There has been a lot of fan fare about the recent legislation that allows nationwide marriage for gay couples in the USA but not everyone is happy or excited. One photography business has been the target of this intolerance when their support of gay marriage resulted in a cancellation request from a wedding client. The response they provided was perfect.
As I am sure most of you have noticed by now, your Facebook feeds are full of rainbow colored profile pictures. This is no coincidence but rather a celebration of the monumental legislation that allows for nationwide gay marriage in the USA. Florida based Brentwood Photography did their part to participate in the celebration and show their support for gay couples across America.
This show of support was met quickly with a cancellation request from one of their clients who was not quite as eager to celebrate. The client demanded their retainer be returned. Brentwood Photography took the opportunity to answer the client and did the most honorable thing with the clients retainer.
I am standing and slowly clapping Brentwood Photography. Kudos. Go check them out at http://www.brentwoodphotography.com/, and show some love on their FB page Brentwood Photography.
The photographer supporting LGBTQIA + Boobi had no bearing on his ability to take a picture. It was only called into a think when the almost client pitched a bigotry fit and Broke Contract....over being supportive of equality.
Honestly sugarplum you don’t see that as being honestly effed up?
Not sure if you were having a go at me with that quote John Cavan, but did I say anything about tolerance or intolerance? I suggest that kindness and humility goes a long way...in both directions. Both the client and the photographer could have shown a lot more kindness and humility in this case.
Unprofessional. Obviously the photographer had every right to keep the retainer and use it however they would like, but being rude is still being rude.
I wonder how would anyone of you feel if something you do was made illegal and you're not harming anyone by doing it.
This is not about feelings, it's about actions. In this business you really should have a bit more decorum than what was expressed. Certainly this won't be the only time this photographer will be confronted with differing opinions than their own. Snarky and confrontational outbursts will do little good to promote ones views in good light.
I don't support gay marriage and the court didn't vote the way they did because of any law. Their decision was based solely on politics and feelings which are not the same as judgment and completely contrary to their reason for existing.
Now the pro-gay agenda crowd can rip on me too and show me their version of love and acceptance of the feelings and beliefs of others.
Get ready for the next phase of the pro-gay movement when they really ramp up the attacks and efforts to destroy the people who don't agree with them.
I would strongly advise all the photographers & wedding planners who may wish to refuse service to a gay couple to be very cautious of how you go about it.
If you give them half a chance they will tear you apart rather than simply going and hiring someone who shares their beliefs.
“Tolerance of intolerance is cowardice.” - Ayaan Hirsi Ali
"We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal." - Karl Popper
tl;dr - You deserve to be ripped to shreds. You would deny the rights you enjoy to others and then cry foul when your oppression is halted or weakened. This story has been played out many times in the past and, as always, those who fail to understand history have become doomed to repeat it.
I get it, you're religious, so therefore you think you're justified in being a bigot. So, I couldn't care less what you think of me as a consequence. Having the good opinion of the likes of you is entirely irrelevant.
I wasn;t going to say anything but Bob, you've down voted several of my posts where I quote the actual law (for example where I quote the civil rights act and the new mexico supreme court decision ON THIS VERY SUBJECT) with no supporting arguments.
It's hard to take your comment seriously when you simply say "no" (downvote) actual facts.
Sorry, I thought you had down voted several. My mistake.
I didn;t write anything inrelation to his comment because I sort of agree with you his reply lacked strenght. I just wwnted to address what I felt (apparently, somewhat mistakenly) was a double standard on your part.
Hey, Bobby, have you just tried to equalize pedophiles or rapists with people of the same sex who love each other? Oh, I get it, you're catholic!
"I would strongly advise all the photographers & wedding planners who may wish to refuse service to a gay couple to be very cautious of how you go about it.
If you give them half a chance they will tear you apart rather than simply going and hiring someone who shares their beliefs."
There are laws governing how businesses operate and one of those laws prevents businesses from discriminating against clients based on age, gender, religion, sexual orientation and marital status.
If you refuse to offer services to a divorcee because of your religious views, you are breaking the law.
If you refuse to to a hindu wedding because of your religious belief, you are breaking the law.
If you refuse to shoot a mixed race wedding because of your personal views, you are breaking the law.
