I have much to say to come out of my closet.
No, I'm not gay.
I have behaved in other ways that attract approbrium and this will come out; if nowhere else then in the book that is available via "The Imperfect Idealist" website: http://imperfectidealist.blogspot.com (see the column on the left hand side of the page)
In the meantime, this is perhaps enough self-disclosure of my shortcomings:
After my last relationship (which she ended due to overwhelm), I've taken 3 months off from seeing her in order to disentangle things. Here now is "Some of the Disentangling of what I have learned from this last relationship?" -which applies also to my interactions with many others in Hastings (eg The Happiness crew):
1) That I wish I'd spent more of the period of her and I having significant time for each other establishing how we'd want to process the inevitable conflicts ahead.
2) That I took much for granted and built some fantasies for the future without establishing enough of a shared bedrock.
3) That I pressed some buttons that set off alarms.
4) That I could do better.
5) That I know more clearly what I'd be looking for in any future relationship in terms of acceptance in particular.
6) That I find it hard to give affection, acceptance, appreciation in the way that it is perhaps most wanted by people of this era and that I crave too.
Yours in peace
Paul
***********************************************************
And here is my ethical self-outing from February 2013, after triggering controversy on Facebook:
No, I'm not gay.
I have behaved in other ways that attract approbrium and this will come out; if nowhere else then in the book that is available via "The Imperfect Idealist" website: http://imperfectidealist.blogspot.com (see the column on the left hand side of the page)
In the meantime, this is perhaps enough self-disclosure of my shortcomings:
After my last relationship (which she ended due to overwhelm), I've taken 3 months off from seeing her in order to disentangle things. Here now is "Some of the Disentangling of what I have learned from this last relationship?" -which applies also to my interactions with many others in Hastings (eg The Happiness crew):
1) That I wish I'd spent more of the period of her and I having significant time for each other establishing how we'd want to process the inevitable conflicts ahead.
2) That I took much for granted and built some fantasies for the future without establishing enough of a shared bedrock.
3) That I pressed some buttons that set off alarms.
4) That I could do better.
5) That I know more clearly what I'd be looking for in any future relationship in terms of acceptance in particular.
6) That I find it hard to give affection, acceptance, appreciation in the way that it is perhaps most wanted by people of this era and that I crave too.
Yours in peace
Paul
***********************************************************
And here is my ethical self-outing from February 2013, after triggering controversy on Facebook:
PC:
Unbelievably naughty of me to take this
photo?
http://ethicaloutings.blogspot.co.uk/
http://ethicaloutings.blogspot.co.uk/
S: because
...
S: I'm
inclined to agree with Chris. We can't think for you post-factum
Paul, only prompt you to start thinking for yourself _before_ you do
something you can't back away from
J: You
know how parents feel about this sort of thing. Even the ones who are
also friends of yours. I think you should set yourself the challenge
of living without the need to upload everything onto you-tube. How
about putting the i-phone down for a day?
PC: Jules,
I'll make that day the 30th of this month! I also intend to be on
retreat from 17th-26th and will have my iphone on airplane mode; just
using the camera to photograph the Norfolk Broads - no not the women;
the water:-)
PC: J,
convince me that I'm doing more harm than you in the position I am
taking on this and I will remove it. if anyone wants to beat me up
for doing this meet me at Asda, St Leonards at 9.15 on Friday!
S: Paul,
please don't treat this with your usual flippancy. And stop playing
silly games for the sake of getting attention. Even though I do think
a lot of people are a bit touchy about children and photos, they
_are_ touchy and you really don't want to be on the wrong end of that
particular taboo. So please take J's very sensible advice.
PC: I
bow to my youngers and betters in the Triratna Buddhist Movement.
J: My
position is that I am the owner of my image and, while my children
are minors, the owner of theirs too. Anyone photographing me, or my
children, is infringing our privacy and it has long been established
etiquette amongst street photographers to seek permission when
photographing others in public, especially if the intention is to
publish the photograph. I don't feel particularly worried about
predators on the net, but the lack of good manners is annoying.
Several years ago a photograph of me and the children appeared on
flickr and what incensed me most about it was that the photographer
didn't have the decency to ask me if it was ok to use my image.
M: Paul,
anyone is quite capable of reporting this to FB (see pull down menu
on right) as unauthorized use of the image of a minor if it so
pleases them. It might not get you arrested but it could well get you
banned from using FB. Seriously.
J: And
why did you post this in the first place? Was it just to provoke a
reaction or did you want to open an interesting discussion on the
ethical use of pictures in this image-saturated world?
