International Women's Day

What is the value of asking this kind of question? I think this way of thinking draws more lines that it erases. I'm no gender warrior but I have to speak up about this post because I think the very premise of the question being asked here is a little whacked. Would anyone ever ask, "What is the greatest contribution men have made to photography?" Asking this question of women inherently suggests that their contribution is small enough to quantify and then compare and contrast. In reality, we can't really know what "the contribution of women" has been, just like we can't know the "contribution of men" or "the contribution of horses" or "the contribution of fence posts" There have been great photographers who have happened to be female, but what is the purpose of looking at them through a gendered lens when their work may not have had anything to do with gender? Why ask the question? Huh?

Comment posted by Greg Wasserstrom on March 8, 2007

Greg, I understand your point that it is ridiculous to ask for "the greatest female contribution to photography" because it demeans their contributions, however, it is necessary to look at their images though a gendered lens. There are more known male photographers than female. I do not see this as a reflection of the quality of female photographers' work but as a reflection of the gender inequality that is still present in this world.

From my working experience, I am also convinced that gender, especially in photojournalism, can have a major effect on the photos one takes. Gender often gives or denies access to certain situations. People treat a woman with a camera differently than they treat a man with a camera. I do not mean to imply that this is the only aspect of the photographer that makes people treat her or him differently, but I wish to insist that it is an important aspect.

I wish that I lived in a world where I could simply say that there are great photographers who have happened to be female but I do not. In politics, business, photography, and many other professions women remain a minority, although on Earth we are not. One cannot actually measure "the contribution of women," but it is necessary to bring extra attention to their contribution because they are the minority in powerful professions, including photography.

Comment posted by Risaala Lys on March 8, 2007

"Asking this question of women inherently suggests that their contribution is small enough to quantify and then compare and contrast."
yes completely the point, on international men's day are we going to have the
"What is the greatest contribution men have made to photography?"
is there even an international men's day?
As for those equines... well plenty of room for discussion on their contribution.
Couldn't agree more with the comment

Comment posted by alek lindus on March 9, 2007

Greg,

thus you said everything, what must be said.

Comment posted by Martin Storz on March 9, 2007

Greg, you are right. I agree with you. Maybe in the special day, we will pay more attention to women and their achievement. After that, everything will be ok

Comment posted by wang on March 9, 2007

Most of the time I would completely agree with you Greg, I hate gender orientated question, but here no one can deny the fact that the world of photography was and still is dominated by men, especially in the field of photojournalism, just look at the list of photographers in Magnum, the proportion of women photographers is fairly small and in press agencies it's even more ridiculously small, in terms of content or subject matter I don't think to speak of a women contribution is valid but in terms of practise I think it is, of course you can't reduce photography to the world of photojournalism, (it is the only one that i know), i don't know what is the greatest contribution of women to photography, all I can say is that most of times when I meet one it's a breath of fresh air in a milieu brimming with testosterone and all the types of behaviour that it entails.

Comment posted by Gilles on March 9, 2007

I agree with the "breath of fresh air" comment. The question of "What has been the greatest female contribution to photography?" is valid in my opinion. Much more so than "What has been the greatest female contribution to theater? I think the bigger question is not the presence/impact of women in photography but the lack of overall diversity in the profession.

Comment posted by Cary on March 9, 2007

The "greatest female contribution to photography" ? Hu, perhaps SHE is not a photographer, but a "model" ?! I'm just thinking about some famous photos, and especialy about one of an Afghan girl, taken by Steve McCurry in 1984... The picture as touched so many people that I can't help thinking that it is at least a major female contribution to photography and, by the way, I hope, to women rights.
In french, we would say "qu'importe le flacon, pourvu qu'on ait l'ivresse". Is a beautiful bottle more important than the excellent red wine it contains ? In other words, whatever the photographer gender/colour/religion is, the most important in my opinion is what her/his photos show of our World. Just a point of view !
Regards,

Comment posted by JB on March 10, 2007

Instinctively, I too chafe at the implied discrimination in the question: "What has been the greatest female contribution to photography?" Yet there are some excellent real world examples of photos that most likely could not have been taken by men: Susan Meiselas' wonderfully uninhibited series about Carnival Strippers, for example. LIkewise, Christine Spengler's war photographs, taken over the course of thirty years, stand apart from what we typically think of as war photography, partly because she is a woman and has access to situations that men do not, or that may not have necessarily interested male photographers. By befriending women in the midst of war zones (especially in the Middle East), Spengler was able to capture and report scenes that would have been virtually impossible for men to witness.