If you refuse to shoot a same sex wedding because of your personal or religious views you are breaking the law and should be sued.
Oh cupcake if you run a PUBLIC business and descriminate that's usually against the law in most places there scrumptious. It's also pretty much common fucking knowledge so yeah if you descriminate in services for a PUBLIC business especially when being a bigot you deserve the backlash.
...
If its real...which I doubt... the photographer will have to refund the retainer.. nothing was signed in the cancellation and the photographer actually stated that he didn't want to shoot their wedding anyhow... so he cancelled it on his end at the same time.... Retainer returns because the contract is broken by both parties.
It's not that clear cut ...
He certainly didn't help his case when he said HE no longer wanted to work with them. Now, if the couple decides to go to court, it will be harder to determine WHO actually canceled the contract.
If THEY did then the odds are (if his contract is properly written, see the link further down) then they are SOL.
If the judge decides that his reply to them means that HE broke the contract (You are firing me? No! I QUIT!!!) ... he is probably on the hook for the retainer.
Good info on this subject written by an actual lawyer, can be found here:
http://www.thelawtog.com/use-deposit-retainer-photography-contract/
This is why as a business person you should NEVER write ANYTHING in the heat of the moment. Take a day or two before you act on something like this and CAREFULLY analyse the potential impacts.
"I would rather go naked than wear fur, because I strongly believe that it is wrong to have a farm filled with animals that are being killed just to use their fur!" - and just about everyone cheers an claps.
"I do not want to use a photographer that supports gay marriage because I strongly believe that marriage is between a man and a woman" - and the boos and the hisses will not end.
WTF, people?! Either we accept that personal beliefs can take precedence over legislation as long as your actions are legal, or we don't.
I strongly support marriage for anyone and is probably as close to an atheist as can be, but I'm getting truly fed up with people stringing up others for being intolerant! It just doesn't make sense.
Im in a facebook group with this guy. And Ill be honest he post some of the most bazaar and client interactions. I hope someone fact checked this. He could have easily faked that whole thing. Im very happy the law changed but the truth is this guy is an opportunist and and attention seeker. And it working great for him.
I just wrote the following reply on here and I agree with you completely!
"I've debated all day on whether or not to say something publicly. I've decided to do so. I am gay. And I am a photographer. On June 26th at around 5pm, I posted a picture of my wife and I on our wedding day on my personal page. Within 4 hours, I had lost 12 likes and lost a client who sent me a hateful email about how she didn't trust me to photograph her 2 year old daughter in light of finding out I was gay. So, I went to a photography forum with 10,000 photography members and posted my story. I didn't post it on my public page because I just wanted to share with the photography community that I'd lost a client. The comments started going like wildfire and many photographers told me that I should keep the retainer and donate it to an LGBT group. I had decided I wanted to give the retainer back even though it was non refundable. Many group members told me I should send my story to a news outlet but I insisted that if I became popular, I wanted it to be for my imagery and not for this.
The next day in the middle of the afternoon, this semi local to me photographer posted his "text messages". The "client" was respectful in comparison to mine but also asked for the retainer back. His immediate response in the first message was in my opinion unprofessional and stating what he would do with her 1,500 retainer made me suspicious since so many photography members had just told me to do that with my retainer a mere 1/2 day earlier in a very popular photography group on Facebook. But, I let it roll off my shoulders as a potential coincidence. Then he started posting other text messages back and forth with the "client". And a million red flags went up for me. You'd have to look at the other texts in other articles or on his page to understand what I am talking about but these are the ones that stand out to me...
1.) He posted the client wanted the retainer back and that he would donate 1,500 bucks to GLAD (which by the way is GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation). He posted this 1/2 a day after my post went viral on a very popular photography forum where members told me I should donate money to a cause and told me I should make my own story go viral.
2.) The initial clients email while ridiculous was very polite and well spoken. In the follow up text, the client doesn't even mention not getting their sizable 1,500 bucks back. Instead they call him names and curse at him in a very non well-spoken manner. It doesn't even read as the same person and most people would have responded with something along the lines of their money still.