PC: Thank
you for asking, J. Often on my wanderings something catches my eye
and so I photograph litter, nature, graffiti etc etc. My gratitude
diary has space for a 'moment of beauty' in it & on a day of
20emails to my siblings -with great tension- this is the moment I
recollect warmly today & thought I was doing no harm until
Satyadarshin reminded me as above. This prompted me to remember the
inspiring Peace Pilgrim (reading this at present) p38 "I
remember one experience when it said in the local newspaper I was
going to speak at a church service. It showed my picture - front and
back, wearing my lettered tunic. A man who belonged to that church
was simply horrified to discover that this creature wearing a
lettered tunic was about to speak at his church. He called his
preacher about it, and he called his friends about it. Somebody told
me who he was. I felt so sorry that I had somehow offended a man I
didn't even know. so,I called him!
'This is Peace Pilgrim calling', I said. I could hear him gasp. Afterward he told me that he thought I had called to bawl him out. I said 'I have called to apologise to you because evidently I must have done something to offend you, since without even knowing me you have been apprehensive about my speaking at your church. Therefore I feel I must somehow owe you an apology and I have called to apologise!'
'This is Peace Pilgrim calling', I said. I could hear him gasp. Afterward he told me that he thought I had called to bawl him out. I said 'I have called to apologise to you because evidently I must have done something to offend you, since without even knowing me you have been apprehensive about my speaking at your church. Therefore I feel I must somehow owe you an apology and I have called to apologise!'
Do
you know that man was in tears before the conversation was over? And
now we're friends - he corresponded with me afterward. yes, the law
of love works!"
PC: We're
at tangents it appears and I'm shattered (though it was only 18 tense
emails to siblings today afterall) This communication is one I
suggest we carry on off-line. I tried removing this picture yet
haven't worked out how to do that on an iPad or iPhone; previously
I've done the removing via a net book but that's far away. Bear with
me, please.
S: None
of which explains, "Unbelievably naughty of me to take this
photo?" If you thought it was naughty, what kind of response
were you trying to elicit? I say a non sequitur is no excuse.
PC: Yes,
it appears unsafe to follow up my post with an open discussion; sad
that this is the only time I've felt nervous about having no privacy
whatsoever on my facebook news feed. My nerves have been sorely
stretched by working to support my father after his heart attack in
the best way U thought I could and in the face of family opposition.
I dearly need support and recovery - luckily Jn offered today to come
down from Birmingham to London etc to provide friendship face to face
within the 95%encouragement and 5%chalkenge parameters. EXPECT SOME
SILENCE FROM ME ON FACEBOOK.
S: Paul,
please take your own good advice and start by telling us what your
needs are and request the kind of support that can be offered through
a medium like this. You'll find people much, much more sympathetic.
J: I
don't see why you are worried about an open discussion here? This is
a subject I find very interesting and would love to hear what others
think about the appropriation of images. Elsewhere you have asked why
there is opposition to you filming interactions with your family when
your mum was happy with it and trusted what you were doing. Why do
you think people object to their pictures being taken and published
without their consent?
PC: Sorry,
however interesting this topic is I have just awoken from anxiety and
a pressing story that I need to listen to every bit of (surreptitious
or overt) filming of my Dad to tune into today's task of "springing
him from prison"(as he might call it), returning him to his
home, handing over the house-sitting to my eldest brother and getting
to London by 6pm for Jn and the Living Dharma project, then Hastings
tomorrow, Oxford Friday and London/Canterbury Saturday, by which time
the siblings need to have installed guards at Dad's home to stop him
attempting the stairs in his fierce determination to live
independently and ignore medical advice.
PC: My
ESP-like waking was to field my brother in Florida's email about my
filming of Dad and give him this reassurance below. The reassurance
I'd like to give the Dad of the girl in the photo requires my telling
a story about Rio and the rich mum who said "My daughter is
safer if she goes to the ghetto than if not" (for elsewise we
create a divided society). This man's daughter is safer if we live in
a society where I can approach/look at/photograph her without
reproach than if NOT.
As
for Michael in America I wrote, to quell his anxieties about my
YouTubing Dad: Yes, Michael, YouTube enable their account holders
whose accounts are "in good standing" to have this facility
to upload a video without listing it. Dad understood last night that
this enables you to get a sense of how he's doing and to make
well-informed choices with your siblings based on having seen how he
is on his feet and heard his words/dialogues at key times during the
week.
PC: I
once carried the dearest boy in the world to me around a country park
with his mum (Sarah) and he was blonde and this age. I bought him a
(Matchbox) camper van; he was into those from 2-4approx and as I
carried him he kept putting his toy in my shirt pocket y my heart and
taking it out, saying "Damper Dan". Despite having nieces
and a nephew that day for me is my life experience of innocent,
joyful intimacy with a child. Now, as I see a child wrapped up in
their blue (or in this case pink) world, I wonder for how many
nanoseconds I am allowed to appreciate that life. This culture
distances men from becoming primary teachers, distances young females
from the male world, contributing I would suggest to a desperate
over-early sexualisation of young women to get access to the male
world etc. Fathers hold back from the most crucial stage in a young
girls development before in puberty they are ready to go out and
tackle the world with confidence i.e. being convincingly told that
they are the most beautiful, wonderful being in the world and that
they are loved deeply.
