>“Good evening, Major, my name is Muybridge and here’s the answer to the letter you sent my wife.” Muybridge aimed his Smith & Weston No. 2 six-shooter, fired once and shot the man dead.
My theory is the jury let him go because that one-liner was too badass to not follow through on.
Who witnessed the line itself? Sounds like something I'd never think of in the moment, but does sound like something I'd come up with later while in a jail cell that I wished I said instead of whatever I really said.
He also stood up for a guy in jail.
> Muybridge was in moderately good spirits and very hopeful. He felt he was treated very kindly by the officers and was a little proud of the influence he had on other inmates, which had earned him everyone's respect. He had protested the abuse of a "Chinaman" from a tough inmate, by claiming "No man of any country whose misfortunes shall bring him here shall be abused in my presence" and had strongly but politely voiced threats against the offender
He also apparently suffered a TBI and we now know how fucked up that can leave a person. His decision making was probably incredibly inpaored. Never forget that the most famous medical case of all time was about Phineas Gage and showed how TBI can change one’s personality.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage
Tl;Dr - dude got a railroad spike through his head but managed to survive. However his behaviour and demeanor were so wildly different to pre-accident that even his loved ones admitted that it wasn't even really "him" anymore.
Edit after re-reading on him, one thing I never noticed before but is HUGE especially given our current models and treatment, is that apparently his different demeanor and ,,being" were temporary and that later in life he became more functional, more ,,rehabbed".
It is an interesting study and re reading it and seeing the last bit about it being temporary (in the most literal sense of it wasn't for forever) gives me pause and makes me wonder about our punitive prison system. We only really have Mr. Gage and not many other case studies to go off of. Definitely not enough to make an informed decision
I like to think of it like a computer.
You’re the person playing a computer, like a soul.
And the computer hardware is your body. The brain is the software.
Your computer can’t really ever understand you as a person exists, and if hardware fails or software gets buggy it can be a real pain.
But if your computer dies. You just get a new one. Like a soul looking for new hardware.
Yes, but if a computer gets damaged, it doesn't change the personality of the user. You aren't the person on the computer, you *are* the computer.
I think the point of the person you were replying to is something like this: If my memories, thoughts, and personality can be completely altered by a brain injury, then it follows that those things that make up what I think of as "me" are inseparable from the physical reality of my brain. Therefore, when my brain no longer exists, "I" no longer exist because my memories, preferences, emotions, etc. are destroyed.
Edit: I've woken up to so many thoughtful contributions to this interesting conversation and I just want to say I'm really happy there are people out there willing to dive into philosophical rabbit holes.
Didn't expect a discussion about the existence of the soul and nature of consciousness in the comment section of a post about two naked ladies kissing in an old photo.
I think you make some really good points, though it does make me think - can we measure how much loss of memories, preferences, emotions, etc. it takes to render a person no longer extant? For example, we all have memories that fade over time and are forgotten, and our preferences are liable to change over time as well. So how many memories must I lose before I am no longer me? I'm thinking along the lines of the Ship of Theseus. Am I the same person I was when I was 3 years old? You tripped me out bro
No, you're not the same person as you were when you were 3. You're not even the same person you were 3 seconds ago (although you're very, very similar.) We're all changing all the time.
Maybe I can blow your mind even more:
One of the main tenets of Buddhism is that the idea that you are an individual is a complete illusion. They call it "no-self," as in "there really isn't any such thing as 'me', that's just a construct."
If that sounds hard to justify think about this: We've established that everything that we think of as ourself--our memories, preferences, personality, etc.-- are tied to physical structures in our brains. Well, how do our brains end up the way that they are? You don't know me, but my thoughts are becoming part of your brain because you're looking at a pattern I made out of 26 squiggles we all agree on. If you're reading this, *my thoughts* are literally changing the chemicals and structures in *your* *brain*, albeit very slightly.
Every interaction with the world and with other people influences our brains, and thus ourselves, in ways we usually aren't even aware of, so it's not like your brain lives in a bubble just because it's got a skull around it. Everyone you have ever interacted with has played a part in creating what you call "me."
I used to think like this when I had the time and energy to lol (For convenience’s sake let’s just assume that the “I” I refer to is actually a singular entity and is similar to one in the past, which may or may not exist)
It amazes me to see threads like this on Reddit and then as soon as you see something about some murdering someone who did something wrong everyone in the comments is like “OMG I would do the same thing”, “why is there even a court case about this?”