Comment posted by Jim Casper on March 10, 2007

Like a lot of people, I'd very much prefer to live in a world where a thing like International Women's Day isn't necessary. But, as has been amply illustrated by many of the previous comments, until certain insecurities and aggressivities have been... assuaged? such markers, and questions about women's contributions to photography etc will, sadly, continue to be relevant. That said, I have no idea how to answer the question posed at the outset, but then "What has been the greatest female contribution to photography?" is a really unfortunate question anyway!

Comment posted by f:lux on March 10, 2007

Nan Goldin? Diane Arbus?

Comment posted by Idalina Pedrosa on March 10, 2007

Perhaps the greatest contribution then is that there really isn't a way to look at finished product and draw any significant lines between photos made by women and photos made by men. There may be some broad access differences (Meiselas' work comes to mind, Jodi Cobb's Geishas, and so forth) because of differences in social roles, but IMO it would be impossible to argue that "Men's(Women's) photos are always better(worse) than women's(men's)" without looking like a complete idiot.

So maybe the "greatest contribution women have made" is the proof that the question itself is fundamentally flawed....

Comment posted by Clayton McKee on March 10, 2007

Whether the question is right or not, the above answers exemplify clearly the abyss that still exists between men and women in this world. Men attack, women defend, even in the world of journalism. To me the above are just typical answers specially, from Greg (and men of course acquiesce) where rhetoric and sophism imply catch 22. Love the testosterone comment and JB's. Come on guys, just wake up and drop your guns. Let the females take some space in your sun.

Comment posted by Photographer / Reporter on March 11, 2007

The truth is that men and women are different. Women are not men they are women and consequently they think, do and conduct themselves differently. This also extends to their expression, which may be harder to notice in the world of photojournalism or documentary where the expression is very much devoted to the subject. However if you look into photography work that is more personal, you will see very clearly how refreshing and invaluable a women's expression is. The work of Sally Mann and her children is just one that springs to mind, but I am positive there are many more examples of this. As men, we would be foolish not to acknowledge the unique vision of women.

Comment posted by Kayne on March 11, 2007

I would like to thanks to every woman who made such a good work to be on our minds (possibly they made bigger effort to be there than men).

I would like to thanks to women photographers that even with out knowing, they are/were opening the world to others.

I would like to thanks to every photographer (men or women) who sees how women live in many countries… day by day this is changing minds.

PD_ Tina Modotti gives me fresh air…

Comment posted by Cristina on March 11, 2007

International Women's Day is important. In a time of imbalance politically, religiously and environmentally I invite us all to stop and wonder why we argue these small points of semantics before paying witness to the joy and complexity of the women featured in the MIM slideshow? Why is being right or pc more important than being observant and compassionate. I'll say that speaking of gender is tiresome to many of us. It's also tiresome to speak of racism. It's very tiresome to speak of HIV, poverty and war. However only in the debate on women would someone callously ask why? I don't think the MIM copy found here on the site asks the right questions at all, but these pictures are worth thousands of words. Magnum, please don't censor yourselves.

Comment posted by RG on March 12, 2007

She was The idea women.....

Comment posted by Bahadır BEYARSLAN- photographer on March 13, 2007

As my local director of arts council said to me "we just dont fund female practitioners because photography simply doesnt attract women"....can you imagine that statement in this day?..this is the mentality we’re dealing with here similar to the limited and hostile mentality of the first few messages up above...this subject is often met with hostility because we dare question the situation....i only have to look at the art colleges to see how many women go through the courses...but there’s little or no support framework after and too many closed doors...the doors are not accidentally closed either...its exactly the same with other cultural areas like architecture - 40 to 50% of people studying the subject are female yet only 12% are registered after and less than 6% are actually working in it according to riba england...riba tells us its because of childbirth...am i really supposed to believe that all women study architecture for seven years only to quit immediately? and then stack shelves in asda?....its all part of the same mentality......photography per se is a wierd one almost stuck in this bizarre timewarp on this male dominated thing...lets get with the times chaps...and why the open hostility everytime? Doesn’t your attitude above explain why the question needs to be asked in the first place?

In an ideal world yes this question wouldnt and shouldnt have to be asked...unfortunately this isnt the ideal world we wish to live in and photography per se as part of that continues to be a completely male dominated profession and for that matter a white middle class male dominated activity or rather that which is known comes primarily from that one direction.....even the fine art world is more open minded than this one - there are some prominant female practitioners working with photography within fine art...

