guest post by Aaron Muszalski
Wearing a sign on his hat that read “I take photos of other dudes taking photos of boobs without asking!” San Francisco photographer, artist, and devoted contrarian Rubin Starset took this sadly illuminating collection of photos at Burning Man 2008.
For the record, although the terms and conditions on Burning Man tickets do caution that the holder’s “image may be captured on film, video or photographs without holder’s consent and without compensation” Burning Man’s photographer rights and responsibilities policy specifies the following:
You have the responsibility to be respectful to people you wish to record and to seek permission from them before recording their likeness or voice.
Also, before they can be used at the event at all, all cameras must be registered and visibly tagged (unlike many of the cameras seen in Rubin’s photos, which are prominently untagged).
If you are filming or videotaping for personal use, you have the responsibility to check in at Playa Info, sign a personal use agreement, and get your camera tagged. This will let others know that you have obtained permission to use your camera. Unless you sign a personal use agreement and obtain a camera tag, you do not have any right to record images at the event.
The abundance of such non-consensual lechery is not surprising (especially at Burning Man’s Center Camp Cafe, a common hangout for such types, and where most of these photos appear to have been taken). What is remarkable is just how similar these pathetic little men appear, ineffectually hiding behind broad-brimmed camping hats, do-rags and boozy, alcoholic sunburns. I wonder if those long lenses are an attempt to compensate for something?
photos by Rubin Starset
Here Are A Few Related Posts You Might Enjoy:
- Dude-A-Day, 365 Days of Illustrations of Dudes
- Boobs In A Box Video by Geek Entertainment TV
- San Francisco Pie Fight 2009 Photos & Video
{ 31 comments… read them below or add one }
Zing! WTG, Rubin!
At the core of this sad little controversy is the notion that exposed boobage is somehow shameful. I can’t support that.
This is awesome!
Although, for what it’s worth, camera tags are only required for video. Still cameras do not need to be registered.
@Jeffrey
Not in the least. This isn’t about shame, it’s about consent.
Burning Man aspires to be, in their own words, an “experiment in radical self-expression” and the event’s website reminds people that both nudity and photography are examples of self-expression, each valid, and each worthy of respect.
Over the years the event’s photo policy has evolved in an attempt to strike a respectful balance between each side of this potentially uncomfortable dynamic, trying to preserve an environment where people still feel free to go partially (or entirely) naked, and where photographers are still free to pursue their art. Consent has proven to be a crucial element in achieving such a balance. It has nothing to do with shame, and everything to do with mutual respect.
people taking pictures of people who go nude in public? so what? get off your high horse and go listen to some kathy fire or something.
pretty pathetic to have to register a camera. even more pathetic to think one is superior for following all the rules. get over yourselves.
Jeffrey: exposed boobage is certainly not shameful. What is a shame, is those pervs taking pictures without asking and while hiding.
Did Aaron have a tag on his camera?
Did Aaron get consent from the all these subjects to take their photos?
Conjuring up images of Burning Man appropriate punishments….
Or, even better:
Did Rubin have a tag on his camera?
Did Rubin get consent from the all these subjects to take their photos?
I’m off to take pictures of 17 year olds using the Gmail, cause Google’s rules require Gmailers to be at least 18.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9902548-7.html
It’s about respect for the rules.
(Do people really pay $250 to go to Nevada just to take photos like this?)
From the very link he’s referring to: “You do not have to register your still photo camera if you are just shooting for friends and family.”
He has no evidence that these guys weren’t given full permission by the participants being photographed.
“You should ask for permission before photographing or filming any participant.”
Again, no proof that these folks have no permission. This guy clearly just has an axe to grind with anyone else taking photos. He snapped several shots of people with plain old little point & click cameras, which aren’t required to be tagged.
Aaron- Thanks for writing this up! And Rubin, you are my hero. It is always revealing to turn the camera on the pervs who steal images of all the sexy ladies at Burning Man. The fact that MOST shooters do this in an obviously clandestine manner is the shameful part, even if it is for their own personal pleasure, but often times it is for commercial gain in the worst cases.
@Bob
Although it may not be apparent from the images themselves, Rubin made a point to observe each man long enough to establish that they were repeatedly taking photos of women with whom they had had no contact.
