This is a self-portrait I made two months ago, back then I published it with the title “Bold and Proud.”
For some people merely staying alive requires being bold. When you don’t fit into any of the boxes that the society has been trying to enforce for centuries, when your mere existence is an eyesore for conservative people who believe in traditional gender roles, you have to be bold just to survive. When all the “rules” the society tries to enforce clash with your personal lifestyle choices, all that’s left to be is to stay bold and proud.
This photo was meant to be symbolic. I used blue and pinkish lights on my hair for the traditional stereotypical colors for men and women. Same goes for how my hair is arranged. Both sides of the face are lit differently, because I am a person who prefers to live as a man, but the society tries to force that part of me into shadows. However, that part is the real me. When people look at me, they imagine a woman. The problem is that this person they imagine to see actually does not exist.
I also broke some photography “rules” on purpose. There is no make-up, because I don’t use it (I never learned how to apply even the most basic make-up). Then there’s also the broken symmetry. In my opinion, when photographing people’s faces from the front, lighting that evenly illuminates both sides of the face makes the model look more beautiful. People perceive symmetrical faces as beautiful. Asymmetry can be perceived as ugly, even disturbing. Thus intentionally using light in order to make a person’s face look less symmetrical is generally not recommended. Given how my mere existence is disturbing for some people, that seemed fitting.
By the way, in my opinion Rembrandt portrait lighting looks better when a person is photographed slightly from the side (except, of course, for those few very beautiful people who look absolutely stunning in photos in any light whatsoever).
The curious thing about using symbols in art or photography is that usually only the artist knows what each symbol stands for. Viewers looking at some artwork usually cannot figure out the meaning of whatever they are looking at.
The photo is taken with Canon EOS 5DS R digital camera and Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM lens. It is taken at 1/200s, ƒ/8. The background is a grey sheet of paper. I used four lights: one light with a blue gel for illuminating the background; two lights with blue and orange gels for illuminating the face; the main light was a rectangular softbox. (The orange light was changed to pink in Photoshop, because I didn’t have a pink gel at home.)
———
I wrote this post a week ago, yet I was hesitant to hit the “schedule” button.
On the left side of my blog there’s an “about me” widget. You will notice that there is no photo. That is intentional. Most people add their own photos to basic information about themselves. I’m always reluctant to do so.
When I am talking with people online anonymously, I am free to be me. More importantly, the people with whom I am interacting also have no other choice but to perceive this person with whom they are communicating as the real me. When they don’t know my age, gender, race, visual appearance, the place where I live or what citizenship I have, then they cannot possibly apply to me their preexisting stereotypes about various groups of people. Instead, they are forced to interact with me knowing only the words I have written. Then for them I am only a blank page with some words I have said, and that is part of the real me (I think that my thoughts, also when written down and published online, are part of who I am).
The moment people find out how I look like or some biographical facts about me, they start applying to me various stereotypes, they start imagining things about me. Then they no longer see a part of the real me, instead they filter my words though their own preexisting stereotypes. Instead of interacting with a blank page that contains some of my words, they now imagine some person that is not me. In their own minds they construct a fictional image of who they think I could be.
For example, people who don’t know any facts about me will use whichever pronoun I use when referring to myself. Once people know how my physical body happens to look like, then they instinctively start using pronouns I don’t particularly like. And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Once people find out your age, race, and place of birth, they apply to you an endless assortment of various stereotypes.
I like to hide behind my fox logotype, because it allows very little room for imagination. A reader of my blog who sees my logotype might assume that I probably like foxes and tribal art (those would be correct assumptions). Given how I drew this logotype myself, others might also assume that I am interested in art (another correct assumption). But ultimately I still remain near anonymous. A fox logotype doesn’t allow other people to apply to me all that array of stereotypes, which people start having upon finding out how my physical body happens to look like.
Then again, anybody who wanted to find out biographical facts about me could just google for my name. This information can be easily found online, and it’s not like the Internet was free of any photos with my face in them. Thus it probably doesn’t matter anyway.
