Let’s just all get along, eh?

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.

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.

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.

chicks taking photos of cocks? why would we need to take photos when all we have to do is post a craigslist ad?

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!

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 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 ;)

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.

“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.

Actually, yes.

Yes they do.

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.

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.