alt.street Speeding by 'Subtle Indoctrination'?

Accidental tablemates at a restaurant suggested that Americans were

being bombarded with images, etc., designed to convert Americans to

homosexuality and I disagreed. I then took this photo later that

evening, but contend this photo equally promotes heterosexuality.

Your ratings and comments are invited and most welcome. If you rate

harshly or very negative, please submit a helpful and constructive

comment/Please share your superior knowledge to help improve my

photography. Thanks! Enjoy! John

The running (?) man against the publicity poster is fantastic. Love the brownish tones as well. I would have prefered the two man on the left not there. But they were, so ... Great street nevertheless.

I also would have preferred the two men not be there, but that's 'street'. You get what you get and skateboarders at night only pay one visit, so that's it.

 

Thanks for the nice comment.

 

John (Crosley)

Now here's a minefield for discussion John. I'm not sure how one converts people to homosexuality, or did they mean it was designed to convince Americans to accept it? I don't see the billboard/poster as being particularly appealing more to one gender than another but what do I know about the subtleties of advertising psychology? Of the three men in this scene, none of them seems to be taking a blind bit of notice of the super sized male image, (unless there's some soliciting going on between the two on the left). Wouldn't it be nice if we were immune to the manipulation and persuasion of advertisers?

I went to a little restaurant in Half Moon Bay up the Coast from my house and was seated next to a couple my age celebrating their anniversary, at a small seafood restaurant -- hole in the wall -- except situated on pilings -- with world's best fish and chips -- bar none.

 

And the wife was a pro photographer of weddings -- and both were very nice people. They also host the largest 'nativity scene' I think I recall in the county, state or nation or some such. As the conversation developed, they mentioned and we talked about their somewhat fundamental belief that the way society is set up, young people are being 'sold' or 'converted' to homosexuality.

 

After we said pleasant goodbyes (and they were most pleasant people) I continued driving to San Francisco, and saw this window display in Market Street, and was influenced (as to theme) by our conversation to attempt a 'theme' and as usual influenced also by the large graphic advertisement in the country's most 'gay' large city.

 

But is the male body meant to appeal to young women who are looking for a guy, young guys to emulate to impress young women, or young men to look at (and to look like)? Certainly many S.F. gays will just look and smile, as that's their orientation -- gays are drawn to S.F. by its lifestyle from all over the U.S.

 

I'm not gay, and while once more homophobic when I thought that it involved decision-making (as a youth) and when I was more ignorant and fearful (it WAS different), I am quite tolerant. One of my first gay clients, as a young attorney had a disease later called the 'gay disease' which we later know as AIDS. I visited with him at his home where he was injured.

 

(He was a bouncer in a gay bathhouse, initiating sex with 8 to 12 men a day -- initiating, not being passive -- probably one of the most sexually active people I have ever knowingly known as a male.)

 

One day he was in a hospital, and after that I never heard from or of him again. He said he thought he had 'lupus' or some such, but not quite, and then nothing. Never again. Of course it was Aids.

 

He told me all about the gay lifestyle and how he could get anything from his gay network -- and about the practices, etc., which was quite an education for this heterosexual and the only time in my life I ever had to learn about that lifestyle, not otherwise being very interested.

 

(Females are my only interest, as you may have gathered).

 

So the caption on this is framed as a question.

 

It doesn't purport to give any answers.

 

I don't make a judgment, although I certainly have an opinion, and you can guess what it is, given the above.

 

Live and let live.

 

The ad is from a noted clothiers, Abercrombie and Fitch, which has much risque advertising, especially featuring VERY young males and females in sexually tinged situations.

 

One more reason for asking the question, and maybe another for saying 'no'.

 

That's about all I have to say.

 

That's how this photo (and caption) came about.

 

Thanks for contributing, Hanna

 

John (Crosley)

Yes, you got it in four words: 'live and let live'. Having thought about it some more and having said they're not taking a blind bit of notice, perhaps that's the deeper danger of advertising. It's the insidious approach that targets the most vulnerable and impressionable. Anyway, thanks for the history behind your shot and your ever thought provoking images.

Hanna,

 

Many photographers have a disconnect between the thinking part of their brains and their photography.

 

I have permanent connection and hardly can disconnect the two.

 

The two always seem to connect, no matter how hard I try to take 'pretty' photos. I find it's hard, lonely, boring work.

 

Give me 10:00 p.m. on Market Street, San Francisco, a billboard poster in a store window for Abercrombie and Fitch designed to be sexually aggressive/and/or/provocative in the world's most gay city (Sorry Sydney), and then a skateboarder roars by just as I'm framing and I'm quick enough to get it.

 

Now that's my kind of photography.

 

It may or may not mean something, or at least it provokes thought, and it's aesthetically somewhat pleasing, and then it's also completely original.

 

Thanks again for commenting.

 

John (Crosley)