JMO - Values and our humanity

While listening and reading about the debate over the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), I was struck by some thoughts on humna nature and personal values everyone uses to guide themselves and make decisions in their life. It struck me that the worst of those who preach are more than likely the least who really understand the issue, the reality of the issue and the consequences in people's life. They hold to what they describe as their personal values and won't waver from them in the face of what they call the enemy which is simply reality.

The first thought was the saying, "The truth of someone's value is not what or who they include, it's who or what they exclude." That was evident when many who support the pro-LGBT cause decided to remove the inclusion of transpeople, or gender identity, expression or presentation, and felt transpeople were ballast to a sinking bill when faced with the conservative or religious right's view about these people, rights and marriage. And so they jettisoned transpeople from the bill and in their reality.

The exception was Representative Tammy Baldwin. She gave a short, magnificant and magnanimous speech about the failures of Representative Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi and all the representatives who were for the non-inclusive bill. She, and I suspect a few others, decided inclusion was the only answer, and exclusion was not the answer, but merely the politically expedient ones others used to make a show and get votes in next year's election.

The second thought was the saying, "Any principle or belief followed outside of reality is hollow." This is what I consistently heard from the conservative and religious representatives, citing reasons or excuses for voting against the bill, but in reality all those reasons and excuses were falsehoods. They had nothing to do with the actual bill but with their idealistic view of who is acceptable to discriminate against, namely homosexual and transgender people.

The bill including language palatable to the religious community, to allow them to discriminate against anyone they don't want to accept in the church or commercial interests, and to those advocating the "protection" of marriage by exempting any connection between non-discrimination and existing marriage statutes or laws, like the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The writers of the bill simply caved in to protect their political ass(ets) for next year's election.

The third thought was the saying, "In the practice of our beliefs, we make concessions and draw lines between who or what we accept and don't accept." As noted some people's line are imaginary in the real world, some people's lines are drawn for personal reasons for their political survival, and some people's lines are relative to the situation. But then some people's lines are so far out there, it's rare any issue gets even close.

This is a point, how big of a frame of acceptance do we make with our beliefs to establish values and allow humanity into the picture of our life, leaving everyone else outside of our reality? And that's the real issue. It's not about our principles or beliefs, but the frame of our life and view of reality. Everything else are the tools we use to build the frame. After all, like everyone else, we put our frame on the wall of humanity and reality.

So, how big is your frame? How large your humanity?

JMO - Why new ENDA is wrong

The House of Representatives yesterday passed an update to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) by a majority but not enough of one once the Senate passes its version and the compromise goes to the President for George Bush to simply veto it. It was, for the most part, an exercise of political wills and power, and a show of public and political rhetoric about sexual orientation and gender identity. It was an excercise in futility, not uncommon for Congress of recent sessions.

While 350 of the top 500 Fortune companies and over 300 human rigthts and LGBT organizations support an all-inclusive ENDA, Congress, the respective leader on these issues in the House, Representatives Barney Franks, decided to jettision gender identity, meaning transpeople, from the bill. In short, they decided adding another few to the many at the expense of another few was politicially expedient and their version of American values.

The saving grace in the process was Representative Tammy Baldwin whose speech on the floor was magnificent and magnanimous in the face of Reprsentatives Barney Franks and Nancy Pelosi's decision not to include transpeople in the ENDA. It was a political decision of the face of it, but in reality it was a cave-in to the religious and conservative Republicans who don't think all Americans are really Americans and worthy of equal rights and protections.

If this version of the bill is passed, and for some odd reason President Bush has a lapse of memory and his own conscience and signs it, it will mean the formerly oppressed will join the ranks of the oppressors. A gay or lesbian manager will have the right to fire a transperson without cause but they can not be similarly fired. The latter is discrimination and the former is simply business as usual. A fired gay or lesbian will have rights, but a transperson is simply unemployed, often again.

And as usual Congress caved into the minority of groups who have mispresented transpeople and this bill to the public, and especially their constituents. It's ok for a Congressional Representative or Senator to be gay or lesbian. And it's ok for anyone of them to be straight with hidden homosexual tendencies. But it's not ok for a person to be transgender and make the life-changing decision to be who they are, and have any hope they will be granted the same rights and privileges as the rest of Americans in the workplace.

Martin Luther King spoke those immortal words, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." Those words apply equally to one's gender. We have long abolished discrimination against one's race, ethnicity, religion, sex, and disabilities, and now ENDA add sexual orientation. But not gender identity.

There are thousands of transpeople, many who have finished their transistion to be physically and legal their new sex and gender, living ordinary lives alongside the rest of Americans, and few if anyone outside family and friends are the wiser. There are tens of thousands of transpeople trying to live as the rest of Americans. But they are discriminated against routinely in their life, and often the victim of violence. The Hate Crime Act prohibits some of this discrimination and the ENDA would prohibit the rest.

But alas, transpeople aren't in ENDA. Since I expect it will see a Presidential veto and not be overridden by Congress, it would be nice to say express some hatred to the LGB groups that wanted to become the many and the oppressor. But I can't and won't. I do hope that the LGB community follows up on their promise to the T-community to help and support their inclusion in ENDA in 2009. But I'm not holding my breath because deep down I feel the same will happen again.

Deja Vu all over, again, and transpeople will again be political fodder, lost in the shuffle and race to join the many. And they'll be handed an IOU saying, "We appreciate your help in the effort for gay and lesbian rights, and we will reciprocate for you sometime in the future when it's politicially expedient to do without political fallout of our own efforts." That is, of course, unless the real Democrats stand up and say they are for every American. As will the President.

But, as the old saying goes, I'm not holding my breath.