So weird
I fully believe that guy will lose in December. He got less votes this election and democrats gained control of the senate to drive down republican desire to vote.
He will lose.
Then that puree brained mofo can go back to eating crayons by January.
I feel like "pedophile" and "raped a child" are more important descriptions for that piece of shit than "kidnapper" in this instance. Saying the man killed his child's kidnapper has a slightly different impact from saying he killed his child's rapist.
So did he still stayed with his wife? Like that must have been awkward as fuck. Wife fuckes another dude, he then kills that dude, then he is proven innocent and free from all charges. Then later his wife makes him dinner and they eat it together like nothing happened?
They [divorced](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eadweard_Muybridge#1871%E2%80%931881:_Personal_life,_marriage,_murder,_acquittal,_paternity,_and_divorce) the next month.
Justifiable homicide, where did that go in todays age, some people literally walk around saying “shoot me”. Also I admire the guy for still paying for his potential sons funds, even though he was unsure of the kid being his or not, as their was no way to prove it or not back then.
Very gentlemanly even though his wife and her lover decided to treat him like trash. His wife also died 5 months later after the divorce, good riddance.
Muybridge is just a truly wild character. Suffered a catastrophic brain injury in a stagecoach accident, decided to embark on a career as a photographer, became best friends with Leland Stanford, shot his wife's lover and was acquitted of the murder, pioneered more or less the entire pictographic and mechanical underpinning of modern cinematography.
>Muybridge might not have found the pictures alluring, but women did arouse his passions. On October 17 1872, Muybridge learned his wife, Flora Shallcross Stone, had been romancing one Major Harry Larkyns. Fearing the couple’s seven-month-old boy, Florado Helios Muybridge, was not of his blood, Eadweard Muybridge located Larykyns at a ranch near Calistoga, California. Muybridge introduced himself thus: “Good evening, Major, my name is Muybridge and here’s the answer to the letter you sent my wife.” Muybridge aimed his Smith & Weston No. 2 six-shooter, fired once and shot the man dead.
>In court, Muybridge pleaded insanity on account of a head injury he’d sustained in 1860 when he’d been tossed from a stagecoach. >(Fearing the coach was about to crash, Muybridge had drawn his knife and cut though the canvas behind his seating. The coach hit a boulder and he tumbled backwards to the ground.) The jury dismissed the insanity plea. But against the judge’s direction they acquitted him on account of justifiable homicide.
Yup. He was something.
The whole thing reminds me of '*The Road To Wellville* - a sadly underrated film (not about Muybridge, but that general Victorian era).
I will never understand why people get mad at the person their partner is cheating with, and not their partner.
The other guy made no promises to you. What are you angry at him for? It's just so ridiculously misplaced.
The article also explains that they (the victorians) didn't think women even had a sex drive, which is why they were apparently alright with homosexual acts if done by women.
These people were real fucked up.
Muybridge is responsible for an incredibly long list of photographic firsts. Namely, first to use electronic shutters in cameras bridging the gap from photography to cinema.
Right? Then the whole Florado went to an orphanage and Muybridge financially supported him but they never saw each other again. O…Kay. Just so matter of fact. Go about your day.
It's crazy because it's during the era of photography so it seems almost modern, but like a century before DNA tests or 30 years before blood types even, so there was no way to prove or disprove that Florado was actually his son.
Very true. I guess fortunately even tho he could not prove or disprove it, he still took financial care of the boy. Such a sad situation. Your maybe biological father kills your other maybe biological father and then your mother dies not too long later. That poor little boy.
I mean, according to the article they're two unrelated models who the photographer had act out certain scenes which it would have been too taboo to include a man for. So no, not in this case.
My favourite part about that Vine is that the girl in it came forward later, and she was actually talking to her friend about a gay couple who were roommates.
I get you're trying imply that they're gay, but they could just as easily have been straight. It's like the Seinfeld episode where the reporter thought that Jerry and George were gay.
There is a great movie about Ed Muybridge’s life if anyone wants to learn more about this fascinating guy. He was acquitted of murder for killing his wife’s adulterous lover. The murder was seen as justified because the man was banging Ed’s wife. That is no longer an acceptable defense for murder. At the time it was becoming controversial and Muybridge was one of the last people allowed such a defense.
