it and make the same claims based on no research at all, and your experience in the industry seems not to be very great.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
How we view the issue of race in large part depends on where we live and are raised. I was raised in the Northeast and in the UK. You I assume were raised in TX or you choose to live there. A state where a black man was dragged to his death for being black, Two different cultures. And before you say it it doesnt matter if they were tried and found guilty, it just wouldnt happen in the northeast any longer we have grown past that part of the problem. I dont think you are more aware of anything than me quite the opposite really.

The strongest contributor to prejudice is ignorance.  And it comes in many forms. One of them happens when someone looks at a person's address and makes unwarranted assumptions about them.  Like you just did.

Yes, I choose to live in Texas.  I've been living here a whole 9 months now (this time), although I also travel a good deal.  I have also lived and worked in British Columbia (where I grew up - famous hotbed of racist radicalism there, I'm sure you are going to tell me), in California, Ohio, Denver, Tokyo, several countries in the Far East and Europe, and most recently, working in the fashion industry in New York City for 5+ years.  But I'm certain none of that matters, since I now have a Texas address, so you get to make unfair, ignorant, biased statements about me based on where I live.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
We have Italian Vogue here as well

How wonderful!! See, we have so much in common!  We must get together and do lunch!!!

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
It doest mean you see what is right in front of your eyes, it seems to me that you wont see is more like it.

Rather, I won't see what you want me to see, because it isn't true.  And claiming it (with NO EVIDENCE) over and over again doesn't make it true.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
As for skewed data, why collect it unless you wish to make a point,your point or theirs. Therefore it must be skewed if only by the simple way in which the data was collected.

This is about as biased and unreasonable a statement as I have seen.  It says, in effect, that the sum total of all research ever done anywhere by anyone is meaningless and should be disregarded.  It says that all of human knowledge based on research is wrong.  It denies the entire foundation of The Enlightenment and all of the work which has gone on since.

All to make a point about bias.  Unreal!!!!!

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Can you tell me how,who,where and when this data that you hold up as the answer to the issue was raised collected and sorted?

Yes, I can.  I can tell you exactly why, when, where, and what was done with the answer.  But since it is you who are so all-fired anxious to tell us that the study is invalid, please inform us of why.  And no fair claiming it's invalid because all research is invalid.  That's bullshit.  Tell us specifically why THIS study, which you have stated is wrong, is invalid.  It was your claim, now you justify it.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I find most of what you have written here to be an ignorant,blind useless, defense of racist standards.

I haven't defended any standards, except those of scholarship, which you have attacked.  It is not racist to try to find the truth, and to use real data to do it, no matter how much you argue to the contrary.

I understand your discomfort with data.  You have things you really, seriously, deep down want to believe, and you absolutely will not admit to the possibility that they can be proven wrong.  So you reject any research, any study, any data a priori without knowing anything at all about it, just so you won't have to deal with the indignity of information that contradicts your biases.

And that is the root cause of bias and prejudice:  deliberate ignorance and rejection of truth.  You exemplify the very thing you claim to be working against.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You dont so that leaves each of us in the same place in which we started, you in Texas and me in Ct.

Uh, no.  You didn't start in CT, and no matter how much you want to stuff me in that box, I didn't start in Texas.

Emotive Photography wrote:
I am a wedding photographer in addition to fashion.  I am as white as a glass of milk.  I have this to say on this silly subject; 

I have had many people ask me about shooting their wedding.  Once they found I was white they (being African American) decided to go with the Afican American photographer.  This has happened 7 times now.  I do NOT think they are racist for doing this, no more than I am a racist if I shoot a white wedding and NO not Billy Idol!

I have shot 3 black models, and only 3.  Part of this reason is that in Houston, TX there are not many black models, and those who are out there shoot with black photographers.  I feel it is a comfort thing, and a commonality thing more than a race thing.  I wish there were more opportunities to shoot black models, I would relish the opportunity.

I shot many black weddings outside the Atlantic City area. Never a question of what color I was. The only thing considered was the quality of my work opposed to others.

FKVPhotoGraphics wrote:
I shot many black weddings outside the Atlantic City area. Never a question of what color I was. The only thing considered was the quality of my work opposed to others.

So, what you're saying is that you're a hit man? And a skilled one to boot? And they didn't care what color you were as long as you got the job done?

I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Seriously. This thread is making me giggle now, uncontrollably I might add. Brian Diaz, can you please shut this shit down now? Please. Please. Please. Please. Please. Please. Please. Please. Please. Please. Please. Please. Please. Webspinner? Mhana? Anybody? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? Anybody? Something D-O-O economics. Voo Doo economics? Is that I dream of Jeannie I hear playing in the back ground?

Man this is too surreal. Like a carousel you can't ever get off. Simon Lebon had a lyric about in the "Reflex", didn't he?

Dag.

FemmeArt wrote:
Do photographers discriminate against black models?

the industry is racist without argument -- discriminates across the board based on the perceived biases of the applicable audience. i don't believe photographers in general could reasonably be labelled as racist

Alana Skye wrote:
holleration for education!!!!

That's just too priceless not to repeat.

TXPhotog wrote:

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Look Tex, your the kind of person that will never see the problems of race in the magazine industry. If you can sit there and write that you have looked at a magazine rack lately and you see a fair distribution of race across the rack then your just kidding yourself and being dishonest in your arguement. You can leave Jet in or out it wont make much difference in the equation.

True, one magazine will not make much difference.  So many mags, so little time.  But whole classes of magazines, of which Jet is one, which cater to minority readers, is a different matter entirely.  You want them excluded, which buttresses your claimed position.  It's an inconvenient fact that such magazines exist, and provide opportunity to black and other minority models, when you want to complain about claimed lack of opportunity.  Again, let's be honest, shall we?  You don't get to pick and choose the data you want to consider.  It's a big market out there.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
That you think you know more about the fashion industry than me is your belief.

Well, yes, actually it is.  I can back it up with good experience, reason and research.  Every time I mention that, you ignore it and make the same claims based on no research at all, and your experience in the industry seems not to be very great.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
How we view the issue of race in large part depends on where we live and are raised. I was raised in the Northeast and in the UK. You I assume were raised in TX or you choose to live there. A state where a black man was dragged to his death for being black, Two different cultures. And before you say it it doesnt matter if they were tried and found guilty, it just wouldnt happen in the northeast any longer we have grown past that part of the problem. I dont think you are more aware of anything than me quite the opposite really.

The strongest contributor to prejudice is ignorance.  And it comes in many forms. One of them happens when someone looks at a person's address and makes unwarranted assumptions about them.  Like you just did.

Yes, I choose to live in Texas.  I've been living here a whole 9 months now (this time), although I also travel a good deal.  I have also lived and worked in British Columbia (where I grew up - famous hotbed of racist radicalism there, I'm sure you are going to tell me), in California, Ohio, Denver, Tokyo, several countries in the Far East and Europe, and most recently, working in the fashion industry in New York City for 5+ years.  But I'm certain none of that matters, since I now have a Texas address, so you get to make unfair, ignorant, biased statements about me based on where I live.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
We have Italian Vogue here as well

How wonderful!! See, we have so much in common!  We must get together and do lunch!!!

