# Make Toddlers Cry - It's OK, Since It's For the Anti-Bush Cause! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 29, 2006, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562 "2006-07-29T18:56:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Bill\_Door](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@Bill\_Door](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_Door)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/61 "2006-07-29T21:05:54Z")
The ironic thing about this is that once those babies cry, the picture is taken and their work day is over. I’d bet that they spend less time crying during a photo shoot than those Anne Geddes models. You know those Geddes babies spend hours in costume being poked and prodded, and babies always cry more when you want them to stop. Plus, imagine the humiliation of being dressed up like a sunflower or a bowl of fruit or some kind of a fucking Easter basket. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/62 "2006-07-29T21:11:48Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] I don’t actually think it’s stupid at all. It would bother me that she is deliberately making babies cry, even if it wasn’t for the “protest” angle…I actually couldn’t care less about that (if it bothered me all that much, I certainly wouldn’t spend so much time on the SDMB). But for people to claim that this isn’t what she is doing seems pretty silly to me. She clearly says this is the point of the project. She took the idea of the crying babies…put it together with her own feelings of sadness about the current leadership…and there you go…she has a project. [/QUOTE] Well, by “stupid” I meant the whole idea that it’s all about her being “anti-Bush.” I think the idea of making kids cry on purpose for photos is pretty damned sickening. But, the whole, “Oh my god, she’s doing this to protest Bush!” uproar-meh, who cares? Like you said, it’s disturbing even without the protest part. ---
**Author:** ![the\_PC\_apeman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ac8455/32.png) [@the\_PC\_apeman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/the_PC_apeman)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/63 "2006-07-29T21:33:25Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] [Very nice.](http://www.popphoto.com/inamericanphotomagazine/2552/cry-babies.html) As long as she can trash Bush, really, making toddlers cry is not a high price to pay, right? And frankly, although hopeful that this receives universal condemnation on this baord, I would not be completely shocked to discover that some of the more visceral anti-Bush crowd here are supportive of this woman’s tactics. Because, after all, maybe getting kids to cry isn’t the nicest thing to do, but she’s not causing anyone permanent psychological damage… right? :rolleyes: [/QUOTE] **Bricker** , Is this the original source that lead you to do this pitting or did you hear about it somewhere else and then found this link to post? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/64 "2006-07-29T21:35:43Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] [Quote=John Mace] The women did a series of pictures in which she made toddlers cry in order to make an “artistic” political statement. [/quote] [Quote=John Mace] Artist all shoots little girl’s brother, who happens to cry during the photo. [/quote] In which post were you lying? The one \*before \* you decided to read the article, or the one _afterward_? > [@](#): > > Had I not been challenged as to my reading of the article, I would never have posted more than once in this thread. Remember the First Rule of Holes, which the since-slunk-away **Bricker** apparently does. Unfortunately his lying thread title remains, right above his OP. Your \*own \* continued partisan lying, only intensified upon its disclosure, is your own problem. [/QUOTE] I see no lies. I do see some faulty reading comprehension. (I hope it is just faulty comprehension and not a deliberate effort to take disparate statements out of context and dishonestly organize them to create a false accusation of lying.) Let’s try the sequence again: Artist shoots little girl’s brother, who happens to cry during the photo. Artist identifies a “statement” in that photo while doing proofs and recognizes a potential series. Artist then goes out and recruits numerous other toddlers, capturing some of them crying naturally, but inducing others to cry by taking back objects offered to them. Artist then organizes all the photos, including the ones in which she induced the crying, into an anti-Bush photo spread. Attributing falsehoods to **John Mace** when his statements are accurate does nothing to promote one’s own perception as honest. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/65 "2006-07-29T21:54:08Z")
[QUOTE=GIGObuster] No one? OK, now it is clear you did not read the OP. 🙂 [/QUOTE] Well, I do have to agree that \*\*Bricker \*\*pulled one of his famous strawman arguments in the OP-- heading the anti-Bush apologists off at the pass, so to speak. But I don’t think he was bashing her for being anti-Bush. He was bashing those hypothetical people who might give her a pass because she was making an anti-Bush political statement. But, as usual, none of those hypothetical people showed up in this thread. Usually what happens next is that he will claim that such people do exist IRL, so what’s the diff? I don’t find that argument very compelling. **tomndebb** : Thanks for the reply to **Elvis**. I find it hard to even reply to him lately as he constantly distorts my posts, seemingly on purpose. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/66 "2006-07-29T21:55:55Z")