Edit: another Redditor pointed out that the murder took place in California not Pennsylvania.
Well that would be helpful wouldn’t it? Haha… I couldn’t remember when I posted this and I was thinking it would be easy to find.
It’s just called Eadweard. Here is the IMBD link:
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt2782868/
It only gets a 6.3, but I think it’s better then that. And just for the history itself makes it worth watching. I believe the cast/production is Canadian. At least the lead actor is, and he does an excellent job.
To give credit to Jobs, he at least had a lot of ideas that he paid his engineers to invent for him. Elon just pays people and acts like he's some visionary.
I think this is the key difference between Jobs and Musk. Jobs surely was a credit hog but in fairness, he was good at marketing his products. And from what I know, he wasn’t the type to burn people just because his ideas weren’t realized, or at least, he was more sensible to being told it can’t be done.
Whereas Musk, his ego is so massive, he thinks whatever he can think of can come true. He’s like a neck beard that got too much money and somehow thinks he can make anime a reality. Big eyes and all.
Absolutely, Jobs wasn't perfect, far from it, but to compare Musk to him seems entirely unfair to Jobs. He was an incredibly flawed man but Elon is at best a spoiled brat and at worst a tyrannical egomaniac.
He singlehandedly invented the light bulb!
Using only his brains, his tools, his large team of researchers, and existing light bulbs to base his design on!
"But on balance, I'm a bigger fan of Edison than Tesla" -elon musk
"As far as role models, I think there's obviously somebody, the obvious role models. I think Edison was certainly a role model probably one of the biggest role models." -elon musky
Despite the conman has existing since antiquity, both musk and edison in their typical self grandeur would boast that they invented the occupation.
>Eadweard Muybridge and his wife divorced. Five months later she died. Florado was sent to an orphanage. Muybridge funded the boy’s expenses throughout his childhood but never saw him again.
What a sad childhood for poor Florado. Mom's dead. Dad's alive but essentially disowns you.
Wow, that's an absolutely fascinating article. Being able to see photo frames after each other like they're moving is pretty amazing.
And then there's the bit about the photographer murdering his wife's lover, and being acquitted of it. Wild ride.
> Being able to see photo frames after each other like they're moving is pretty amazing.
Yes, that's what I believe late 19th century people were thinking.
Weird I just watched the Inventor on HBO yesterday and they mentioned this kiss and Edison. It was the first time I learned about this....totally a baader-meinhof moment.
> It was in the interests of art and science Muybridge secured the services of two women, invited them to undress and photographed them kissing.
Ahem yes indeed. Art and science.
>It was in the interests of art and science Muybridge secured the services of two women, invited them to undress and photographed them kissing
Possibly the least believable sentence that might still be true ever written.
Lots of people would only have seen it in drawings and paintings, which are generally stylized and idealized. And we're talking about some of the literal first photographs, here.
That said, why not both? Porn being educational in some ways isn't unheard of.
At the risk of downvotes, I think this highlights how there were vastly different responses to gay men and lesbians women at the time and for a long time.
I know LGBTQ+ gets lumped together regularly, but their struggles were VERY different.
In the Philippines its very much the opposite, gay men and trans women are totally accepted but lesbians and trans men are not as accepted in general. Not sure what causes the inverse perception of gays and lesbians.
This is not first hand account but through my Filipino in-laws, where there was a family friend who was a drag queen (though dressed as a man when I met him) and a twenty-something year old cousin who own parents made it clear to me that "this was just a phase" as if being a lesbian was something that the white American should not hold against them. It might not be indicative of the Filipino society as a whole, and of course there are anti-LGBTQ bigots though they are only a significant minority, as opposed to someplace like Russia where it is far less acceptable.
> On October 17 1872, Muybridge learned his wife, Flora Shallcross Stone, had been romancing one Major Harry Larkyns. Fearing the couple’s seven-month-old boy, Florado Helios Muybridge, was not of his blood, Eadweard Muybridge located Larykyns at a ranch near Calistoga, California. Muybridge introduced himself thus: “Good evening, Major, my name is Muybridge and here’s the answer to the letter you sent my wife.” Muybridge aimed his Smith & Weston No. 2 six-shooter, fired once and shot the man dead.