Capture versus Create

I love looking at images people produce, and while some of them are ones, in the back of your mind I ask myself, "What were they thinking?", I always try to find something to see and learn. And all photographers are far more self-critical than critics of others' work, it always pays to examine your own more critically to find the mistakes in your vision, effort and work while being more open with others' work.

In looking at the work of others I tend to ask myself was the image captured or created. It's obvious all images are created in that they are moments in time and place discerned and discriminated by the photograher. They create the image they saw. But the difference I use is if the image was already there and they found a piece of life and reality in it or if the image created in the studio or similar situation.

Ok, it's a statement of the obvious. All studio, commercial and product photography, and almost all porttrait, wedding and similar people photography is created. It didn't happen until the photographer created the environment for the images. It's a type of photography I like looking at because it reminds me of the diversity of vision and imagination photographers have, something find difficult.

Which leads to looking at captured photography. The diversity of vision in being and seeing the world is fascinating. We all could walk down a country road for a mile and all of us would come home with different images. It's simply how each of us looks and sees. This is where I learn to expand my own mind outside the box I limit myself. It doesn't mean I'm good or a even do much beyond what I already do, but sometimes it reminds me to step outside the mental box.

In end all images are created. Every photographer sits down in front of their computer to process and produce their images, either in print or on the Web. So all images are really created, I just focus on the original image, was it in the world or in someone's mind. It's why I call myself an ordinary photographer, simply walking around, looking and seeing, and then photographing what pleases me, and why I like to produce images of what I saw, nothing enchanced or created, just was then and is now.

Or so, it's why I'm a photographer. I focus on the captured image and enjoy those who produce either.

TAO - Photo Student of the Tao

I was browsing in a bookstore recently and wandered into the religion section for another reason but ended up looking at books on Eastern religions, namely Taoism, which I've been a student of since 1975 when I read Alan Watt's book "Tao, The Watercourse Way".

Then I was a student in geography and hydrology, not of Taoism or other religions or philosophies. I was preoccupied with getting my bachelors and masters degrees in geography specializing in water resources. Life is like that, it consumes your attention, energy, focus and resources, and when you think you're busy enough something hits you from a direction and with a force you're not ready or prepared. The ole' mental thump on the forehead.

Well, I really didn't understand much of the book except the basic ideas and one visual image that's never left me about life. In the book he describes our being a hollow tube floating on a river. You're not interferring with the flow but moving with the flow. You can't effect the flow but you reflect the flow. You're simply being with the flow and the flow with you. And he writes, if you can understand it, then you can't describe it, and if you can describe it, then you don't understand it.

And so obviously I don't understand it. And thus, like many, I'm simply a simple student of it. And over the years I've understood it also applies to photography. It's not about you, the camera and the subject. It's about you and the flow of life, and you're holding the camera to capture instances in the flow. And the same rule applies, but to this you can add that when you capture it you're simply capturing a moment in time and place.

And in the moment, it's about being in the moment of life and the moment of photography. Bringing you and your camera into, as they say, harmony with life and the flow of life. Kinda' sounds esoteric, don't it? Well, it is philosophical and religious in one sense and on one plane of life when it's really about working. But it's also as the saying goes, it's about "being in the moment" and that moment is the Tao and Tao of photography.

And so, like many other writers on the subject (geez, do a Google search on "Tao of Photography" and you get a ton of links), I'll explore the Tao as it relates to my understanding of the Tao and of life and photography. It's all just personal and a personal exploration to finally reread all the chapters in the "Tao Teh Ching", using Henry Wei's "The Guiding Light of Lao Tzu" and Philippe Gross and S.I. Shapiro's Tao of Photography.

So it's all relative to those books and me. The rest are my wanderings in throught and images.

LensWork Magazine

I got the latest issue of LensWork photography magazine yesterday. I want to encourage everyone to find a copy at a bookstore or magazine stand or order it on-line. If there is a magazine that demonstrates the value of being a human being and the importance of photographers in presenting our humanity, LensWork is the magazine and the latest issue (Number 73, Nov-Dec. 2007) is a great example. Why?

First, the columns by Brook Jensen and Bill Jay are always worthwhile to read and to ponder the thoughts. And the interviews are always good to understand the diversity of serious photographers and their craft. But most importantly, this issue has four tremendous portfolios, the "People of Ethopia" by Robert Waddingham, "Endangered Species: The Point Judith Fishermen" by Markham Starr, the "Portraits of Time" by Beth Moon about ancient trees, and "Cage Call" by Louie Palu about underground miners and mining.

This is without a doubt the best photography magazine in the world. Others are flashy, talk about equipment and the photographic processes, present brillantly printed images, offer tons of long-known advice, and on and on. LensWorks brings you simple humanity through the eyes of outstanding photographers to show their passion and love for a subject. Their photography isn't the showcase that the rest of the magazines are about, with LensWork, the images, stories and information are. And that's the difference.

It's about the content. Others sell content and through all the ads you eventually find useful nuggets or even articles, or find interesting photos. LensWork is all content (ok, ads for itself but no more). You can read something beginning to end by turning pages, not searching to find where the it ends near the end of the issue. You can view portfolios in sequence as the photographer and editor wanted, not being distracted by the ads on the pages. The images consume the page and they consume your attention. Right there in front of you, without pretense or distractions.

So I encourage you to expand your understanding of the world than merely scanning a magazine for the interesting stuff. LensWork, and this issue, will stay in your memory as you read and reread it, and it will be one you will save to read again to renew your connection to humanity. It's not overblown in the world of hype today to say that, even if you think it is. Find the issue and then tell me I'm wrong.