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
It doest mean you see what is right in front of your eyes, it seems to me that you wont see is more like it.

Rather, I won't see what you want me to see, because it isn't true.  And claiming it (with NO EVIDENCE) over and over again doesn't make it true.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
As for skewed data, why collect it unless you wish to make a point,your point or theirs. Therefore it must be skewed if only by the simple way in which the data was collected.

This is about as biased and unreasonable a statement as I have seen.  It says, in effect, that the sum total of all research ever done anywhere by anyone is meaningless and should be disregarded.  It says that all of human knowledge based on research is wrong.  It denies the entire foundation of The Enlightenment and all of the work which has gone on since.

All to make a point about bias.  Unreal!!!!!

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Can you tell me how,who,where and when this data that you hold up as the answer to the issue was raised collected and sorted?

Yes, I can.  I can tell you exactly why, when, where, and what was done with the answer.  But since it is you who are so all-fired anxious to tell us that the study is invalid, please inform us of why.  And no fair claiming it's invalid because all research is invalid.  That's bullshit.  Tell us specifically why THIS study, which you have stated is wrong, is invalid.  It was your claim, now you justify it.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I find most of what you have written here to be an ignorant,blind useless, defense of racist standards.

I haven't defended any standards, except those of scholarship, which you have attacked.  It is not racist to try to find the truth, and to use real data to do it, no matter how much you argue to the contrary.

I understand your discomfort with data.  You have things you really, seriously, deep down want to believe, and you absolutely will not admit to the possibility that they can be proven wrong.  So you reject any research, any study, any data a priori without knowing anything at all about it, just so you won't have to deal with the indignity of information that contradicts your biases.

And that is the root cause of bias and prejudice:  deliberate ignorance and rejection of truth.  You exemplify the very thing you claim to be working against.


Uh, no.  You didn't start in CT, and no matter how much you want to stuff me in that box, I didn't start in Texas.

I think this post was about the fashion modeling industry so no need to confirm that except to you so, If you look at a Jet magazine you will see that "Black" fashion and style play a large part in it.
You claim to have worked in some model agency "one of the oldest" for some period of time on your bio, you dont say which or for how long. You leave it open to interpetation. That is your basis for this deep understanding of fashion? oK.
I shot tests for Ford Robert Black for a time in AZ sooo?
I said you were raised in Tx OR choose to live there, I dont see your point or any mistake here,you did choose to live there right? And you are living there right? So your point here is what? Doesnt seem too ignorant to me how about you Tx? I think it is spot on myself.
I did start in Ct that is where I was born and between there and Cardiff Wales is where I grew up so I dont understand your point there either,could you explain it to me? I have traveled alot as well Europe,England,Wales Ireland,Scotland,Russia,Indonesia,South America,Africa the Middle East and British Coloumbia as well.( I was the person who helped install and aligned the red light cameras in several cities up there). While giving me a great understanding of people from different places and allowing me to watch some really great GP racing I dont see its use in this debate other than to try and impress people with your limited travel plans. "Most" people gain a deeper understanding of others by travel, dont you think?
So Ok tell us/me what was done and how and who and in what way and what type of data was collected.
You say you can so put up or. Data invalid no, skewed yes. All data is skewed by the type of question asked, the persons demographic asked,the time/place the question is asked ie whats going on in peoples lives at that time(like war) and the way the questions are asked. This does not make it false but it is skewed to give the answer or outlook needed to prove or disprove someones point of view. You and others may not see it this way, but your eyesight is in question already so. I did not say it was wrong I said it was skewed, I look at the magazine rack everyday and what I see is white faces looking back at me for the most part, when I open up the pages what do I see? White faces for the most part. Ok so I go to another section or a different store and what so I see? The same. So no matter what your data says it is right in front of my eyes what the truth is. You can use data I will use my eyes and as I said it leaves us both where we started.
You dont understand anything at all about me, you dont know me. I am perfectly at ease with data. I am so at ease with it that I am able to see it and around it to gain a proper view of the subject. The view you take is very much like our current administrations, look the data says they have WMD's,just look at the data. I use data to gain perspective I wont live or die by it. Take your average lens test by the mfg's. That will give you all you need to know about someones data. I dont want you to see anything Tx. Really I dont. Your at the age as you say where you cant be bothered so dont be.
You said:
"You have things you really, seriously, deep down want to believe, and you absolutely will not admit to the possibility that they can be proven wrong.  So you reject any research, any study, any data a priori without knowing anything at all about it, just so you won't have to deal with the indignity of information that contradicts your biases". What is it that I want to belive? That there are more whites in magazines than blacks? oK you got me. The rest of that paragraph is nonsense and reall only applies to yourself it seems. It is not racist to try and find the truth I absolutely agree with this. It is racist in this instance to deny something that is right in front of your eyes should you care to look. You dont think someone could find a set of data to say the exact opposite of yours? Please.
"And that my son is the root cause of bias and prejudice:  deliberate ignorance and rejection of truth".  You exemplify the very thing you claim to be working against.
Next.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
As a Black and White mixx I have had more racisum directed at me from blacks than whites. Except when it came to their daughters, and then everyone kind of came together on this issue.

So you kinda get both barrels! That really sucks. But I can kinda relate to it, I'm a 2 meter tall guy with tattoos, with strange black clothing, so I'm bound to draw looks on me... the black people fear me because I'm a strange whitey, and the white people fear me because they think I'm a potential murderer, satanist, or whatever... of course, I could chose to not wear strange clothing and live a "normal" life, but I shouldn't have to...

As for the daughters, lol, I think all parents are the same in that regard, almost no one is ever good enough

Hey, heads up, "mixed" guys look more interesting most of the time, I'm sure the chicks dig that, at least most ladies I know do! That's a big plus! Maybe it makes up somewhat for the other intolerant a-holes!

Beach Photography wrote:
I've never dated a black woman. I've never shot a black model. Racist? nope.

Don't knock it till you tried it! Once you go black you don't want to come back!

TXPhotog wrote:

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Look Tex, your the kind of person that will never see the problems of race in the magazine industry. If you can sit there and write that you have looked at a magazine rack lately and you see a fair distribution of race across the rack then your just kidding yourself and being dishonest in your arguement. You can leave Jet in or out it wont make much difference in the equation.

True, one magazine will not make much difference.  So many mags, so little time.  But whole classes of magazines, of which Jet is one, which cater to minority readers, is a different matter entirely.  You want them excluded, which buttresses your claimed position.  It's an inconvenient fact that such magazines exist, and provide opportunity to black and other minority models, when you want to complain about claimed lack of opportunity.  Again, let's be honest, shall we?  You don't get to pick and choose the data you want to consider.  It's a big market out there.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
That you think you know more about the fashion industry than me is your belief.