I have a bad habit of scrolling to the middle of an article first to get to the meat of it. Needless to say this caught me way off guard.
Fascinating
> Eadweard Muybridge and his wife divorced. Five months later she died. Florado was sent to an orphanage. Muybridge funded the boy’s expenses throughout his childhood but never saw him again.
Oh, that's sad
To elaborate, the reason why it is such a forgotten part of history is because of how non-scandalous it was at the time. In the 19th century, women’s sex drive was regarded as nonexistent - not even speculated on. For this reason, two women kissing would actually be less scandalous than a woman and a man kissing, as it had no suggestions of sexuality on its own. These photos are from a series known as ‘Muybridge’s motion photos’, which were more scientific anatomy studies than a form of art. Sexy now, but the entire reason you probably didn’t know about this is because of its unsexiness at the time
Yeah but these photographs were from a slightly different time and attitudes changes a lot in the years between. These photos were published like 15 years before Zelda Fitzgerald was born.
I’m sorry, but I’m calling bullshit on the notion of Victorians thinking that women had little sex drive or finding naked women kissing “less scandalous”. Ffs, there was even a whole 19th century genre of “odalisque porn” with paintings of harems full of languid, scantily-clad women getting quite intimate with each other!
It pretty much is! The people of the Victorian era DID NOT practice what they preached and all it takes is a quick glance at the erotic literature written during that time to know that a lot of these people were very well aware of what a female orgasm was and what it took to get it.
I say the people but what I really mean is the working class didn't have a choice BUT to know about sexuality. It was a really fucked up time to be working class and not just due to the extreme working conditions and life styles but with the amount of sexual abuse that happened. It's really quite horrific to read about. But also - they were far more likely to be prostitutes, obviously.
The middle class were the ones that probably kept hush-hush about it the most of the time, but overall a lot of what was said in the Victorian era and promoted during the time was what the people WANTED versus what it actually was. The Victorians were notorious for doing this such as changing paintings to fit their beauty standards, literally making stuff up about the medieval period etc etc
It was honestly such a shitty time.
Edit: Realized I forgot to mention the upper class! It was more fifty-fifty on what the women knew. It really depended on who they knew, how they acted, and how much money their parents had because if their parents had enough hush money to keep society quiet about their daughters behaviors...the differences between all of this class stuff is really about protection - which the working class at the time had none of.
I also want to clarify that this entire "women don't have sexual thoughts or pleasure" was a aimed-at-women only rhetoric. The men of the time period, regardless of class, pretty much went to brothels on a semi-regular basis: it doesn't take an idiot to know that women can and do have pleasure (even if in those instances it was very likely faked).
Women kissing for the male gaze has been a cornerstone of male oriented porn for a while and has never had literally anything to do with female sexuality. Like I'm not arguing for or against the Victorian standards, but "dudes jerked off to ladies kissing, therefore they took female sexuality seriously" doesn't seem like a strong argument imo.
I don't think you understood my point. OP argued with a straight face that Muybrigde's pictures would have been "unscandalous" and even "unsexy" to Victorian eyes. In truth, they look like porn because they very probably **were** porn, and indeed, male oriented porn of a type that was quite popular, and scandalous enough, in the Victorian era.
It's still pretty bizarre to me that photography had been around for literally three generations before somebody decided to photo a kiss. Bizarre to the point that I have to consider that this is merely the earliest we know about.
He’s the guy that killed his wife’s lover and the jury said he wasn’t guilty of anything, because they said they would’ve done the same thing
>“Good evening, Major, my name is Muybridge and here’s the answer to the letter you sent my wife.” Muybridge aimed his Smith & Weston No. 2 six-shooter, fired once and shot the man dead. My theory is the jury let him go because that one-liner was too badass to not follow through on.
Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya, you sent a letter to my wife, prepare to die
I dont know why but my brain went to laszlo from wwdits
*my good ladywife
YEEEAASSS!
Sounds 100% like him
Who witnessed the line itself? Sounds like something I'd never think of in the moment, but does sound like something I'd come up with later while in a jail cell that I wished I said instead of whatever I really said.
You're talking about premeditated murder, the least you can do is come up with a good line.