In case you are wondering about my haircut, my hair looks like this, because I am lazy. I haven’t been to a hairdresser for seven years. I just ignore my hair and don’t do anything with it, which is why it has grown sort of long. Of course, I have considered getting a nice men’s haircut, but monthly hairdresser appointments would be a chore and an extra expense. Like many other guys, I am too lazy to think about haircuts.
After many years of only getting a haircut every six to ten weeks when I couldn’t stand it any longer, I finally set up a regular appointment at my barber’s for a trim once a month. Now I don’t ever have to think about it.
That’s a lovely photo; I’m glad you shared it!
I share your feelings about showing your face to the world. Even my hair photos over at Affinity left me somewhat angsty before and after submitting. So I think you are quite brave!
As for the foto, I have to agree with Marcus.
avalus @#3
For me it is different, I’m not angsty on an emotional level. Instead it is a rational calculation about whether letting people see how my body looks like would cause any drawbacks.
If I had a handsome male body, I’d be happy to plaster my photos all over the Internet. Unfortunately, that’s not how my body looks like.
I remember a few days ago you shared photos with some cool braids. I liked that haircut. I think that long hair looks great on men, and I strongly dislike how the society pressures people to have “gender appropriate” haircuts. Instead, everybody should be free to do with their hair whatever they like. Personally, I do not care about my own hair, but I can definitely appreciate a cool-looking haircut on another person.
And I also have a fetish for men with long hair. This is another fact I am semi-reluctant to share given how some people kink-shame others.
Huh. Had you not titled the post “Symbolic Photography”, I’d not have known it was intended to be symbolic.
I just see a portrait of a young person.
(Also: so serious you appear!)
—
Rules? To an ignoramus like me, photography is just a way of imaging — no rules, other than the clearer the image, the better the photo for such as I.
John Morales @#5
Yep, that’s how symbols in art work—usually the viewers don’t even notice that there were supposed to be any of them.
Once you take courses on how to make photography or try to read books (or online articles) about how a professional photographer should make their images, there will be a ton of rules. Although maybe “guidelines” would be a better word. Most artists usually agree that it is possible to make a great artwork also by intentionally breaking the rules/guidelines, but these rules are still taught in art schools (or photography schools).
It’s a great portrait. It shows you how you want to be seen and that’s a revolutionary act on itself.
While not on the same basis (I am happy with my assigned sex/gender, just not with the crap that comes with it), I share some of your aversion against posting pics of myself. My body is outside of the conventionally attractive zone. It’s fat and even if it weren’t it’s getting older and you better believe how that gets you judged. Suddenly all your opinions are judged against your supposed ability to make straight men horny or lack thereof*.
I’ll be forever grateful that Mr got stuck in the 90s and has kept his long hair. Anyway, back in the 80s girls came in long and short hair, then in the 90s grunge hit and all the guys had long hair, but nowadays you’ll hardly find a girl with short hair or a boy or dude with long hair. For adult women past a certain age this seems to change again. I guess at a certain age you’re supposed to have a “practical” hairstyle so you don’t spend too much time on yourself (there’s children to be had/cared for! there’s housework to be done!) since the dudes don’t care anymore anyway. Fuck them, too.
*This is most interesting when talking about sexual harassment and assault, because you get told that you’re just “jealous” of the attention young sexy women get, because somehow being fat and middle aged now is incompatible with having been young and slim 20 years ago. Fuck me if I understand how that works.
Giliell @#7
Another example for the same problem would be statements like: “You advocate feminism only because you are so ugly that no man wants to marry you.” Alternatively, even if the woman advocating feminism is young and looks like a super model, she will still get crap like: “You must have an awful personality then, you wouldn’t be advocating feminism if men liked you.”
It’s my favourite argument because I’ve been together with the same man for 20 years now. Married for almost 13 of them, while those making the accusation can’t usually find somebody who even considers them worth a one night stand…