3.) The follow up texts show the client messaging him at 4:39am and him replying at 4:44am. They were both awake at this hour? It's a possibility but unlikely when all of the other facts are put together.
4.) The "clients" messages always say "Sent from web" under them which indicates they could have been sent from any email account to the phone via text.
5.) In numerous follow up text screenshots, "the client" starts the messages with "Hey Brentwood Photography..." Who starts emails that way? In 10 years, I've never had someone say "Hey Pure Emotions Photography" when messaging or emailing me.
6.) If you scroll down on the Buzzfeed article and look at later texts between him and "the client", the client ends their texts with a hyperlink to Brentwood Photography's page. What client would signature their ticked off messages with a link to Brentwoods page? I am seeing a trend here.. every screenshot is embedded repeatedly with brand messaging....
7.) None of the texts written by "the client" sound like they were remotely written by the same person which makes me feel like he's trying very hard to make the client worse and worse each time to get more and more sympathy.
To be completely honest, I am fully prepared for people to call me jealous. I am fully prepared for people to call me names. But at the end of the day, I am sick to my stomach because I am 99,.9% positive that this is a scam to drum up more business. His page is being flooded with LGBT people wanting him to photograph them (and hetero as well). Maybe I am angry because I am gay and I don't want other gay people to be swindled into believing this. I don't know. But it doesn't feel right to me at all. "
I think the evidence is mounting against this guy. What you are saying makes total sense to me. You do not seem jealous. I think this guys is full of it. But Fstoppers is a blog and they see this as an article that will get a lot of attention and interaction. And I think it has done just that. I think his/your message is a good/smart one for LGTB photographers but that does not mean he is not being an opportunist.
I've debated all day on whether or not to say something publicly. I've decided to do so. I am gay. And I am a photographer. On June 26th at around 5pm, I posted a picture of my wife and I on our wedding day on my personal page. Within 4 hours, I had lost 12 likes and lost a client who sent me a hateful email about how she didn't trust me to photograph her 2 year old daughter in light of finding out I was gay. So, I went to a photography forum with 10,000 photography members and posted my story. I didn't post it on my public page because I just wanted to share with the photography community that I'd lost a client. The comments started going like wildfire and many photographers told me that I should keep the retainer and donate it to an LGBT group. I had decided I wanted to give the retainer back even though it was non refundable. Many group members told me I should send my story to a news outlet but I insisted that if I became popular, I wanted it to be for my imagery and not for this.
The next day in the middle of the afternoon, this semi local to me photographer posted his "text messages". The "client" was respectful in comparison to mine but also asked for the retainer back. His immediate response in the first message was in my opinion unprofessional and stating what he would do with her 1,500 retainer made me suspicious since so many photography members had just told me to do that with my retainer a mere 1/2 day earlier in a very popular photography group on Facebook. But, I let it roll off my shoulders as a potential coincidence. Then he started posting other text messages back and forth with the "client". And a million red flags went up for me. You'd have to look at the other texts in other articles or on his page to understand what I am talking about but these are the ones that stand out to me...
1.) He posted the client wanted the retainer back and that he would donate 1,500 bucks to GLAD (which by the way is GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation). He posted this 1/2 a day after my post went viral on a very popular photography forum where members told me I should donate money to a cause and told me I should make my own story go viral.
2.) The initial clients email while ridiculous was very polite and well spoken. In the follow up text, the client doesn't even mention not getting their sizable 1,500 bucks back. Instead they call him names and curse at him in a very non well-spoken manner. It doesn't even read as the same person and most people would have responded with something along the lines of their money still.
3.) The follow up texts show the client messaging him at 4:39am and him replying at 4:44am. They were both awake at this hour? It's a possibility but unlikely when all of the other facts are put together.
4.) The "clients" messages always say "Sent from web" under them which indicates they could have been sent from any email account to the phone via text.
5.) In numerous follow up text screenshots, "the client" starts the messages with "Hey Brentwood Photography..." Who starts emails that way? In 10 years, I've never had someone say "Hey Pure Emotions Photography" when messaging or emailing me.
6.) If you scroll down on the Buzzfeed article and look at later texts between him and "the client", the client ends their texts with a hyperlink to Brentwood Photography's page. What client would signature their ticked off messages with a link to Brentwoods page? I am seeing a trend here.. every screenshot is embedded repeatedly with brand messaging....