Still stalking me, **Tom**? It’s at your own peril, ya know. You might actually read what I’ve quoted before making slurs about my character and embarrassing yourself as much as \*\*Bricker \*\* and \*\*John \*\* have here… :rolleyes: Now go read the quotes from **John** , willya? Yes, let’s review what’s actually been said, not your own cherry-picked spin: \*\*John \*\* repeated **Bricker** ’s assertion, \*not \* supported by the article he linked to, that she made kids cry for the purpose of anti-Bush political propaganda (note: read the thread title as well as the OP, okay?). After claiming to have actually read the link, \*\*John \*\* \*changed \* his tune to conform to the statement that the anti-Bush photo was made after the kid cried on his own. But he didn’t note that that what he had said earlier was incorrect. Later, though, he went back to the party line that she had made the kid cry for the purpose of anti-Bush propaganda. Clear now? That’s what he said, right? It’s all right above your post. Now, it may be possible that \*\*John \*\* simply shares Bush’s lack of concern for the world of mere fact when it inconveniently disagrees with his desired opinion. It may well be that the Bush loyalists’ often-used Costanza Defense, that if Bush really meant it then it wasn’t a lie, also applies to \*\*Bricker \*\* and **John**. But not with so many changes in the course of a few hours. That’s not “faulty reading comprehension”, it’s simply lying - and your own statements above are hanging right on that precipice themselves. Your claim that **John** ’s statements are accurate is impossible when they are mutually inconsistent, and that assertion “does nothing to promote [your] own perception as honest”. Now, set down your grudge, accept the possibility that you may be wrong once in a while, and get a damn grip. Shit, buddy, life is too short to engage in such juvenility. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/67 "2006-07-29T21:57:42Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Thanks for the reply to **Elvis**. I find it hard to even reply to him lately as he constantly distorts my posts, seemingly on purpose. [/QUOTE] \*Distort \* them? I simply \*quoted \* them. :rolleyes: You sound like Charles Barkley and Terrell Owens, complaining about being misquoted in their own autobiographies. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/68 "2006-07-29T22:06:02Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] Oh, wait, I missed this one on preview. Can’t even keep your own lies straight, can you? :rolleyes: **Sarahfeena** , what’s _your_ excuse? [/QUOTE] My excuse for what? ---
**Author:** ![SkipMagic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skipmagic/32/20706_2.png) [@SkipMagic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SkipMagic)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/69 "2006-07-29T22:11:47Z")
It’s okay, everyone. The photographer attached signing statements to each photo declaring the kiddos weren’t really crying, and that no legislation passed by Congress could convince her otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/70 "2006-07-29T22:12:40Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] \*Distort \* them? I simply \*quoted \* them. :rolleyes: [/QUOTE] Christ, I hate to do this… **THERE WAS MORE THAN ONE TODDLER, YOU IDIOT!!!** The first one cried all on its own. Susequent toddlers who didn’t cry on their own were made to do so by, for example, giving them candy and then taking it back. It’s in the goddam article, you lying sack of shit. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/71 "2006-07-29T22:14:12Z")
I guess you meant, my excuse for backing up **John**? Because it seems clear to me that she took a picture of a crying child, and it occurred to her that it would be a great political statement to make, if paired with a particular caption, so she took more pictures of more crying children, and paired them up with various similar captions. Taken together, they are a work of art that makes a political statement. If you do not believe this to be an accurate explaination of what she did, then please explain why. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/72 "2006-07-29T22:16:17Z")