Well, yes, actually it is.  I can back it up with good experience, reason and research.  Every time I mention that, you ignore it and make the same claims based on no research at all, and your experience in the industry seems not to be very great.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
How we view the issue of race in large part depends on where we live and are raised. I was raised in the Northeast and in the UK. You I assume were raised in TX or you choose to live there. A state where a black man was dragged to his death for being black, Two different cultures. And before you say it it doesnt matter if they were tried and found guilty, it just wouldnt happen in the northeast any longer we have grown past that part of the problem. I dont think you are more aware of anything than me quite the opposite really.

The strongest contributor to prejudice is ignorance.  And it comes in many forms. One of them happens when someone looks at a person's address and makes unwarranted assumptions about them.  Like you just did.

Yes, I choose to live in Texas.  I've been living here a whole 9 months now (this time), although I also travel a good deal.  I have also lived and worked in British Columbia (where I grew up - famous hotbed of racist radicalism there, I'm sure you are going to tell me), in California, Ohio, Denver, Tokyo, several countries in the Far East and Europe, and most recently, working in the fashion industry in New York City for 5+ years.  But I'm certain none of that matters, since I now have a Texas address, so you get to make unfair, ignorant, biased statements about me based on where I live.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
We have Italian Vogue here as well

How wonderful!! See, we have so much in common!  We must get together and do lunch!!!

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
It doest mean you see what is right in front of your eyes, it seems to me that you wont see is more like it.

Rather, I won't see what you want me to see, because it isn't true.  And claiming it (with NO EVIDENCE) over and over again doesn't make it true.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
As for skewed data, why collect it unless you wish to make a point,your point or theirs. Therefore it must be skewed if only by the simple way in which the data was collected.

This is about as biased and unreasonable a statement as I have seen.  It says, in effect, that the sum total of all research ever done anywhere by anyone is meaningless and should be disregarded.  It says that all of human knowledge based on research is wrong.  It denies the entire foundation of The Enlightenment and all of the work which has gone on since.

All to make a point about bias.  Unreal!!!!!

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Can you tell me how,who,where and when this data that you hold up as the answer to the issue was raised collected and sorted?

Yes, I can.  I can tell you exactly why, when, where, and what was done with the answer.  But since it is you who are so all-fired anxious to tell us that the study is invalid, please inform us of why.  And no fair claiming it's invalid because all research is invalid.  That's bullshit.  Tell us specifically why THIS study, which you have stated is wrong, is invalid.  It was your claim, now you justify it.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I find most of what you have written here to be an ignorant,blind useless, defense of racist standards.

I haven't defended any standards, except those of scholarship, which you have attacked.  It is not racist to try to find the truth, and to use real data to do it, no matter how much you argue to the contrary.

I understand your discomfort with data.  You have things you really, seriously, deep down want to believe, and you absolutely will not admit to the possibility that they can be proven wrong.  So you reject any research, any study, any data a priori without knowing anything at all about it, just so you won't have to deal with the indignity of information that contradicts your biases.

And that is the root cause of bias and prejudice:  deliberate ignorance and rejection of truth.  You exemplify the very thing you claim to be working against.


Uh, no.  You didn't start in CT, and no matter how much you want to stuff me in that box, I didn't start in Texas.

Tx, I'm curious about something.  Where do the websites that indicate minorities
get more work then their numbers in the general population.  I don't doubt
you know what you're speaking of but last I check the magazine racks, magazines
like Elle, Vogue and other fashion rags had precious few Black or minority
models unless you count other. (semi-private joke) I think sometimes 'experts'
tell us things and we accept it as a fact but where do they get their data from?
Is it correct?  How did they gather their information?  Personally I think that fashion magazines know it won't matter if they mostly use White models to showcase their designs and products and because most of their viewers are White
they may tend to show mostly White models like Jet shows mostly Black people
but Jet is a poor example.  It is a tiny magazine and doesn't have any where near
the power and wide readership of most magazines.  Again I'm no expert on the fashion industry but I won't just take as fact what some experts claim as fact
about a industry that seems to offer few real chances for Black and minority
people. I was looking at several agency websites recently and I counted their
Black models  most had less then ten.

Skehrkrow wrote:

So you kinda get both barrels! That really sucks. But I can kinda relate to it, I'm a 2 meter tall guy with tattoos, with strange black clothing, so I'm bound to draw looks on me... the black people fear me because I'm a strange whitey, and the white people fear me because they think I'm a potential murderer, satanist, or whatever... of course, I could chose to not wear strange clothing and live a "normal" life, but I shouldn't have to...

As for the daughters, lol, I think all parents are the same in that regard, almost no one is ever good enough

Hey, heads up, "mixed" guys look more interesting most of the time, I'm sure the chicks dig that, at least most ladies I know do! That's a big plus! Maybe it makes up somewhat for the other intolerant a-holes!

My future wife likes it I guess? 2 meters tall? Damn is it true what they say about tall guys and their...umm... Yeah it never really bothered me what people thought of my skin color for the most part but every once and awhile something would get through to me. Thanks

oldguysrule wrote:

the industry is racist without argument -- discriminates across the board based on the perceived biases of the applicable audience. i don't believe photographers in general could reasonably be labelled as racist

What he said.

Allen Coefield wrote:
Do photographers conduct themselves as racist?  Maybe some do and some dont.  What able black photographers?  Is the majority of their porfolio made up of black females?  Most likely yes. 
  Racism goes two ways and no one is immune.

The reason black photographers use mainly black girls is because anything to do with black is pigeon holed into being "URBAN". Urban fashion, Urban models, Urban art. All of which is used to describe being black. I personally cannot stand it. But let me inform you, that this is not racism that is the only work available for black models, photographers and artists as we are all subjected to things associated with street and i personally have no association with being "street" im a glamour puss...not gonna see me doing glamourus shoots though.

Edwiina wrote:

The reason black photographers use mainly black girls is because anything to do with black is pigeon holed into being "URBAN". Urban fashion, Urban models, Urban art. All of which is used to describe being black. I personally cannot stand it. But let me inform you, that this is not racism that is the only work available for black models, photographers and artists as we are all subjected to things associated with street and i personally have no association with being "street" im a glamour puss...not gonna see me doing glamourus shoots though.

I'm a black photographer. Does that mean that I shoot mainly black women? No, I shoot anybody. Any black photographer that shoots only BLACK women or BLACK people in general is generally isolating themselves, therefore their chances of getting future work will be slim to none. If you look at my port, you'll see that I;ve shot not only women of different color, but I also shoot males as well. I try not to discriminate in shooting models, even though I may be reluctant at times. I'm still at a transitional moment.

Terrence Blount wrote:

Don't knock it till you tried it! Once you go black you don't want to come back!

wow...now if that isnt racist I dont know what is....
Oh wait...I am white...I am not supposed to say that.
I have shot plenty of black models....some where great and most were not.