I have suggested that he add a FAQ or other documentation on his site to explain this fact, along with further context about the intent behind this art project.
The nice way , I think, is to run up to the subject you’ve photographed and tell them that you got a beautiful picture of them & give them your contact info so they can get it. They have an opportunity to ask you to you erase it… and you actually get to meet & interact with the person like a real live human being.
But I suppose that might be too scary for some folks.
@Bob
Also, as regards tagging of cameras, while I hate to nerd-pick (a useful neologism recently suggested in the comments of a post over on BoingBoing) ANY camera capable of shooting video is required to be tagged. These days, that includes pretty much all digital cameras, regardless of size, as they almost all include some sort of movie mode. Here is the specific rule (which also happens to be the very first paragraph in the Burning Man photo policy):
“The easiest way to determine whether you have to register your camera is as follows: All video cameras must be registered and have a tag attached to them. If your digital camera can record even a few seconds of motion imagery, it is considered a video camera.”
That said, I do not think that non-compliance with the tagging policy is, in itself, the heart of the problem here. That remains, as I suggested above, the lack of clear, overt, mutual consent. In this context, the lack of visible tags merely further paints a picture of attendees who either don’t understand the culture of the event, or who do, but have willfully chosen to disregard (and disrespect) it.
@Jim, who asks “(Do people really pay $250 to go to Nevada just to take photos like this?)”
Actually, yes.
Yes they do.
Wow, lookit the outrage. How many of those declaring their contempt for this project are guilty of exactly the behavior being held up to the light, I wonder? Defensive much?
“She was naked, dude, so she was totally asking for it.”
Slim, this is why I love you to death even though I never seem to get to see you.
Many here are getting caught up in what is and what is not the exact Burning Man Photography Rule. They are completely ignoring the fact that Burning Man rules — as loose as they are — are broken left and right by everyone who goes there. There is an expected amount of gray-area to every rule at Burning Man.
However, with all this anarchy there is also a certain assumption of responsibility. If you are planning on bending/breaking a rule great — just plan on also owning up to any repercussions of your actions. Also, bonus points are given to those who break a rule artistically.
The “dudes” here are breaking the rule of consent and I would bet most if not all of them know it. Photography consent is often broken on an ad-hoc basis at Burning Man — where one sees and takes a chance beautiful shot which happens to include nudity. However, these dudes are different in that they are choosing to specifically break this rule.
Rubin too has chosen to break this rule of consent. However, he is doing so publicly and honestly with the knowledge that he will be called forth for his actions. Also, at least in my book, he gets massive bonus points as it were for doing so artistically.
@Jim’s comment about Rubin not having consent is a little thought-provoking.
If you’re a nit- (or nerd-) picker, then not having consent is not having consent. This remains true whether you’re exposing exhibitionism or voyeurism.
Yes, I prefer the former and probably would prefer Rubin’s company to his subjects’. Still, it seems like his failure to get their consent is a fly in the ointment.
Hopefully, Rubin isn’t nit-picker ;)
I have done this every single time I’ve gone to AVN (the porn convention). a porn starlet drops a pen and 20 guys are there with their cameras literally up her ass the minute she turns around to pick it up — it’s a phenomenon all by itself. I take their pictures not to shame them (they have no shame about what they’re doing, obviously), but to observe the observers. and to register my disbelief, in a way.
the women are on display. the men are in a public place, so it is absolutely legal for me to photograph them. Rubin, IMHO, hasn’t broken any rules of consent. and anyone who thinks they can step outside their house without being photographed or recorded by someone, anyone — is living in 1950.
Rubin fucking rocks for doing this, and even moreso for tagging himself doing it. he’d have a field day at the adult expo.
If tags must be used they should be on the wrists of the folks shooting who are expected to obey rules of etiquette.
@matt Public? Burningman is in no shape or way “public”. Everyone at Burningman agrees to the same set of rules when they buy their ticket, or they don’t get in. This way, the people wandering around nude get some assurance they won’t become thwaping fodder in another girls gone wild video, and photographers get to practice their art.
Composition and intent is everything when it comes to photographing people, these photographers seem less than honorable based upon their actions.