PC: Etc
etc
PC: I've
just written this to D : Thank you for sharing Alice on a bus
journey in Bristol once; I was touched. I've written about adults and
children in modern society and brought in your story around safety
that I cherish the most on my FB page. If you added a comment
underneath the pink child I controversially photographed in a cafe
yesterday, your few minutes here would greatly meet my need for
support and recognition of my social isolation for the wonderful
world of children. Please suggest ways I can contribute to your
well-being too?
PC: Ultimately
I'm looking for a world to be created that marginalises private
transport (other than the bicycle)'and does the same with children
too. It takes a community to,raise a child, not a couple of
scared/scarred parents in an atomised world. How many cars do you
really need on your street and how are you going to share them? Don't
you need a few more children (instead of cars) playing on your
street? OK, who is going to have them and how are you going to share
them such that we can all live child-enriched lives whilst trying to
build a sustainable world socio-economic system?
PC: Where
is my Cosette? I came out of prison 20 years ago but still haven't
found her/him, or rather I did in India, then the drunken wife-beater
took her/him away, as alluded to & I have to see up to 7 years
more through before I get to BodhaGaya to redress this wrong:-)
J:
You
didn't answer my question paul. Why do you think people object to
their picture being used without consent, or to being filmed?
C:
OK,
we could get into a debate about how sad it is that single men in
their late forties can't photograph a little girl in a cafe without
asking permission. And we can debate how unfair it is that people
have a stereotype of a pedophile as an unshaven sleep deprived man in
shabby clothes taking photos of little girls. But that perception is
not going to be changed overnight. Add to that,PC, the fact that if
challenged you would either feel the need due to your reverence for
truth to blurt out something about your sexual predelictions or (as
here) some convoluted piece of philosophical rambling rather than a
straight answer, and you could well have the law feeling your collar.
And you would have to be sure that nowhere in your various garages
filled with junk or electronic storage devices there were any weird
materials or dubious web searches . And mud sticks, which would
blight a lot of career or relationship paths. All for the sake of
proving some point about your right to post a photo of a stranger's
child with the caption 'ooh I'm being naughty'. Incredibly stupid
behaviour. Have the debate first if it means so much to you.
PC:
The
debate is to be had
PC:
You
are welcome to search my garages and my computers.
PC:
I'm
not yet in a calm enough place to do justice to J's questions though
I've bought a friend down from Birmingham who will be with me in Asda
on Friday, by which time I intend to put this matter to rest to J's
satisfaction & mine.
PC:
What's
going on (if you want the back story) http://youtu.be
J:
To
me it's very simple. The dangers to ourselves and our children are
the same whether or not we choose to live in fear of them. I choose
not to live in imagined fear. But the issue of photographing others
without consent comes down to a lack of good manners. It shows a lack
of respect and courtesy, reducing a person to the same status as
litter, graffiti or whatever else has caught your eye.
C:
I
think this is the most interesting debate Paul has ever posted, and a
shame he has decided to give it a low priority. I think that two
different issues are entangled here. What rights if any do you have
over your own image and is it right to photograph and publish images
of children. For better or worse we live in a society in which the
spectre of child abusers looms large. That means that pictures of
children are in a different category. No matter how much you argue
for sharing in the innocent joys of childhood, that is always going
to prey on people's minds. And the way to challenge the stereo type
is through parenting, early years education, voluntary work and so
forth. Forcing the issue by taking and posting illicit photos just
forces the issue and is likely to be seriously counter-productive. In
terms of image rights, the child cannot consent and the patent or
guardian is unlikely to consent on their behalf.
C:
On
adult image rights, I am less understanding. You go out in public and
your image becomes part of the common heritage of mankind. People see
you, remember you, memorialise your image in any way that seems of
value to them. I get very annoyed by the (small) number of
interpreters I employ who complain about their image rights. It seems
to me pretentious (that 1000 year building behind you is the view you
are interpreting) and belittles the profession - this may effect my
agency, my equity membership, my big break in the West End/
Hollywood. No this is actually your real career, and mr Yakimoto with
his iPhone is just as important an audience member as a mythical
talent scout.
C:
And,
like PC I have only pleasure in seeing my image multilplied across
the Internet. As long as there isn't a wanted sticker across it.
PC:
You'll
be pleased to know that I'm now uploading this dialogue as my latest
YouTube video (out within the next hour) and that I'm on a computer
from which I will shortly delete this image, once I've copied all the
dialogue into a word document for later....