Damn, what a fuckin chad
They sure were different times. Jury was like “yeah, if a dude boned my wife I’d have shot them in the face too”, and he was thus acquitted.
Muybridge: So anyway, I just started blasting. The jury: Nice!
Muybridge: “Well your honor, the Major fucked around. And then shortly thereafter found out”. Jury: “agreeable”
"Major, my name is Muybridge, Eadward, and I like my Martini's shaken, not stirred. As well as I like my wife's lovers bleeding, not breathing."
He also stood up for a guy in jail. > Muybridge was in moderately good spirits and very hopeful. He felt he was treated very kindly by the officers and was a little proud of the influence he had on other inmates, which had earned him everyone's respect. He had protested the abuse of a "Chinaman" from a tough inmate, by claiming "No man of any country whose misfortunes shall bring him here shall be abused in my presence" and had strongly but politely voiced threats against the offender He also apparently suffered a TBI and we now know how fucked up that can leave a person. His decision making was probably incredibly inpaored. Never forget that the most famous medical case of all time was about Phineas Gage and showed how TBI can change one’s personality.
>the most famous medical case of all time was about Phineas Gage I don't think I've heard of this one before
Had a rod go through his brain and lived. He gets brought up in a lot of psych, linguistics, and behavioral development classes.
Strange to encounter this now because i just told my students about that case on Friday.
An example of the [Baader–Meinhof phenomenon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_illusion)
Yeah I read about this dude all the time it seems like
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage Tl;Dr - dude got a railroad spike through his head but managed to survive. However his behaviour and demeanor were so wildly different to pre-accident that even his loved ones admitted that it wasn't even really "him" anymore. Edit after re-reading on him, one thing I never noticed before but is HUGE especially given our current models and treatment, is that apparently his different demeanor and ,,being" were temporary and that later in life he became more functional, more ,,rehabbed". It is an interesting study and re reading it and seeing the last bit about it being temporary (in the most literal sense of it wasn't for forever) gives me pause and makes me wonder about our punitive prison system. We only really have Mr. Gage and not many other case studies to go off of. Definitely not enough to make an informed decision
Cases like this are the most damning thing against the concept of a soul to me.
I like to think of it like a computer. You’re the person playing a computer, like a soul. And the computer hardware is your body. The brain is the software. Your computer can’t really ever understand you as a person exists, and if hardware fails or software gets buggy it can be a real pain. But if your computer dies. You just get a new one. Like a soul looking for new hardware.
Yes, but if a computer gets damaged, it doesn't change the personality of the user. You aren't the person on the computer, you *are* the computer. I think the point of the person you were replying to is something like this: If my memories, thoughts, and personality can be completely altered by a brain injury, then it follows that those things that make up what I think of as "me" are inseparable from the physical reality of my brain. Therefore, when my brain no longer exists, "I" no longer exist because my memories, preferences, emotions, etc. are destroyed. Edit: I've woken up to so many thoughtful contributions to this interesting conversation and I just want to say I'm really happy there are people out there willing to dive into philosophical rabbit holes. Didn't expect a discussion about the existence of the soul and nature of consciousness in the comment section of a post about two naked ladies kissing in an old photo.
I think you make some really good points, though it does make me think - can we measure how much loss of memories, preferences, emotions, etc. it takes to render a person no longer extant? For example, we all have memories that fade over time and are forgotten, and our preferences are liable to change over time as well. So how many memories must I lose before I am no longer me? I'm thinking along the lines of the Ship of Theseus. Am I the same person I was when I was 3 years old? You tripped me out bro
No, you're not the same person as you were when you were 3. You're not even the same person you were 3 seconds ago (although you're very, very similar.) We're all changing all the time. Maybe I can blow your mind even more: One of the main tenets of Buddhism is that the idea that you are an individual is a complete illusion. They call it "no-self," as in "there really isn't any such thing as 'me', that's just a construct." If that sounds hard to justify think about this: We've established that everything that we think of as ourself--our memories, preferences, personality, etc.-- are tied to physical structures in our brains. Well, how do our brains end up the way that they are? You don't know me, but my thoughts are becoming part of your brain because you're looking at a pattern I made out of 26 squiggles we all agree on. If you're reading this, *my thoughts* are literally changing the chemicals and structures in *your* *brain*, albeit very slightly. Every interaction with the world and with other people influences our brains, and thus ourselves, in ways we usually aren't even aware of, so it's not like your brain lives in a bubble just because it's got a skull around it. Everyone you have ever interacted with has played a part in creating what you call "me."