Girl’s aren’t that scary. Just ask!
is it only dudes that break these rules? where are the photos of chicks taking photos of boobs. or dudes and chicks taking photos of cocks?
also what do tagged cameras look like? (well.. the tag itself)
do you know if these dudes maybe approached the women after taking the photos to show them and seek approval then?
a lot of people in the backgrounds of these photos seems to have similar tans and also wearing much of the same garb.
not defending anyone breaking rules.. just asking/saying :)
@Brian
chicks taking photos of cocks? why would we need to take photos when all we have to do is post a craigslist ad?
On rules: this years rules say that these photos (were they taken in 2009) would have the copyright assigned to BM org, because they’re posted on the internet. Odd (apparently new) rule, #9 in the ticket terms.
Wow, yet another reason I think this country is going down the tubes. Cant we as a culture just live and let live? If women have a problem with people photographing them in the nude, don’t go out in the open crowd of people with cameras. Duh!
I think it is sad that this is an issue at all, we live in a world with real problems, there are people being killed in the streets of their neighborhood out there. No wonder half the world hates us.
there just boobs fer cryin out loud!! The main reason people like them so much is because we all lived on them when we were born. “your” boobs are not more sacred than anothers, get over it.
I hate double standards, and I hate judgemental crap when somebody points out what someone looks like, or what hat there wearing like it matters at all, What about YOU pal?
I have been DPW for eight burns and I could give you folks several things to discuss, like that the whole event uses enough fuel and material to save a third world town from starvation, and we do it for a party, but who cares any way? So throw your tits around, and if some guy you don’t know snaps a shot because he likes what he sees? take it as a compliment, and don’t be so damned insecure.
You could do what I suggest to many whiners, and complainers when I roll with my crew, GO HOME.
What Matt and Mike seem to forget with their “don’t show your tits if you don’t want them photographed” is that (A) Burning Man is as Estee says not technically public and (B) the photography consent rules of Burning Man were established just so people could feel free to do what they want with their bodies and their in a relaxed fun environment.
Without these consent rules, it would become another Girls Gone Wild voyeur-fest — where the girls are all expected to compete against who can be the most exhibitionist amateur porn star.
Personally, unlike Mr “everyone who isn’t a DPW hardass should GO HOME” Mike, I prefer the relaxed atmosphere that the consent rules encourage.
p.s. Also, really Mike? You’re DPW crew aren’t whiny complainers? Has the DPW changed recently? Cause last I checked their third biggest past-time was bitching about the regulars who come to the event — the second biggest past-time being bitching about everyone who is not DPW, and of course the first biggest being drinking shitty beer.
@Brian I suggested to Rubin that he do “Photos of chicks who take photos of dongs” next year to cover both sides of this story.
Burning Man is held on public land. Chances are if you’re doing Burning Man right, you will be photographed by someone wanting to record your self-expression. Sometimes this is in a negative light, sometimes in a positive one. But are a couple of photos and some snarky comments really that big of a deal?
I do love the nice notification via large hat. It’s like “Press” only more specific.
i feel there’s dubious morality here at best. while i think people who take pictures of naked women without their permission are abhorrent, i also feel that publicly shaming people who *might* be doing so (without being absolutely 100% *positive* that’s the case) is equally abhorrent.
we only have rubin’s word for what he saw, he’s asking us to implicitly trust his judgment and determination of what he witnessed, and we don’t know him (or the quality of his deductive process) at all. that’s all pretty shaky ground to say the least, and on that basis, he’s pillorying people in public prior to (or absent of) their being able to defend themselves. you might recall that’s essentially what joseph mccarthy did, and … well … we all know how that went.
we have the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty in this country, and that doesn’t change based on the distastefulness of one’s crime. i think that the better way to go about dealing with people who are seeming to engage in this kind of conduct is to have a direct conversation with them and confronting them about their behavior, rather than taking what’s seen at face value and exposing them to public criticism … wherein there’s a high risk of libel, and potentially unfairly damaging their lives.
that said, i also feel that anybody proven to be taking pictures of naked women without their consent should be hog-tied to the trash fence.
Wow, Mike just totally proved Elusis’s point. Awesome.
Heinlein taught us that there is no shame in exhibitionism OR its natural counterpart of voyeurism.
Let’s just all get along, eh?