However its a shame that your blog here has to start with a negative when in fact i can think of many incredible contributions to photography by female practitioners..lets start with one of my favourites Julia Margaret Cameron...then Cindy Sherman, Diane Arbus, Nan Goldin, Lee Miller, Tina Modotti, Sophie Calle, Barbara Kruger, the art crowd like Sam Taylor Wood, Gillian Wearing, Vera Lutter, Susan Hiller, Susan Meiselas, Dorothea Lange, Margaret Bourke White, Helen Levitt, Dicky Chappell, Sophie Ristelheuber, Christina Garcia Rodero, Eve Arnold and other magnum women and theyre just the famous ones....!

many others deleted, forgotten and omitted out of the photography books much in the same way as the history of painting...(and i certainly wouldnt class it as 'small points of semantics'?)

Comment posted by mary fitz on March 13, 2007

I’m an English language teacher. The majority of my colleagues are female NOT because males find it harder to get jobs but because language teaching attracts more women than men. One of the places I work in is a school for apprentice engineers, for every 40 males there are about 2 females. At a university, I also teach a language course which includes lessons on marketing & sales. The numbers on this course are more or less the reverse, for every 40 females there are 2 males. More males want to work in the R&D department at Renault; more females want to work in the marketing department at L’Oreal. I really can’t believe that the people in agencies like Magnum are just a bunch of misogynists who intentionally restrict the number of females entering the profession. But maybe this is the case. What I need to see are figures. What is the proportion of females compared to males who want to become photojournalists and what is the proportion of females compared to males who actually make it into the agencies. Then we can decide whether women photographers are being badly treated or not.

In a few comments there’s been a suggestion that female photographers possess a kind of special “sensitivity” which makes their photography unique. We’re on a very slippery slope here, aren’t we? Isn’t this just as ridiculous as suggesting that only testosterone charged males can cover conflicts. Susan Meiselas’ Carnival Strippers is outstanding photography ( I know I saw it close-up last year in Arles) but couldn’t Larry Towell or Paolo Pellegrin produce equally outstanding work on the same subject. Doesn’t Alexandra Boulat cover conflicts equally as well as James Nachtwey? It’s not about gender, colour or religion. It’s about individuality & talent.

But what really pisses me off is this. In some countries, female genital cutting still takes place; girls don’t have the right to a proper education; women are forced in to prostitution; women are forced into marriage; women are being battered by their husbands; attitudes to AIDS means that young virgins are being used to “cleanse” infected males. For fuck’s sake, on International Women’s Day shouldn’t we have been debating how photography & photographers (both male & female) can help these people?

Comment posted by James Cox on March 16, 2007

more hostility....why do we have to provide evidence when its clear?.....ok, on a quick count whilst we're at this website and not sure for some names...78 names listed for magnum out of which 8 names womens names...but i never said magnum is misogynistic anyhow....(you also put word in our mouths when we dare to mentionthe problem..actually you try to make it impossible for us to even talk about it).... I myself was simply talking about general cultural attitudes across the board...try having a look at peter marlow 'giants of italian design' on the other page.....'one of those people is not like the others'.....

try going into waterstones bookshop if youre in england and look at the photography section - if you are lucky you will find on the shelves out of all the books maybe one monograph by a female practiitoner say mary ellen mark?? Then try the Art section which will undoubtedly be filled with the usual suspects, matisse, picasso et al blah blah and the modern crowd...you would be lucky to find 5% maybe in this area monographs by female practitioners....let me know how you get on and whether that alters your perceptions in any way?? : ) honestly...i really have reached the end of my tether....

yes i agree there are certain careers in which women ar more prominent...like primary school teaching for example in england is mostly women and the very few men that enter that profession usually are fasttracked to being the heads...but largely it is really stigmatised for a man to work in primary schools...

the problem i am talking about is endemic across most cultural areas especially in visual arts...literature seems to have been more open minded somehow...i am not sure what this problem is but its almost like we are seen as not being capable of original ideas or creative thought of our own.....i know from my own experience certainly at art college we were treated more or less as hobbyists who would just have children afterwards and not to be taken very seriously at all....the older women were treated worse than us.....but that is northwest england which is particularly institutionally backward culturally in its attitude towards women...eg. the rarity of solo shows by female artists and photographers....eg. the arts council director who said that they didnt fund women at all because they werent any making photography or video!...why then do they have a history of rejecting every application for funding by female practitioners? : ) if you would like some documented evidence/figures i can write them when i am back home...im away right now so i dont have access to my stuff.....i just dont bother dealing with any of the art institutions there at all unless i really have to or unless they seem to be willing to behave in a 'normal' way towards me....ie treat me like an ordinary human being, with a mind and ideas of my own etc......its strange that i was treated totally differently in Ireland - almost like Ireland has had a total shift of political conscience since freedom in the south from colonial rule....