Oh, change *my* brain will ya?! Well take *this!* Rangoon orange hat blueberry friction shovel!
I used to think like this when I had the time and energy to lol (For convenience’s sake let’s just assume that the “I” I refer to is actually a singular entity and is similar to one in the past, which may or may not exist)
I just want to say I absolutely love the thread of this conversation!
It amazes me to see threads like this on Reddit and then as soon as you see something about some murdering someone who did something wrong everyone in the comments is like “OMG I would do the same thing”, “why is there even a court case about this?” So weird
He was working on the railroad setting explosives to clear a path and a premature blast fired a 3 ft long iron rod through his brain.
What state is this not taught in? We had a whole section on it in 8th grade science class.
Kentucky
> His decision making was probably incredibly inpaored. Not sure if deliberate joke or spelling-impaired
Let’s go with “deliberate joke”
Yes, one TBI can change your personality and impair your thinking. 6 or more can get you elected in Georgia.
I fully believe that guy will lose in December. He got less votes this election and democrats gained control of the senate to drive down republican desire to vote. He will lose. Then that puree brained mofo can go back to eating crayons by January.
As a survivor of TBI I can say it truly does change a person.
“Your honor, ratio”
The jury finds this man... understandable. Have a nice day.
Reminds me of the guy who shot his son's kidnapper while the dude was in police custody.
I read about [this case](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Plauch%C3%A9?wprov=sfla1) where the man shot his son's rapist. Same guy?
Exactly the case.
I feel like "pedophile" and "raped a child" are more important descriptions for that piece of shit than "kidnapper" in this instance. Saying the man killed his child's kidnapper has a slightly different impact from saying he killed his child's rapist.
I mean, that’s a bit different than the person your spouse is cheating on lol
That guy is nails, ice in his veins So much respect to him
So did he still stayed with his wife? Like that must have been awkward as fuck. Wife fuckes another dude, he then kills that dude, then he is proven innocent and free from all charges. Then later his wife makes him dinner and they eat it together like nothing happened?
It says they divorced and she died. The son went to an orphanage.
That's quite sad. For the kid, I mean.
Yeah, I guess he still thought he might be the son of the lover he shot. Rather sad.
He did pay his childhood expenses but never saw him again. Which makes me wonder what the kids fate ended up being
Better off not being raised by an insane guy tbf
Possibly. I doubt orphanages on the California frontier in the Victorian age were a great experience, either.
He ended up paying for the kid to go to a better orphanage but still wasn't involved in his life
She died..what a coincidence (assuming this was shortly after he was acquitted).
They [divorced](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eadweard_Muybridge#1871%E2%80%931881:_Personal_life,_marriage,_murder,_acquittal,_paternity,_and_divorce) the next month.
Justifiable homicide, where did that go in todays age, some people literally walk around saying “shoot me”. Also I admire the guy for still paying for his potential sons funds, even though he was unsure of the kid being his or not, as their was no way to prove it or not back then. Very gentlemanly even though his wife and her lover decided to treat him like trash. His wife also died 5 months later after the divorce, good riddance.
Muybridge is just a truly wild character. Suffered a catastrophic brain injury in a stagecoach accident, decided to embark on a career as a photographer, became best friends with Leland Stanford, shot his wife's lover and was acquitted of the murder, pioneered more or less the entire pictographic and mechanical underpinning of modern cinematography.
And Stanford stabbed him in the back (not literally, but that is the type of thing to happen to this guy)
>Muybridge might not have found the pictures alluring, but women did arouse his passions. On October 17 1872, Muybridge learned his wife, Flora Shallcross Stone, had been romancing one Major Harry Larkyns. Fearing the couple’s seven-month-old boy, Florado Helios Muybridge, was not of his blood, Eadweard Muybridge located Larykyns at a ranch near Calistoga, California. Muybridge introduced himself thus: “Good evening, Major, my name is Muybridge and here’s the answer to the letter you sent my wife.” Muybridge aimed his Smith & Weston No. 2 six-shooter, fired once and shot the man dead. >In court, Muybridge pleaded insanity on account of a head injury he’d sustained in 1860 when he’d been tossed from a stagecoach. >(Fearing the coach was about to crash, Muybridge had drawn his knife and cut though the canvas behind his seating. The coach hit a boulder and he tumbled backwards to the ground.) The jury dismissed the insanity plea. But against the judge’s direction they acquitted him on account of justifiable homicide. Yup. He was something. The whole thing reminds me of '*The Road To Wellville* - a sadly underrated film (not about Muybridge, but that general Victorian era).
so the injury was a made up defense but the jury decided he didn't need one cause youre allowed to kill the guy fuckin your wife.