7.) None of the texts written by "the client" sound like they were remotely written by the same person which makes me feel like he's trying very hard to make the client worse and worse each time to get more and more sympathy.
8.) The next morning he immediately starts capitalizing on it telling everyone that he is going viral. He makes a shout out to the Ellen show.... most likely in hopes that someone in the grapevine can get him there. He starts asking for a PR rep on his personal page and bragging the whole day about how viral he is going and how many new followers he has. It all is so attention seeking.
To be completely honest, I am fully prepared for people to call me jealous. I am fully prepared for people to call me names. But at the end of the day, I am sick to my stomach because I am 99,.9% positive that this is a scam to drum up more business. His page is being flooded with LGBT people wanting him to photograph them (and hetero as well). Maybe I am angry because I am gay and I don't want other gay people to be swindled into believing this. I don't know. But it doesn't feel right to me at all.
he woke up to 17K likes on his FB page overnight and already made a video about it..
https://www.facebook.com/BrentwoodPhotography/videos/10153359154252348/"...
Read my response above yours.
I agree. this is all a publicity stunt.. this guy is all about business!!
Firstly, congratulations to you & your beautiful wife & sorry that you've had to deal with crumby clients.
Without evidence supporting your claim, this is a he said, she said situation. I'm not disputing what has occurred, just without something to back it up, thats what it looks like.
1) GLAD & GLAAD are two distinct organisations.
- GLAD: Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders.
- GLAAD: Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.
2) You push someones buttons in the right order & even your Harvard English Lecturer can turn into an incoherent mess.
3) He is presently in Thailand, there is an 11 hour time difference between there & Florida. So what reads at 5am in Thailand is 6pm in Florida, given the level of exposure he is currently receiving, its entirely within the realm of feasibility.
4) "sent from web" is what it reads when you send a message directly from the desktop browser interface for Facebook. Not from an email.
5) Just because you don't experience it, doesn't mean it doesn't occur. Its a matter of formality, not familiarity.
6) What has happened in this is that the person who messaged Brentwood Photography has used the Share via Message function on the post in question. They've not signed off using Brentwood's sig.
7) See point 2.
8) No, he didn't make a shout out to Ellen, someone else commented, on his personal page, that he could end up on Ellen. It was originally shared off his personal page by his friends, it vent viral from there. He is on holiday, needing a PR rep for the time being makes sense, I very much doubt that he has ever dealt with this level of attention before.
He is currently the flavour of the day, the internet is fickle, he'll be forgotten about within a month.
If you believe that all of those things together don't seem extremely suspicious, then that is fine. Point number 1 wasn't just about the spelling of GLAAD or GLAD.. it was moreso about the fact that this happened 1/2 a day after I posted in a photography group with 10,000 members about this very same thing happening to me and the members telling me that I should try to make it go viral and that I should donate my retainer to an LGBT cause. That coupled with everything else just reads off extremely suspicious to me.
Most people who become overnight sensations make posts like, "Omg I cannot believe this is happening. I am so overwhelmed by all of the support." Etc. He is behaving as though he knew this was coming. It all seems like a well played chess game to me.
At 10:33am yesterday, he wrote a new post on his personal page "Not surprised if I get a call from Ellen any min from now. Lol
This is blowing up!"
Well done. This simple act of kindness will be more profitable than photograph the wedding of the person who sent the message.
I think the photographer went about this in the wrong way actually. First of all I think that anyone should have the option to spend their money with whomever they want. The photographer also should have the right to decide who to do business with. End of story. There shouldn't have been an issue beyond that.
There are laws in place that prevent businesses from discriminating against clients. As a business you can't decide to refuse service to someone based on age, gender, sexual orientation, marital status or religion.
There are several layers of laws preventing this.
Im against those laws ;)
They were needed at one point and really they still are.
It all stems form the Civil rights Act of 1964.
The act ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public.
So yeah.