Edwiina wrote:

The reason black photographers use mainly black girls is because anything to do with black is pigeon holed into being "URBAN". Urban fashion, Urban models, Urban art. All of which is used to describe being black. I personally cannot stand it.

Actually, since I am shooting a lot in the black community (entertainment, fashion AND urban) I can clearly state that there is a huge difference between the common "urban model" and a black high fashion model!

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:

What he said.

No, not what he said.  Richard is well qualified to comment, knows the business (unlike you) and is correct that the industry "discriminates across the board".  Each and every casting call is based upon race, and it is generally specified in the casting.  Each and every job has a target audience, and the racial mix of the models selected is designed with that in mind.  They are selective or, if you wish, "discriminating" based on race.  No question.

However, that is not "racist", it's simply marketing to a target market.  That's a very different thing.  Maybe before the Bad Word gets thrown out too many more times, we ought to define what it means:

Main Entry: rac·ism
Pronunciation: 'rA-"si-z&m also -"shi-
Function: noun
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

You will note that even here the term "discrimination" is used to define "racism" - but that's not true.  "Discrimination" simply means making choices or selections based on a characteristic (in this case, race).  To "discriminate" is, in other contexts, even considered desirable:  a "discriminating person" is a statement of praise.  In this case, "discrimination" often operates in favor of the minority models, not against them, and in any event is not based on any sense of superiority or prejudice, but simply utilitarian ends backed by market research.

I fully understand that there are those who will tell us that any such "discrimination" is wrong or racist, because that is their own personal bias.  Those folks would have to also tell us that the best models to sell cosmetics in China are Africans, or that at least Africans ought to be used quite often, because there are so many of them.

It's not true.  Advertising choices are made for a reason, and it isn't "racism".

Amanda Schlicher wrote:

Okay, get this.

I once knew a  (black) woman who modeled for a pinup site who went BALLISTIC on the site owner (white woman) for photoshopping the pictures she BOUGHT from her because she didn't like the way her skin tone turned out.  It's understandable that a model might be upset that someone "butchered" their photographs in a way that they felt was unflattering, but she turned it into a RACIAL ISSUE.  She said a white woman could never understand what a black woman felt like when she looked at pictures of herself and her skin was "all green and stuff."  And she accused the site owner of being racist because she was "so insensitive" in her stylization of the photographs.

Yup, someone actually in reality turned a photographic color balance issue into a race issue.

my very best girl friend is black and she loves the fact that photoshop can cover the spots on her legs......she is beautiful...........j

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Tx, I'm curious about something.  Where do the websites that indicate minorities
get more work then their numbers in the general population.

I am not sure I understand the question, Tony.  The particular site I have been referring to is www.newmodels.com/race.html, which Mr. Lassiter seems not to have read very carefully, but objects to anyway on the grounds that it contains data.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I don't doubt you know what you're speaking of but last I check the magazine racks, magazines
like Elle, Vogue and other fashion rags had precious few Black or minority
models unless you count other.

This gets to one of the sub-texts in the conversation, Tony.  You are being selective on the magazines you choose to look at - and that distorts the reality of what is in the marketplace.

This thread wasn't started about "fashion", but about "photographers" in general.  Subsequently Mr. Lassiter claimed that the opportunities available to black models were less than for whites.  Again, that's not a statement about "fashion", but about modeling opportunity in general.  He even chose to call out a particular magazine (Jet), which he wanted to exclude from consideration, even though it is not a fashion magazine.  Later he talks about "the magazine industry", without qualification.   The trouble with all of that is that "the magazine industry" includes a lot more than fashion; the opportunities for models include a lot more than fashion (and more than "the magazine industry").  He wants to limit the terms of the debate to one narrow area, and ignore the rest of the opportunities available to models.

So he now claims it's "about fashion" - which isn't what we (except for Alana, for a different reason) were discussing at all.

Yes, the distribution by race within "fashion" magazines provides less opportunity for black models than more general interest publications.  I said as much earlier.  But that is not and was not my point, nor the boundaries of the discussion set forth by the OP.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
tell us things and we accept it as a fact but where do they get their data from? Is it correct?  How did they gather their information?

Tony, do me a favor.  Read the article I cited above.  It says where the information comes from.  Mr. Lassiter hasn't read it - or hasn't paid attention - so he doesn't know.  You should.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Personally I think that fashion magazines know it won't matter if they mostly use White models to showcase their designs and products and because most of their viewers are White

And again we get back to another point I tried to make earlier, and nobody has paid attention to:  The vast majority - the overwhelming majority - of photos used, and of models who appear in fashion magazines are in advertising, not in anything the magazine itself is doing.  The choices reflect the needs of the advertisers, not the editors.  The "opportunities" provided by the magazine itself are no more than a few $150 a day jobs; the opportunities provided by the advertisers in the same magazine are hundreds of high-paying commercial jobs.  And yet we get all this complaining about "the magazine industry" when it has very little to do with the distribution of models and opportunities for models within its pages.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I was looking at several agency websites recently and I counted their Black models  most had less then ten.

Consider the following:

1.  "Less than ten".  How many would you expect?  If 12% of America is black, and an agency has 100 models, on that basis alone you would expect only 12.  Yes, there is less representation in the fashion industry for blacks, but it is not as bad as it is made out to be.

2.  Fashion is only a small (although very visible) subset of all modeling work.  If you check the commercial agencies you will find something very different - which reflects the fact that there is lots of work for black models, and the agencies need models to fill those requirements.  But people like Mr. Lassiter don't want you to know about that.

TXPhotog wrote:

No, not what he said.  Richard is well qualified to comment, knows the business (unlike you) and is correct that the industry "discriminates across the board".  Each and every casting call is based upon race, and it is generally specified in the casting.  Each and every job has a target audience, and the racial mix of the models selected is designed with that in mind.  They are selective or, if you wish, "discriminating" based on race.  No question.

However, that is not "racist", it's simply marketing to a target market.  That's a very different thing.  Maybe before the Bad Word gets thrown out too many more times, we ought to define what it means:

Main Entry: rac·ism
Pronunciation: 'rA-"si-z&m also -"shi-
Function: noun
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

You will note that even here the term "discrimination" is used to define "racism" - but that's not true.  "Discrimination" simply means making choices or selections based on a characteristic (in this case, race).  To "discriminate" is, in other contexts, even considered desirable:  a "discriminating person" is a statement of praise.  In this case, "discrimination" often operates in favor of the minority models, not against them, and in any event is not based on any sense of superiority or prejudice, but simply utilitarian ends backed by market research.

I fully understand that there are those who will tell us that any such "discrimination" is wrong or racist, because that is their own personal bias.  Those folks would have to also tell us that the best models to sell cosmetics in China are Africans, or that at least Africans ought to be used quite often, because there are so many of them.

It's not true.  Advertising choices are made for a reason, and it isn't "racism".