I think people are not ignoring the crucial and vital things you are talking about which is the terrible treatment of women worldwide and its really disgusting - people are i suppose simply focussing on the question above about photography...i guess our human limitations are that we can can only solve one problem at a time...though this is one small part of an ongoing problem - the continuing attitude towards women globally...

ps. by the way 'they' do think that only men can cover any sort of conflict issues..trust me...i know...

Comment posted by mary fitz on March 17, 2007

Mary, I apologise. From your reply it’s obvious that you’ve had to put up with a lot of prejudice. You’re a woman & a professional photographer so my remarks coming from a male and an amateur, who doesn’t have to worry about making a living from his photos, seem pretty arrogant & insensitive - though you were kind enough not to suggest this yourself.

The hostility you felt I guess came mainly from what I said in the last paragraph. I do tend to go over the top a bit when I speak about things I feel strongly about (see my comment on the artprice posting too - though you probably won’t like what I’ve said about art & photography there either!). There just seemed to me to be much more important issues to be talking about on International Women’s Day. But you’re obviously right, that’s NOT a reason to avoid speaking about the problems of female photographers.

Where I will be a stickler is with figures. 8 out of 78 Photographers at Magnum are women OK. If we consider that 50% of the population is female then there’s definitely something wrong but if only 10% of the people who apply to Magnum are women then there’s nothing wrong except arguably with society in general but that’s a bigger issue altogether. I don’t know anything about the Arts Council or arts institutions. All I know is that people in authority don’t like to admit that they’re wrong. To change things you’re going to have to hit them with hard facts & figures and get as many “big names” on your side as possible.

As regards bookshops, if Waterstones in Sheffield & Meadowhall are anything to go on then yep the photography section is very “limited” to say the least. I think this is probably to do with the fact that tits & bums and books on photo techniques are easier to sell than good quality photo-essays but they don’t even give us the choice, do they?

You might find it hard to believe but I’m definitely on your side & I’m sure Greg is too.

Comment posted by James Cox on March 18, 2007

"One cannot actually measure "the contribution of women," but it is necessary to bring extra attention to their contribution because they are the minority in powerful professions, including photography." I think that it is questions like this one that remind, and in fact keep women as subjugated beings in discourse. To frame this issue in this way is to think that the terms of photography remain in the men's domain- that there will always be an opposition gender and that this opposition is the locus of the photographic debate. Yes, you can say its only semantics, but any discursive act should be considered as one that either speaks from power (as I claim this question does) or speaks to power.

Comment posted by song on March 18, 2007

ahhh just read your comment...you sound like a nice guy...We are not
supposed to be
angry but accepting..and actually i really dont waste my time being angry
anyhow.. its pointless though i remain aware of the situation - anger
itself is pretty pointless....the best thing you
can do is go out and put your head into your work and make an amazing set
of work...in that way you are saying '.... the lot of you''

As for the tits and bums photography surely thats not even worth the
mention? thats just folk with no ideas beyond what their didgeridoo is
interested in.... honestly i call them 'billybobs' by the way - the phrase
coined due to over proliferation of men particularly in higher education
art/photography courses and institutions called Bill and Bob, some endlessly
painting and photographing naked women..white with
pot bellies, balding,really arrogant and usually do rubbishy middle class
work themselves..am i allowed to swear?... there is an overload of these
type in all cultural spheres..come on now you all know them...its really
really unbelievable....its just wierd..

Janet street porter was hilarious about this billybob syndrome she called
them M-people in tv exec land, male, masonic, middlebrow, middleclass and
distinctly mediocre (sorry guys no offence actually meant : )).....

by the way i reckon you shouldnt satisfy anyone by describing yourself as
'amateur'..this is a nonsense capitalist invention that only values things
that create money and people will treat you as somehow lesser if you say
this...

Comment posted by mary fitz on March 19, 2007

I think women bring so much to photography.
I'm no feminist, but women see the world differently and there is a womenish touch in their pictures.
Well, I don't understand why some people think this kind of question is useless, it's just the kind of question you're expecting to see on Women's day.