Regardless of my opinions on the laws and how they recently changed, I find it interesting that most comments are to the effect that "there are laws that stop businesses from treating clients like this"...what about laws to stop clients from treating businesses like this? I'm sure we'll find out eventually whether this was all a setup/stunt or not, but that aside, clients discriminating against businesses (once they have a contract in place) is a serious issue too. The usual outcome seems to be either the business cops it on the chin and lets it slide (returns the retainer etc), or they are painted as hard-nose / cold-hearted etc for sticking to their contract and keeping the retainer or pursuing breach of contract remuneration. But in business people are often reminded that "the client is always right". Take from that whatever you like.
"what about laws to stop clients from treating businesses like this?"
Nope ... nothing. It sucks but what can you do.
For those of you commenting on here about the photographers response ... some of this is for those of you who have never been in business or who are now in business and haven;t really bothered researching the laws involved in operating a business.
Side note before I continue, I am in support of LGBT rights. Canada has recognized same sex marriages since 2005, welcome to the party USA. :)
I agree with those of you saying his response was over the top. That being said, here are a few fun facts to keep in mind.
1- Keeping the retainer.
Here is a good article on Retainer vs Deposit.
http://www.thelawtog.com/use-deposit-retainer-photography-contract/
Retainer – a fee paid in advance to someone, esp. an attorney, in order to secure or keep their services when required.
Deposit – a sum payable as a first installment on the purchase of something or as a pledge for a contract, the balance being payable later.
The gist of it is that a retainer is a fee to book the photographers service while a deposit is a partial payment for future services. In some legal jurisdictions, since the service was never rendered the deposit needs to be reimbursed ... the retainer on the other hand was a BOOKING FEE ... a fee for the service of booking the photographer so the service has already been rendered.
I'm not a lawyer so if someone on here with actual legal training thinks I am wrong, please chime in. :)
2-Photography Businesses that support or do same sex marriages.
It is ILLEGAL for me, as a business offering services for payment, to refuse service to someone based on their gender, age, race, marital status, religion and sexual orientation.
There was a case in New Mexico is 2003 that made it;s way to the New Mexico Supreme Court, the photography studio lost and the US Supreme Court has refused to review that decision.
As a business, you CANNOT refuse to do business with someone based on the above criteria so really, any business this couple will deal with does business with LGBT clients.
"So i'm spending your 1.5k with trannies". Now that would be shocking.
Wow... I'm so tempted to share this, but I don't want to give any of my clients any ideas....
Great work! :)
OK, well I am a Christian and I do not support gay marriage (because there is no such thing). I think this story has been blown a bit out of proportion. For a start, the broccoli argument is a bit specious and has nothing to do with how Christians (or others not in favour of gay marriage) feel. No one thinks eating broccoli is immoral (unless you happen to be a 6 year old boy), but plenty of folks consider so-called "gay marriage" to be immoral and wrong. So the "if you don't like it, don't do it" argument has no truck with me.
Rather than broccoli, a better example would be something more like - "I am not in favour of bank robbery. You photograph people robbing banks and, although I would never rob a bank myself, I am opposed to it and do not want someone who supports it working for me. You might say, well, if you don't like bank robberies then don't rob a bank, but that is beside the point". Does that summarize it more? Do I want someone who is aiding and abetting in something immoral doing work for me? Or replace "bank robbery" with something like "abortion".
It should be pointed out that Justice Kennedy in his ruling also stated that people were free to follow their own religious beliefs - "Finally, it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered."
Although how long that will last remains to be seen. I can see the religious persecution of those who do not agree (just look at this post) beginning already.
What is dissapointing is how FStoppers keeps giving us advice on how to handle certain situations yet they totally blew this one.
By the way, according to stats, over 26 million Facebook users have availed themselves of the special filter to rainbow up their profile picture. Out of 1.44 billion active users that amounts to 1.8% - ie, not that many.
Maybe the editors of Fstoppers or Peter House can help me here? I cant find any information on the website, about which political or religious views you have to support, to be welcome on Fstoppers.com?
Its clear that ppl who support traditional marriage are not welcome on this site: they are beeing shamed in official articles on Fstoppers.com.
But what other political or religious views do you have to have, before one really is welcome and accepted on Fstoppers? I cant fint it anywhere!?
Short civics lesson: this was not legislation; this was a Supreme Court decision. This is a crucial distinction with massive ramifications.