Are photography enthusiasts an aggressive complaining bunch?

[waday]

ok.. I have an urge to argue with you on this... but I'll pass.

I will totally support you on this, @mmaria!

It's actually an incredibly sexist and demeaning statement.

I'm really not reacting on every thing that is said about women, but this is really something!!

It would be interesting and educating if you would go through the post and separate what is true gender differences from what is sexist rant.

Lew, see the below quotes and my explanations:

Have you noticed that there are very, very few female gear heads?

Without hard data, it's hard to know, but I would assume this to be correct. Just like the fact that there are way more men in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) careers than women, and this is quite unfortunate.

That is because they have lots of their little fixes. They can go and buy a pair of shoes, a new dress, a new perfume. Or, as they say, a new scent. They can go and get a new haircut, a new colour, only to stare at themselves in the mirror for two days and go back to have another. After all they have kids.

This entire portion is sexist and demeaning.

From the first statement of 'their little fixes' down to 'after all they have kids'. I wouldn't dare say that fashion is a 'little fix', considering some pairs of shoes cost as much as some flagship cameras. Some handbags cost more than cars.

Also, what, men don't have kids? It's the woman's place to take care of the kids?

A new scent? Please, men have just as many, they cost just as much, and some men fuss about their scent probably more so than women.

A new haircut? Aren't men in the barbershop like once a month? My wife goes to a stylist probably once a year, if that. Yes, her style costs probably a hundred dollars. Me? I go about once a month, at $15 a cut, that's more than my wife spends. Some barbers/hairstylists cost much more than $15. I can't complain.

There are PLENTY of men that complain about styles, clothing, scents, fashion, shoes, and the like. Just as many as women. Society as a whole places gender stereotypes on everyone.

Women have to be dainty, cook, clean, and raise children.

Men have to be gruff, unemotional, work on cars, and be unclean (you know, so the lady folk have something to do during the day while the man works, brings home the money, and supports his wife who can't work because she has to stay at home and raise children).

Please. I'm done with gender stereotypes. Gender stereotypes in this day and age are to racism in past generations.

Welcome to the real world where men and women are considered equal.

 

[sm4him]

What do you think, is this a minority from the hobby? Is it similar in other hobbies? I do not really follow anything else hobby wise on the internet so maybe the knitting forums are the same

Firearm forums are a lot more polite.

Political forums are a lot nastier than here. Way way WAY nastier.

I don't know anything about knitting forums, but I can't imagine that there is anything to argue about.

To the point that our hobbyists argue about gear indicates what role they think gear has in photographic success.

I was once a conference planner for an organization called The Knitting Guild of America. I planned local and national conferences attended by 100s and 100s of knitters (in some cases, over 1,000) and featuring internationally-reknown knitting instructors. Based on that experience, I can tell you that I suspect if they have a forum, they can manage to get themselves QUITE worked up! (P.S. No, I don't knit. Takes time away from staring at myself in the mirror. LOL)

 

[Derrel]

SNIP>>Every time I look at an article on Dpreview and many other sites the comments almost always end up in "canon should have done this" "nikon should have done that" etc. A lot of complaining.

It often gets to the point of insults between different posters, sometimes amusingly and I do think sometimes a little out of hand. A lot of aggresion albeit keyboard warrior stuff

What do you think, is this a minority from the hobby? Is it similar in other hobbies? I do not really follow anything else hobby wise on the internet so maybe the knitting forums are the same

The comments about Canon should have done this, Nikon should have done this have been really played up by the major web photo sites. At one time, dPreview and The Luminous Landscape were the two biggest,most-important sites, by far; this was back at the very start of the digital era. By the 2008 period, Michael Reichmann at Luminous Landscape was repeatedly calling Canon's cameras, "the Toyota Camry of cameras," and really slamming Canon, for as he repeatedly wrote,in multiple articles over a three-year span, that Canon was guilty of "failing to innovate." Reichmann made a very big deal of buying an all-new Nikon system once Nikon began buying sensors from Sony, and the image quality passed what Canon had. And now, within the past couple of weeks, the latest article Recihmann has up on his site mentions that Canon has forsaken him, and no longer returns his phone calls or e-mails, and they have to BUY their test cameras...no more FREE LOANER CAMERAS FROM CANON!!! Oh, woe is he...

It's like, a guy spends a few years on one of the world's most influential photography web sites, and he repeatedly bashes the camera brand he has invested heavily in, over and over, and then switches to the other company's cameras...and then, and then--he switches to SONY and the A900, and then he moves to MIRRORLESS cameras....and writes multiple articles about how awesome mirrorless cameras are...then he takes on a new business partner, Mr. Kevin Raber, and then Raber raaaaaaves about mirrorless cameras and how awesome they are, for a couple of years...