I said I agree with what oldguy wrote, are you now going to tell me what I believe?
Richard doesnt need you to speak for him, not to me anyway.
You sent me a friend request I accepted and later deleted you after reading the nonsense you write here at MM. Is that what is bothering you that I deleted you as a MM friend?
You seem to think I dont "know" the business. I know enough to go and learn more.
I have 25 years experience as a working photographer and only photography has bought my home fed my child and paid my bills for the past 25 years, so I know enough. I unlike you have 25 more years left in me to be creative get published some more and enjoy argueing with old people.
I did not go on a model/photographer site and tell everyone up front that I am old and tired and cant be bothered any longer,we can all see and read that you did.
I personaly feel that your simply old and tired too set in your ways.Terrified of the new,crushed by the fear of all these "others" coming around changeing things and such. Is it that I dont ask you for your advice on anything?
And lonely, with only these simple arguements left to keep the mind half way  working.
Your being blind, wilfully so. Your long winded diatribe has been pulled apart by me and shown for what it is,nonsense. My whole point here is that "if" you look at the mag rack as you claim you do the evidence is right in front of you. More white than black.
I respect Richard's point of view and work, he is still creative, humble and helpful. I have noticed that he gives his point of view without trying to shove it down someone's throat as you are trying to do with me. I believe your wrong on all counts here but who cares really what you or I think,no one so what is the point of me trying to educate you? There isnt one.
I wrote earlier that I did not think that photographers were racist but I do think that race plays a huge part in the selection process at whatever level. Most photographers will shoot what is put in front of them. The analogy about China and Africans was simply senile.
'But its all good.
peace
next>

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I think this post was about the fashion modeling industry so no need to confirm that except to you

There is no reason at all to believe that the OP had fashion in mind when he started this thread with his post.  The OP is neither a fashion model nor fashion photographer.  The concept of "fashion" was not mentioned in the first 20 posts in this thread.  For you to now claim it is "about fashion" is false and misleading.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You claim to have worked in some model agency "one of the oldest" for some period of time on your bio, you dont say which or for how long. You leave it open to interpetation. That is your basis for this deep understanding of fashion?

No, not "open for interpretation".  The facts are what they are, no interpretation needed.  But it is good that you finally got around to looking at more of my background than just my state of residence.  Your earlier ignorant statements can now be much more informed statements.  Isn't that an improvement?

And no, that's not my sole basis for my understanding of fashion, (I've been doing this for a very long time), but it certainly is the most recent, and the most powerful.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I shot tests for Ford Robert Black for a time in AZ sooo?

Quite right.  So?  Is it your claim that qualifies you to understand the fashion industry (or any other)?  Really?  Doing a few test shoots makes you an expert?  Fascinating.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I said you were raised in Tx OR choose to live there, I dont see your point or any mistake here,you did choose to live there right? And you are living there right? So your point here is what? Doesnt seem too ignorant to me how about you Tx? I think it is spot on myself.

Back to my earlier point about intellectual honesty.  You chose to make judgments about me based solely on where I happen to be living at the moment.  You tarred me with the broad brush of racist atrocities, simply because of my current address.  Let's recall what you said, shall we:

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
How we view the issue of race in large part depends on where we live and are raised. I was raised in the Northeast and in the UK. You I assume were raised in TX or you choose to live there. A state where a black man was dragged to his death for being black, Two different cultures. And before you say it it doesnt matter if they were tried and found guilty, it just wouldnt happen in the northeast any longer we have grown past that part of the problem.

To associate those things with me is dishonest and, frankly, despicable.  To do so based solely on where I now live is ignorant in the extreme.  You should be ashamed of yourself, and honest enough to admit now what you did, and that it was wrong.  Instead, you continue to try to justify it.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I was the person who helped install and aligned the red light cameras in several cities up there

Another fine example of your background in the fashion industry.  I bow to your superior knowledge. 

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
While giving me a great understanding of people from different places and allowing me to watch some really great GP racing I dont see its use in this debate other than to try and impress people with your limited travel plans.

Either location we have been matters, or it does not.  Intellectual honesty again.  If you are going to judge me on the basis of geography (as you unfairly have), then you at least ought to have some familiarity with my history of places I have lived and worked.  But again, you aren't honest enough to admit that.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
"Most" people gain a deeper understanding of others by travel, dont you think?

Yes, I do.  Sadly, some are impervious to that knowledge.  On the basis of your performance here, I'd have to judge you are one of them.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
So Ok tell us/me what was done and how and who and in what way and what type of data was collected.

As I said, I can do that, but YOU are the one who rejected the study and claimed it was invalid.  You did so based on no knowledge at all of what it was.  So it is up to YOU to provide a rational basis for your assertion, and you have not done that.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Data invalid no, skewed yes. All data is skewed by the type of question asked, the persons demographic asked,the time/place the question is asked ie whats going on in peoples lives at that time(like war) and the way the questions are asked. This does not make it false but it is skewed to give the answer or outlook needed to prove or disprove someones point of view. You and others may not see it this way, but your eyesight is in question already so.

Again, all this without any understanding of what the study was.

You dismiss studies in general because they are "skewed", although you cannot identify what exactly was skewed in this one.  By that logic, no learning through studies is possible, because there is no such thing as a perfect study.  If (as there must be) a study is flawed at all, we should all ignore its findings.  Especially if they disagree with your pet theories.  Right?

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I did not say it was wrong I said it was skewed, I look at the magazine rack everyday

You go to the magazine rack everyday?  That may account for your problem.  You need to get out more.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
and what I see is white faces looking back at me for the most part, when I open up the pages what do I see? White faces for the most part. Ok so I go to another section or a different store and what so I see? The same. So no matter what your data says it is right in front of my eyes what the truth is.

It has many times been observed that we tend to see what we are afraid of seeing.  In your case, you are consumed with the notion of race.  It is very important to you.  You know what you expect to see, and if you look in just the right places, you can confirm your own prejudices.  So that's what you do.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You can use data I will use my eyes and as I said it leaves us both where we started.

That's a wonderful example of why "anectodal data" is not given much credence in the scientific community.  People like you, with an axe to grind, find and report what they expect (fear) to find.  And never mind the data - it is "skewed", but your observations are not. 

Uh huh.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
What is it that I want to belive? That there are more whites in magazines than blacks?

No, it's much broader than that.  You've made that clear.  This simply happens to be one instance of it.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You dont think someone could find a set of data to say the exact opposite of yours?

"Could" is not the same as "have".  You haven't done it, but you want to argue about it anyway.

Yes, I expect you could find some data that disagrees.  As you say, data can be skewed.  If you were to find such data, at least then we could have a discussion about the way it was collected and what the biases of the two studies respectively were.  But you haven't done that.  All you have done is wave your arms and complain.

TXPhotog wrote:

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I think this post was about the fashion modeling industry so no need to confirm that except to you

There is no reason at all to believe that the OP had fashion in mind when he started this thread with his post.  The OP is neither a fashion model nor fashion photographer.  The concept of "fashion" was not mentioned in the first 20 posts in this thread.  For you to now claim it is "about fashion" is false and misleading.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You claim to have worked in some model agency "one of the oldest" for some period of time on your bio, you dont say which or for how long. You leave it open to interpetation. That is your basis for this deep understanding of fashion?