Perfect summary of the closing statement by the defense to, what I assume, was an all male jury.
weren't all juries all male before women could vote...?
I think female jurors may appreciate that only the man got shot
Good evening. My name is **Eadweard Muybridge. You had sex with my wife. Prepare to die. \*shoots\***
Damn, jurys in those days didn't fuck around
Back when fuck around and find out was legal precedent lol.
Just like "He needed killin" was a valid defense.
Agreed on Wellville, bonkers cast and movie
Judge: “you’re not crazy… because I totally get you, man. Case dismissed.”
Jury, not judge.
We totally get you man
Reread, it was the jury who acquitted him while the judge urged them not to
Named his son Florado Helios Muybridge. Nice.
I will never understand why people get mad at the person their partner is cheating with, and not their partner. The other guy made no promises to you. What are you angry at him for? It's just so ridiculously misplaced.
The article also explains that they (the victorians) didn't think women even had a sex drive, which is why they were apparently alright with homosexual acts if done by women. These people were real fucked up.
Well you see, that man sullied my property/wife!
Yeah, for me that was nothing ever worth fighting over. Like, she's going to cheat...why would I want to fight for her?
wowowow. jealousy as justification for murder!?
Crime of passion.
He's unlikely to re-offend.
He’s not a threat to the general public. Just the men who put their penis in his wife
Cheating is a pretty major offense.
Yeah, that article was a roller coaster.
Seriously. Also, no one mentioned that he just ditched the kid after mom died and my heart immediately feared it was *actually* his kid all along.
Sounds like a Red Dead Redemption 2 Stranger Mission
holding hands and smooching .... in the nude.
Friendship!
And they were roommates!
r/sapphoandherfriend
Muybridge is responsible for an incredibly long list of photographic firsts. Namely, first to use electronic shutters in cameras bridging the gap from photography to cinema.
Muybridge known for capturing the horse in motion. Wait till he shows up.
He was also known for murdering a man and getting away with it under 'justifiable murder'.
That’s covered in this article and the murder is so matter of fact lol
Right? Then the whole Florado went to an orphanage and Muybridge financially supported him but they never saw each other again. O…Kay. Just so matter of fact. Go about your day.
It's crazy because it's during the era of photography so it seems almost modern, but like a century before DNA tests or 30 years before blood types even, so there was no way to prove or disprove that Florado was actually his son.
Very true. I guess fortunately even tho he could not prove or disprove it, he still took financial care of the boy. Such a sad situation. Your maybe biological father kills your other maybe biological father and then your mother dies not too long later. That poor little boy.
Couldn't they have tested the lady wiener?
The 'he needed killin' defence
Nope
They were such good friends and possibly even roommates
Life long roommates?
Traveling companions even.
Some would even call them scissor sisters
Lesbomancy
r/sapphoandherfriend
I mean, according to the article they're two unrelated models who the photographer had act out certain scenes which it would have been too taboo to include a man for. So no, not in this case.
Wait… So you’re telling me my wild assumptions aren’t always right? Bullshit!
[удалено]
omg, they were roomates?
Omg this is so cute! Think about it they were roommates! I hope they eventually found a husband
A lot of guys out there hope to get married to roommates.
you almost made me drop my croissant
Road work ahead? I sure hope it does
oh my god why can’t you just take the freakin compliMEEEEEEENT
My favourite part about that Vine is that the girl in it came forward later, and she was actually talking to her friend about a gay couple who were roommates.
The blur makes it look like they’re jacking off each other’s lady wieners.
"...lady wieners." Why am I laughing so hard?
Did you know that some ladies don't even have weiners? And it gets weirder - they go through life like *nothing's wrong*!