If you have some time come and watch my website, I am a little photgrapher and I'd like you to comment my pictures.

Thanks !

Comment posted by Cerise* on March 24, 2007

great

Comment posted by james.mcveigh2@btopenworld.com on March 27, 2007

About why there are so few women in Magnum I might help you with This:
- most of the Magnum's photography is photojournalism, isn't it?

I had to emigrate to escape the family dictature, and to be free then to be a photographer and not a secretary or a teacher as my parents wanted.
Then I had to leave the father of my children to be a free photographer, to be free to spent as much time and money as I needed with photography.

How can , for example a woman like me, photographer, living alone with children, in an other country than the mine, how can I leave the children to document the subjects that touch me around the world? I can't.. there is no solution for this kind of situation. I can manege to leave 10 days, if I pay someone to take care of them out of my place, feet them, take them to school, etc.. it'll cost me 250 euros, I did it once.
So, I photographe my surrounds, on the day light, almost never the week-end, sharing a part-time job, accumulating this kind of feminin joy very close to a women's grace condition..and some kind of repressed frustration.
I am working since two years on my first book, by email, with my editor, who lives on the other side of the atlantic ocean, who helps me alot and gives me courage to continue,
I am not talking about injustice, I am talking about reality.

We are on 2007, I am a 41 years old european woman! There are millions waiting to be them selves.

Comment posted by unknow on March 31, 2007

What if we imagined that fewer women apply to Magnum because they are already discouraged long before that? Why have I often felt special accolades for successes in the arts when my gender is revealed? Because so few of us are willing and able to fight against the forces that tell us all from birth, everywhere around the world, that we are not good enough, and that the standard to be measured by is the masculine paradigm. Those of us who strive to be as good as the men in our fields lack ambition. For let us not forget that those of us who make it to the top fight two wars: the one all the men had to fight, and the one we must fight as women. The same can never be said of men.

Comment posted by Anne on April 1, 2007

Thats a really interesting comment...I really dont know why these attitudes prevail still...its really a backward mentality but then like i said before noone wants to listen to a whinger so you just have to get on with it as best you can and say ''.... them'' in the nicest possible way with a smile on your face.....its a nigh on miracle I continue to make work..most of my friends from art college have stopped long ago...

women in cultural positions are as negative towards us as men are in fact far worse in my experience...so why is it that women in England - curators, funders etc many in low paid jobs themselves have even worse attitudes towards us? Why are they so nervous about upholding and not disturbing the cultural status quo? Im not sure how it is in other countries but there is a pronounced difference that I personally experienced between cultural attitudes in say Ireland and England. I always felt this was somehow because of the massive shift in political consciousness in Ireland having only recently come out of colonial rule in the south and this occurring just after women were first granted the right to vote. This is all pretty recent in terms of world politics. I'm not saying anything is perfect there either...the right to choose still an issue there etc..

What I'm saying is that attitudes to female arts practitioners there seem far more progressive than in England which is essentially a cultural backwater. Its a very strange 'culturalcolonial' mentality that still exists here. So whilst Ireland supported me heavily even government cultural grants for shows abroad etc English cultural bodies and institutions by contrast on the other hand have consistently refused any backing. Incidentally, by way of example, the Arts council in North West England told me they would ''never support any of my projects'' that I would ''never get any funding'' because im ''not a name from london'' and because i dont make work like ''Mr famous from london - hes a really good photographer you know - why cant you be more like him?'' These women actually told me a couple of male names that i should be using as my yardstick for what is good art/good photography. I told them i have no interest in being somebody else or being like somebody else and that I make art to be able to use my own voice. This is the key for us - being able to have an artistic voice.....so you simply have to find the way to make the work fullstop...
sorry i write a lot because i type very quick and freeform : ))

Comment posted by mary fitz on April 9, 2007

Photography is one thing, and then there is photojournalism. Even though I am convinced that there are so many more hurdles for women to gain recognition for their work, and perhaps more issues of fear to consider when entering into risky situations, it occurs to me that women often have a great deal more access to subjects. It is for this reason that I believe more of us should be taking the risk to get involved. Men have access to the masculine world, but run into trouble when trying to get into the world of women, particularly in societies that segregate the sexes. Conversely, however, I believe that women have much more access to the world of men then men can ever dream of having to the world of women. It is something I have experienced first hand, and particularly as a westerner/foreigner, travelling in the Middle East and Asia. So come ladies, don't waste time whining and get to work!

Comment posted by Anne on May 21, 2007