No, not "open for interpretation".  The facts are what they are, no interpretation needed.  But it is good that you finally got around to looking at more of my background than just my state of residence.  Your earlier ignorant statements can now be much more informed statements.  Isn't that an improvement?

And no, that's not my sole basis for my understanding of fashion, (I've been doing this for a very long time), but it certainly is the most recent, and the most powerful.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I shot tests for Ford Robert Black for a time in AZ sooo?

Quite right.  So?  Is it your claim that qualifies you to understand the fashion industry (or any other)?  Really?  Doing a few test shoots makes you an expert?  Fascinating.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I said you were raised in Tx OR choose to live there, I dont see your point or any mistake here,you did choose to live there right? And you are living there right? So your point here is what? Doesnt seem too ignorant to me how about you Tx? I think it is spot on myself.

Back to my earlier point about intellectual honesty.  You chose to make judgments about me based solely on where I happen to be living at the moment.  You tarred me with the broad brush of racist atrocities, simply because of my current address.  Let's recall what you said, shall we:

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
How we view the issue of race in large part depends on where we live and are raised. I was raised in the Northeast and in the UK. You I assume were raised in TX or you choose to live there. A state where a black man was dragged to his death for being black, Two different cultures. And before you say it it doesnt matter if they were tried and found guilty, it just wouldnt happen in the northeast any longer we have grown past that part of the problem.

To associate those things with me is dishonest and, frankly, despicable.  To do so based solely on where I now live is ignorant in the extreme.  You should be ashamed of yourself, and honest enough to admit now what you did, and that it was wrong.  Instead, you continue to try to justify it.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I was the person who helped install and aligned the red light cameras in several cities up there

Another fine example of your background in the fashion industry.  I bow to your superior knowledge. 

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
While giving me a great understanding of people from different places and allowing me to watch some really great GP racing I dont see its use in this debate other than to try and impress people with your limited travel plans.

Either location we have been matters, or it does not.  Intellectual honesty again.  If you are going to judge me on the basis of geography (as you unfairly have), then you at least ought to have some familiarity with my history of places I have lived and worked.  But again, you aren't honest enough to admit that.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
"Most" people gain a deeper understanding of others by travel, dont you think?

Yes, I do.  Sadly, some are impervious to that knowledge.  On the basis of your performance here, I'd have to judge you are one of them.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
So Ok tell us/me what was done and how and who and in what way and what type of data was collected.

As I said, I can do that, but YOU are the one who rejected the study and claimed it was invalid.  You did so based on no knowledge at all of what it was.  So it is up to YOU to provide a rational basis for your assertion, and you have not done that.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Data invalid no, skewed yes. All data is skewed by the type of question asked, the persons demographic asked,the time/place the question is asked ie whats going on in peoples lives at that time(like war) and the way the questions are asked. This does not make it false but it is skewed to give the answer or outlook needed to prove or disprove someones point of view. You and others may not see it this way, but your eyesight is in question already so.

Again, all this without any understanding of what the study was.

You dismiss studies in general because they are "skewed", although you cannot identify what exactly was skewed in this one.  By that logic, no learning through studies is possible, because there is no such thing as a perfect study.  If (as there must be) a study is flawed at all, we should all ignore its findings.  Especially if they disagree with your pet theories.  Right?

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I did not say it was wrong I said it was skewed, I look at the magazine rack everyday

You go to the magazine rack everyday?  That may account for your problem.  You need to get out more.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
and what I see is white faces looking back at me for the most part, when I open up the pages what do I see? White faces for the most part. Ok so I go to another section or a different store and what so I see? The same. So no matter what your data says it is right in front of my eyes what the truth is.

It has many times been observed that we tend to see what we are afraid of seeing.  In your case, you are consumed with the notion of race.  It is very important to you.  You know what you expect to see, and if you look in just the right places, you can confirm your own prejudices.  So that's what you do.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You can use data I will use my eyes and as I said it leaves us both where we started.

That's a wonderful example of why "anectodal data" is not given much credence in the scientific community.  People like you, with an axe to grind, find and report what they expect (fear) to find.  And never mind the data - it is "skewed", but your observations are not. 

Uh huh.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
What is it that I want to belive? That there are more whites in magazines than blacks?

No, it's much broader than that.  You've made that clear.  This simply happens to be one instance of it.


"Could" is not the same as "have".  You haven't done it, but you want to argue about it anyway.

Yes, I expect you could find some data that disagrees.  As you say, data can be skewed.  If you were to find such data, at least then we could have a discussion about the way it was collected and what the biases of the two studies respectively were.  But you haven't done that.  All you have done is wave your arms and complain.

So you still have not shown the information that you claim to have. How when and where and who. The idea of going to find info to refute yours is fine but not needed, I said I dont take data as the end all. Its always skewed and should be looked at as such. Dont if you dont want to.
  I never said I was an expert at anything but you try to come off as one. Red light cameras were a consultant job and one that I did very well using my studio and GP experience. You bought up travel not me and it hurts when someone has more of a thing than you do I know but its still a fact, i travel a lot.
I am Black and White by birth so it is rather hard to be a racist really,I dont have an agenda on race, nor do I spend much time thinking about it unless I encounter someone who is ignorant and needs to have their eyes opened for them.
I said you live in Tx, you do. I also said it was a state where a black man was dragged to his death for being black, did I say you were driving the pickup truck, no I did not. But if the shoe fits as they say. Stop crying and back peddling Tx, as you say anyone can find any data they need if they go look for it which bolsters my point not yours. It also weakens the very foundation of your arguement about your data.
next

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I said I agree with what oldguy wrote, are you now going to tell me what I believe?

Why shouldn't I?  You have been telling me what I believe for quite a while now.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Richard doesnt need you to speak for him, not to me anyway.

No, he doesn't.  He is quite capable of speaking persuasively for himself.  But since he hadn't clarified his point (and I don't know what he meant), I chose to disagree with the interpretation you evidently were putting on it.  If I happen to disagree with him on the issue, so be it.  Disagreements happen.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You sent me a friend request I accepted and later deleted you after reading the nonsense you write here at MM.

Back to honesty again.  It is very rare indeed that I send a friend request, and I do so only to those that I know and have a good relationship with.  You certainly do not qualify for that, and never did.

The truth is that you sent me the friend request, and I approved it back in the time when I was approving anyone who asked.  Since then I have pruned back my "friends" and put a note in my profile saying why.  I deleted you, along with hundreds of others, because there was no reason for you to be there.

Frankly, I don't give a damn about anything as trivial as "MM friends".

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You seem to think I dont "know" the business. I know enough to go and learn more.
I have 25 years experience as a working photographer and only photography has bought my home fed my child and paid my bills for the past 25 years, so I know enough.