THOSE are the kind of people who are running one of the world's most-influential photography web sites...people who love to stoke brand wars, to the point that one major camera brand cuts them off, and they feel the need to tell the public that Canon has cut them out of their normal preview-and-review of cameras and lenses...

Recihmann and The Luminous Landscape spent years, literally years, faulting Canon for its lack of a simple mirror-up button like Nikon has used. One of the most-important control features for a landscape shooter was, for literally years, sacrificed by Canon for its Direct Print button. Imagine, the $7999 Canon 1Ds bodies, which were at one time, Recihmann's favorite tool, lacking a mirror lock-up button--instead, having a button for a Direct Print option, so the camera could be hooked up to a printer via a cable, and images sent to print...from a Canon 1Ds....Reichmann harped on that a few times too many for Canon's liking. He did a lot of complaining about Canon. He encouraged people to buy Nikons by saying that Canon was "failing to innovate," and he did that for several years in a row. He went from advocating expensive medium format digital system to advocating for small, light, mirrorless camera systems.

This is how the so-called leaders of these web sites behave. Is it any wonder that their readers/followers/fans behave any differently? They engage in "so-and-so ought to do THIS!" talk, constantly.

 

[runnah]

The internet was designed for armchair quarterbacks. It amuses me to see these folks (thom hogan etc..) who think the they can
run an entire massive company better than those who do.

The internet world needs to be aware of a few things when it comes to products.
1. What you want is not physically possible. A 600mm f/1 that weights 2lbs cannot be done.
2. What you want may be physically possible but would be so cost prohibitive that XY company would lose way to much money to risk bringing it to market.
3. Just because you want something doesn't mean that enough people want it to make it financially viable to go into production. So no 600mm Tilt shift lens.
4. R&D is expensive. Rushing out products only causes unhappy customers and lost business. So you have to wait until it's ready.

Take these thing into consideration before complaining about Canon/Nikon won't do this that or the other thing.

 

[runnah]

"True gender differences"? Or socialized gender stereotypes?

Wimmin be shoppin!

I've found that speaking in absolutes is a good way to end up with egg in your face.

 

[Derrel]

The internet was designed for armchair quarterbacks. It amuses me to see these folks (thom hogan etc..) who think the they can
run an entire massive company better than those who do.

OMG, totally, totally spot-on, runnah! It's amazing how the world's #1 camera company, Canon, and the world's #2 company, Nikon, have managed to survive without the wisdom of a couple of middle-aged white dudes from North America...

 

[astroNikon]

Anyone can have Nikon or Canon build the camera that they want them to build.
you only have to come up with the engineering, supplier and manufacturing costs.
Tell them they don't need a new box to save yourself some money.

I would guess, this may be in the 8 figures to do so.
Then, no one can complain as they can get the camera that they want.

 

[sashbar]

Looks like I have managed to stir some emotions

To stir it a bit further (that is the only way I can explain my point), it reminded me of an old and politically not entirely correct anecdote.

There is a well known Russian proverb "An uninvited guest is worse than a Tatar". It stems from the 13-15 century Mongol-Tatar Yoke and probably is at least 500 years old. It is just an ancient proverb, no one actually thinks about Tatars or Tatar nation in a negative way when saying it. Now, a group of Tatars wrote to the Linguistic Academy complaining that this old proverb was demeaning and disrespectful to Tatars and demanded to change it. The Academy duly obliged and changed the proverb. Now it says "An uninvited guest is better than a Tatar". Do you catch my drift?

On a serious note, I have wrote nothing new about women. Apart from my own close observations, there is a solid body of scientific research on therapeutic effects of shopping as well as anthropological theories on why it affects men and women in different ways.

There is a clear scientific evidence that women tend to transfer negative emotions into clothing and their general appearance considerably more often than men. Again it has an anthropological explanation. You may be surprised to know, but the research shows, that clothes trigger nostalgic emotions in a woman's mind that is very similar to a photograph. It rarely happens with men.

Saying that I am much more nostalgic about my old clothes than my wife is about hers. Still I do not draw any conclusions from that, because there is a much larger body of evidence contradicting my family experience.

There is a research showing that women most often buy for a retail therapy 1. Clothes. (Amounts for more than half) Distant 2nd Food 3. Shoes 4. Accessories. Men buy 1. Food 2. Electronics 3. Music and Movies.

To all who feel my statement was demeaning, I recommend to start with "Evolved Foraging Psychology Underlines Sex Differences In Shopping Experiences and Behaviour" by Kruger and Byker.