Oh, and I left out an important point. The first child JUST HAPPENED TO BE CRYING WHEN SHE TOOK THE PICTURE. Subsequently, when taking the pictures of the other children, if they did not cry spontaneously, she did something to them to make them cry, in order to get the emotion of unhappiness captured on film. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/73 "2006-07-29T22:16:52Z")
Wait a tick, I get it now! This is all a clever sendup of people who are so mindlessly partisan that they think drivia as this actually has some sort of significance! **John-boy** , you scamp! Really had be going that time! ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/74 "2006-07-29T22:17:41Z")
I don’t think her primary interest was trashing President Bush; that was just an occasion. That said, WHAT KIND OF SICK MONSTER INTENTIONALLY MAKES A CHILD CRY, OR ALLOWS SOMEONE TO MAKE HIS/HER CHILD CRY, JUST FOR A PHOTOGRAPH? I really hope she asks me if she can make one of my nieces or nephew cry. That way I can beat the shit out of her husband. Rhymers don’t hit women even when they deserve it. 'Cept in a spanking context. Or self-defense. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/75 "2006-07-29T22:20:58Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] she took a picture of a crying child, and it occurred to her that it would be a great political statement to make, if paired with a particular caption,… [/QUOTE] Either her perception of ‘great’ is skewed, or the titles are more accurately a reflection of the casual contempt which an increasing fraction of the population holds for the president. It’s hard to see these nearly surreal photos as a serious attempt at propaganda. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/76 "2006-07-29T22:21:44Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Wait a tick, I get it now! This is all a clever sendup of people who are so mindlessly partisan that they think drivia as this actually has some sort of significance! **John-boy** , you scamp! Really had be going that time! [/QUOTE] IOW, you see that you were wrong in your interpretation and instead of admitting that you just prefer to throw mud around. Typical. Since I’ve already said TWICE that I think the action being pitted is a minor offense, I don’t know what your point is. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/77 "2006-07-29T22:24:57Z")
In response, a conservative photographer should take photos of stem cells crying. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/78 "2006-07-29T22:29:05Z")
[QUOTE=Squink] Either her perception of ‘great’ is skewed, or the titles are more accurately a reflection of the casual contempt which an increasing fraction of the population holds for the president. It’s hard to see these nearly surreal photos as a serious attempt at propaganda. [/QUOTE] This is just semantics now. I never said it was a “serious” attempt at propaganda…she is trying to express her own political opinions through these pictures of crying babies. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/79 "2006-07-29T22:35:58Z")
Not really. In order to make your case at all, you had to go beyond the original link and bring in evidence that, yes, indeed, she had proceeded to caption a number of entirely innocuous photos with political entendres. The original link didn’t make that clear at all, and same was pointed out to you. The reason we didn’t see it: it wasn’t there. Now, if you had made that link to begin with, you would have a case. Still only a teapots worth of tempest. And, as well, you leave us with the impression that if she _had_ targeted the demon-bitch Pelosi, you might very well have shrugged your shoulders and gone on about your business, squandering your children’s inheritance on crackpot political bets. None of this matters in the slightest, **John**. Go crack a brew and chill. There will be a _real_ outrage soon enough, The Man Who Fell Up is a veritable cornucopia thereof. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562/80 "2006-07-29T22:36:54Z")
[QUOTE=Skald the Rhymer] I really hope she asks me if she can make one of my nieces or nephew cry. That way I can beat the shit out of her husband. Rhymers don’t hit women even when they deserve it. 'Cept in a spanking context. Or self-defense. [/QUOTE] Yay, misogyny. :rolleyes: Anyway, on the topic, she didn’t make toddlers cry for the anti-Bush cause, so bad on the OP. She did make toddlers cry (excluding the first kid from whose “natural” crying she got the idea, and including those kids she later worked with who didn’t cry on their own), but it appears that was to represent the “worry about the future of the country”, not Bush. And, of course, she’s an ass for making kids cry when (by her own admission) some cried anyway. So, uhm, everyone sucks! Yeah, why not. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/make-toddlers-cry-its-ok-since-its-for-the-anti-bush-cause/366562.md?page=5)