Your own profile says your photographic career has had very little to do with the fashion business that you now claim to be talking about.  You really need to decide what claims you wish to make about yourself.  Personally, I'm prepared to believe your profile when it says the things you have been doing are on a small, glamour-oriented segment of "the magazine industry".  Here is what you say about yourself: "I make my living through my photography.
Working with magazines such as EasyRiders,HotRod Bike,RacerX and quite a few more in the custom Harley Davidson area for the past 14 years. I am moving away from this line of work and into fashion only now as it allows me to have more fun."  Nothing in that inspires confidence that you know anything much about the fashion industry, or about anything else other than the little niche you worked in.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I unlike you have 25 more years left in me to be creative get published some more and enjoy argueing with old people.

And I am sure it will be time well spent.  However, you cannot now claim expertise from things you are going to do later.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I did not go on a model/photographer site and tell everyone up front that I am old and tired and cant be bothered any longer,we can all see and read that you did.

Yes, we certainly can.  the truth is, I'm old.  I'm tired of the crap.  I'm no longer interested in making a living in the industry.  And I'm honest about it.  So what?

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I personaly feel that your simply old and tired too set in your ways.

Now there's a surprise.  I never would have guessed.  Fortunately, your opinion of me means very little.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Terrified of the new,crushed by the fear of all these "others" coming around changeing things and such.

Why would I be terrified if change happens in an industry that I no longer am working in?  Change happens.  It has always happened.  But so far you haven't caused any of it.  No worries.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Is it that I dont ask you for your advice on anything?

Good heavens!  Enough with the self-centered comments.  I don't live in fear that you may not have me on your friend's list.  I am not losing sleep because you aren't asking me for advice (why would you?  I won't ratify your prejudices, so you will ask someone else who will).  This isn't about you.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
And lonely, with only these simple arguements left to keep the mind half way  working.

I see you have now become an expert on my social life as well.  Tell me, how did you come by that knowledge?

It is unseemly to throw out personal insults, particularly ignorant ones.  You should be ashamed.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Your being blind, wilfully so. Your long winded diatribe has been pulled apart by me and shown for what it is,

Or not.

What we have seen is that your ego is bruised.  You are consumed with nonsense like MM friends lists and me pining away, waiting for you to ask me for advice.  There is a lovely Alice in Wonderland quality to it all, but it certainly has nothing to do with the issues we have been discussing.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I have noticed that he gives his point of view without trying to shove it down someone's throat as you are trying to do with me.

If your point is that Richard is a better man than I am, I will not argue the point.  Neither would I argue with the assertion that he is a better man than you.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I believe your wrong on all counts here

Of course you do.  But the key word is "believe".  Belief is a matter of faith, and need not be informed by actual information.  You seem to have an abundance of it.  It's a shame it has to be so out of touch with reality.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
but who cares really what you or I think,no one so what is the point of me trying to educate you? There isnt one.

If you wish to try "educating" perhaps that would be good.  You can start from some real information, and less with the "beliefs".  But I suppose we should note the extreme improbability that I will be come a True Believer after your style.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
So you still have not shown the information that you claim to have.

No, I haven't.  And I said why.

Neither have you.  So either come up with a rational, specific reason for rejecting that study, or get off it.  Continuing to harp on "skewed" data, when you have no idea what the skew is, is very silly indeed.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Red light cameras were a consultant job and one that I did very well using my studio and GP experience.

Hey, I didn't bring them up, you did.  That was the example you chose to use to buttress your claim to expertise.  And I think it does, in fact, do a good job of illustrating your level of expertise.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You bought up travel not me and it hurts when someone has more of a thing than you do I know but its still a fact, i travel a lot.

Back to lack of honesty again.  YOU raised the issue of location as determining a person's knowledge and opinion.  I didn't do that.  YOU assigned "Texas" to me, without acknowledging anything else.  YOU turned it into a diatribe against location.  So when I responded that I had more than Texas in my background, you try to claim that I "brought up travel".  Dishonest.

As to "more of a thing than I do" - why would I care (be hurt) by someone else's travel?  Really.  Why?  Once again, this is not about you.  I don't give a damn how much you have travelled, and am not injured by it in the slightest.  It's another one of those "friend's list" things with you all over again.

Get over yourself.

(And for the record, I have spent a total of 17 years living outside the United States and still have nearly a million frequent flier miles in my accounts.  Are there people who have travelled more than me?  Of course.  Am I bothered by that?  Of course not.  More silliness by you.)

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I am Black and White by birth so it is rather hard to be a racist really,

An interesting argument.  False, fallacious, but interesting.  You would have us believe that being of mixed race confers some kind of mystical immunity to racism?  The historical record gives little credence to that assertion.\

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
as you say anyone can find any data they need if they go look for it which bolsters my point not yours. It also weakens the very foundation of your arguement about your data.

Neither of those is true.

Yes, anyone can find specific sources of claimed data to support pretty much anything.  What counts, as you so often argue, are the biases that underlie that data.  The specific biases, not biases in general.  Until you have a specific data set to discuss, those biases cannot be made explicit, and no judgment can be made of the quality of the data and resulting conclusions.  So all the arm waving in the world about what you COULD do, if only you took the trouble to try, means nothing.

Cspine wrote:
Next time I see an illiterate transgendered homosexual eskimo dwarf, I'm gonna kick him in his little nuts.

God fukin bless America.

I think the topic of illiterate transgendered homosexual eskimo dwarves is way more interesting that anything anyone has said on this topic...let's start a new thread...

"Does MM disciminate against illiterate transgendered homosexual eskimo dwarves...I say YES!"

Seriously...I have never photographed even one...and everytime I see one I just want to pat them on the head...and try to teach them to read...and convert from being godless sodomites and build them an igloo...

Late Bloomer Studios wrote:
You're grown men fighting over stats, and data.

No, we are not.  I have stats and data, he has nothing but the unreasoning desire to dismiss all stats and data out of hand (unless it happens to agree with him).

FemmeArt wrote:
I'm a black photographer and model.  I can definitely tell you that it is much tougher for black models to find work.  I just wonder why that is?  Heck, even my portfolio speaks to this trend, but certainly not intentionally.

Why don't you have black models in your portfolio, especially since you are a black photographer?

Late Bloomer Studios wrote:
Yo, Hayden. TX. I say ya'll fight, or go get a hotel room! Fuck a war of data, and words. Jet Blue. Southwest. Don King. Come on! Make a new thread called, "What did I just get done saying"?, and just be done with it. Because what you are both talking about right now is some super supremo he said, she said bullshit! You're grown men fighting over stats, and data. You're both photographers. You're both actually pretty good. Go take a fucking picture somewhere, and be friends. Please. Rodney King said it best: ... ahh forget it. *ding* *ding* *ding* Round 48!

True... yet, I've got to side with TX.

No matter how long Hayden made a living with photography and fed his family, he is trying to enter a new segment which is real world fashion industry, yet, Hayden tries to tell TX how the industry ought to work.