Then again of course some would think it is not worth the effort and would rather spend this time staring at themselves in the mirror Sorry, could not resist Just joking.

 

[robbins.photo]

Are photography enthusiasts an aggressive complaining bunch?

In a word, yes. Why, do you have a problem with that pal?

Lol

 

[sashbar]

ok.. I have an urge to argue with you on this... but I'll pass.

I will totally support you on this, @mmaria!

It's actually an incredibly sexist and demeaning statement.

I'm really not reacting on every thing that is said about women, but this is really something!!

It would be interesting and educating if you would go through the post and separate what is true gender differences from what is sexist rant.

Lew, see the below quotes and my explanations:

Have you noticed that there are very, very few female gear heads?

Without hard data, it's hard to know, but I would assume this to be correct. Just like the fact that there are way more men in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) careers than women, and this is quite unfortunate.

That is because they have lots of their little fixes. They can go and buy a pair of shoes, a new dress, a new perfume. Or, as they say, a new scent. They can go and get a new haircut, a new colour, only to stare at themselves in the mirror for two days and go back to have another. After all they have kids.

This entire portion is sexist and demeaning.

From the first statement of 'their little fixes' down to 'after all they have kids'. I wouldn't dare say that fashion is a 'little fix', considering some pairs of shoes cost as much as some flagship cameras. Some handbags cost more than cars.

Also, what, men don't have kids? It's the woman's place to take care of the kids?

A new scent? Please, men have just as many, they cost just as much, and some men fuss about their scent probably more so than women.

A new haircut? Aren't men in the barbershop like once a month? My wife goes to a stylist probably once a year, if that. Yes, her style costs probably a hundred dollars. Me? I go about once a month, at $15 a cut, that's more than my wife spends. Some barbers/hairstylists cost much more than $15. I can't complain.

There are PLENTY of men that complain about styles, clothing, scents, fashion, shoes, and the like. Just as many as women. Society as a whole places gender stereotypes on everyone.

Women have to be dainty, cook, clean, and raise children.

Men have to be gruff, unemotional, work on cars, and be unclean (you know, so the lady folk have something to do during the day while the man works, brings home the money, and supports his wife who can't work because she has to stay at home and raise children).

Please. I'm done with gender stereotypes. Gender stereotypes in this day and age are to racism in past generations.

Welcome to the real world where men and women are considered equal.

Thanks for your explanation, I see your point, even though do not agree with the way you are putting your arguments forward.

First, to put it aside, by "little fixes" I mean shoes as much as cameras. They both are just little fixes. They do not last long. Actually shoes have a good chance to last longer. I thought it was clear from my post, but apparently I was not clear enough.

Yes there are plenty of men who buy clothes and do haircuts as often as women if not more often, but this argument completely misses the point, because, contrary to what you said, there is a large body of data showing that shopping behaviours and therapeutic shopping behaviours of men and women differ considerably. Just read my previous post. If you do your own research you will find a ton of data.

You can see things from the point of gender stereotypes, just as well you can look at it from the point of anthropological differences. But however you look at it, be it a political or scientific point of view, a vast research data exists and it unequivocally shows huge differences.

It does not mean men are better, it just means men are different. Why is it demeaning is beyond my understanding.

Lastly you mention kids. Here you can argue with me and I happily adjust my position. I would say that on average in the world women are blessed because they tend to spend more time with their kids than men do. On average they are closer and more emotionally attached to their litte kids than men are. They draw more satisfaction from having kids. And I stress it: on average. In the world. Because, excusez moi, America is not the entire world. Even if probably a somehow better part of it. I am not saying women have to spend their time in the kitchen and taking care of the kids. I am just saying that they do. I do not pretend to know whether it is good or bad. That is just the way it is. It may change in the future, but so far it has not happened yet. Will you argue with that?

There are lots of loving men and hard working women in the world, but it is not the point. There are stereotypes, there are counter-stereotypes and there is a stone cold data and scientific research. And the data as well as most respected theories support what I wrote. If you feel it is sexism, what can I do about it? Pretend that science is wrong?

 

[sashbar]

"True gender differences"? Or socialized gender stereotypes?

Wimmin be shoppin!

I've found that speaking in absolutes is a good way to end up with egg in your face.

Yes, but it is still safer than not being able to see the forest beyond the trees.

 

[waday]

To all who feel my statement was demeaning, I recommend to start with "Evolved Foraging Psychology Underlines Sex Differences In Shopping Experiences and Behaviour" by Kruger and Byker.

You know what, "How to Deal with Bigots" is next on the list. Sorry.

 

[Overread]

You know as interesting as some elements of this might be I have a feeling that this thread is not going to go anywhere but into a fight. Time to move on and take some photos or such.