Knowing TX, knowing the industry and having been through numerous discussions with industry newbies (models and photographers alike) over the years cleaning up misconceptions... I understand why TX is getting annoyed.

To Hayden:
There is nothing wrong with letting someone with real experience in a particular field educating you.

I shoot anything out there for years, as a martial artist, I shot many martial arts competitions in the 80's, Funny that Late Bloomer mentioned Rodney King, because last week, I covered my very first boxing event, actually, I saw my very first life event ever. https://www.modelmayhem.com/posts.php?thread_id=77676

I don't go around and tell other photojournalists who shoot boxing for years how to do it, I rather observe and shut up and hope I can pick up a tip or two when they talk.

I even asked a ringside photographer who had his tag on the ring floor before a fight what can be done, where could I stand and basically asked him for advise.

My suggestion to you, no matter how you dislike TX, you may just drop the argument, don't talk to him anymore, but read every post he made that is industry related. Do the same when Oldguysrule posts and there are a few others too.

There is nothing wrong with "not knowing yet", but a lot with "borrowing assumed knowledge from the future".

All the best

UdoR

TXPhotog wrote:
While I appreciate the comments, I have to take exception to this:


No, we are not.  I have stats and data, he has nothing but the unreasoning desire to dismiss all stats and data out of hand (unless it happens to agree with him).

Look man, I have to be honest with you. I watch a lot. I usually don't jump in these things. I am engaged in a pretty big project right now so I've been taking breaks on MM here, and there. I'm a black photographer...and for the most part you are right. It's just that you have to understand that a whole lot goes into why people feel the way they do about these things. It's not all numbers TX. Feelings, and perceptions are a little harder to encapsulate, and relate to if you aren't the one with the contrary feeling to begin with. A level of internal understanding of the grievance would help. But for the most part you are right. That doesn't change anything though.

UdoR wrote:

True... yet, I've got to side with TX.

No, I do too.

TXPhotog wrote:

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I said I agree with what oldguy wrote, are you now going to tell me what I believe?

Why shouldn't I?  You have been telling me what I believe for quite a while now.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Richard doesnt need you to speak for him, not to me anyway.

No, he doesn't.  He is quite capable of speaking persuasively for himself.  But since he hadn't clarified his point (and I don't know what he meant), I chose to disagree with the interpretation you evidently were putting on it.  If I happen to disagree with him on the issue, so be it.  Disagreements happen.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You sent me a friend request I accepted and later deleted you after reading the nonsense you write here at MM.

Back to honesty again.  It is very rare indeed that I send a friend request, and I do so only to those that I know and have a good relationship with.  You certainly do not qualify for that, and never did.

The truth is that you sent me the friend request, and I approved it back in the time when I was approving anyone who asked.  Since then I have pruned back my "friends" and put a note in my profile saying why.  I deleted you, along with hundreds of others, because there was no reason for you to be there.

Frankly, I don't give a damn about anything as trivial as "MM friends".

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
You seem to think I dont "know" the business. I know enough to go and learn more.
I have 25 years experience as a working photographer and only photography has bought my home fed my child and paid my bills for the past 25 years, so I know enough.

Your own profile says your photographic career has had very little to do with the fashion business that you now claim to be talking about.  You really need to decide what claims you wish to make about yourself.  Personally, I'm prepared to believe your profile when it says the things you have been doing are on a small, glamour-oriented segment of "the magazine industry".  Here is what you say about yourself: "I make my living through my photography.
Working with magazines such as EasyRiders,HotRod Bike,RacerX and quite a few more in the custom Harley Davidson area for the past 14 years. I am moving away from this line of work and into fashion only now as it allows me to have more fun."  Nothing in that inspires confidence that you know anything much about the fashion industry, or about anything else other than the little niche you worked in.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I unlike you have 25 more years left in me to be creative get published some more and enjoy argueing with old people.

And I am sure it will be time well spent.  However, you cannot now claim expertise from things you are going to do later.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I did not go on a model/photographer site and tell everyone up front that I am old and tired and cant be bothered any longer,we can all see and read that you did.

Yes, we certainly can.  the truth is, I'm old.  I'm tired of the crap.  I'm no longer interested in making a living in the industry.  And I'm honest about it.  So what?

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I personaly feel that your simply old and tired too set in your ways.

Now there's a surprise.  I never would have guessed.  Fortunately, your opinion of me means very little.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Terrified of the new,crushed by the fear of all these "others" coming around changeing things and such.

Why would I be terrified if change happens in an industry that I no longer am working in?  Change happens.  It has always happened.  But so far you haven't caused any of it.  No worries.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Is it that I dont ask you for your advice on anything?

Good heavens!  Enough with the self-centered comments.  I don't live in fear that you may not have me on your friend's list.  I am not losing sleep because you aren't asking me for advice (why would you?  I won't ratify your prejudices, so you will ask someone else who will).  This isn't about you.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
And lonely, with only these simple arguements left to keep the mind half way  working.

I see you have now become an expert on my social life as well.  Tell me, how did you come by that knowledge?

It is unseemly to throw out personal insults, particularly ignorant ones.  You should be ashamed.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
Your being blind, wilfully so. Your long winded diatribe has been pulled apart by me and shown for what it is,

Or not.

What we have seen is that your ego is bruised.  You are consumed with nonsense like MM friends lists and me pining away, waiting for you to ask me for advice.  There is a lovely Alice in Wonderland quality to it all, but it certainly has nothing to do with the issues we have been discussing.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I have noticed that he gives his point of view without trying to shove it down someone's throat as you are trying to do with me.

If your point is that Richard is a better man than I am, I will not argue the point.  Neither would I argue with the assertion that he is a better man than you.

Hadyn Lassiter wrote:
I believe your wrong on all counts here

Of course you do.  But the key word is "believe".  Belief is a matter of faith, and need not be informed by actual information.  You seem to have an abundance of it.  It's a shame it has to be so out of touch with reality.


If you wish to try "educating" perhaps that would be good.  You can start from some real information, and less with the "beliefs".  But I suppose we should note the extreme improbability that I will be come a True Believer after your style.

False words, you sent the request, you wish to deny it now thats ok.
I dont have a bunch of MM friends so that is a non issue. I never said anyone was a better man I said i respected Richard and his work. The original post was about photographers and race you threw in some ref to some data that you rely on for your view on the subject I said I dont take any data at face value in so many words.
Get over yourself, you have been trying to insult me by the back door all along and it has failed to achieve your end which is I dont know what.
Put up or shut up thats all that remains here Tx. You keep telling me I should be ashamed. No I am not. I get published I get paid I dont sit around trying to impress people on an internet site with my age and wisdom. Show me what you got sir,thats all that matters. What I wrote on my page is true and what you wrote on yours is also true I guess. At the end of the day I count ads, covers centerfolds and features, nothing else matters to me,nothing. I think those who have offered to work with me feel I "still" have the creative framework to make beautiful images as seen in my portfolio how about yourself? You want to attack the work I have
The rest of this is just a pissing match between two people who see the world very differently.
next