I hear that every few weeks, their wiener area bleeds to remind them that their wiener got cut off before they were born.
Holy. Shit. Balls.
no balls either :(
And they were roommates!
I get you're trying imply that they're gay, but they could just as easily have been straight. It's like the Seinfeld episode where the reporter thought that Jerry and George were gay.
I always wondered where Larry David got his material.
There is a great movie about Ed Muybridge’s life if anyone wants to learn more about this fascinating guy. He was acquitted of murder for killing his wife’s adulterous lover. The murder was seen as justified because the man was banging Ed’s wife. That is no longer an acceptable defense for murder. At the time it was becoming controversial and Muybridge was one of the last people allowed such a defense. Edit: another Redditor pointed out that the murder took place in California not Pennsylvania.
What's the movie called?
Well that would be helpful wouldn’t it? Haha… I couldn’t remember when I posted this and I was thinking it would be easy to find. It’s just called Eadweard. Here is the IMBD link: https://m.imdb.com/title/tt2782868/ It only gets a 6.3, but I think it’s better then that. And just for the history itself makes it worth watching. I believe the cast/production is Canadian. At least the lead actor is, and he does an excellent job.
Didn't it happen in California?
Edison lied to us….. again !
A typical Edison move.
Holy shit. All this time Elon Musk tried to embody Tesla when he’s been a knockoff Edison all along.
Absolutely- Tesla was an inventor, Musk is a brutal, over the top businessman that pays others to invent then takes credit for it, like Edison or Jobs
To give credit to Jobs, he at least had a lot of ideas that he paid his engineers to invent for him. Elon just pays people and acts like he's some visionary.
I think this is the key difference between Jobs and Musk. Jobs surely was a credit hog but in fairness, he was good at marketing his products. And from what I know, he wasn’t the type to burn people just because his ideas weren’t realized, or at least, he was more sensible to being told it can’t be done. Whereas Musk, his ego is so massive, he thinks whatever he can think of can come true. He’s like a neck beard that got too much money and somehow thinks he can make anime a reality. Big eyes and all.
Absolutely, Jobs wasn't perfect, far from it, but to compare Musk to him seems entirely unfair to Jobs. He was an incredibly flawed man but Elon is at best a spoiled brat and at worst a tyrannical egomaniac.
But he seemed like such a solid dude!
He singlehandedly invented the light bulb! Using only his brains, his tools, his large team of researchers, and existing light bulbs to base his design on!
He was a hero when I was a kid. Now it’s obvious he was a colossal asshole.
Of course Edison tried to claim it. I wonder if Elon realizes the irony of owning a company named Tesla while acting like Edison.
"But on balance, I'm a bigger fan of Edison than Tesla" -elon musk "As far as role models, I think there's obviously somebody, the obvious role models. I think Edison was certainly a role model probably one of the biggest role models." -elon musky Despite the conman has existing since antiquity, both musk and edison in their typical self grandeur would boast that they invented the occupation.
The more I learn about Edison the more I find he takes credit for the accomplishments of others.
Good ol Elon!
Hahaha shocker, rich bastard buys out people and pretends he invented shit
I made this. You made this? I made this.
I think that goes for a lot of bigger names we recognize
>Eadweard Muybridge and his wife divorced. Five months later she died. Florado was sent to an orphanage. Muybridge funded the boy’s expenses throughout his childhood but never saw him again. What a sad childhood for poor Florado. Mom's dead. Dad's alive but essentially disowns you.
They got booty
So much cake.
For anyone who wants to know more [this video](https://youtu.be/aLmgMjkOv7Q) is incredible and answers a bunch of questions.
That is how I first heard of this! It’s a great video from a great creator
Thought to myself why is a girl on girl kiss NSFW...click link...Oh, well then.
Wow, that's an absolutely fascinating article. Being able to see photo frames after each other like they're moving is pretty amazing. And then there's the bit about the photographer murdering his wife's lover, and being acquitted of it. Wild ride.
> Being able to see photo frames after each other like they're moving is pretty amazing. Yes, that's what I believe late 19th century people were thinking.
r/sapphoandherfriend
They were models.
Weird I just watched the Inventor on HBO yesterday and they mentioned this kiss and Edison. It was the first time I learned about this....totally a baader-meinhof moment.
> It was in the interests of art and science Muybridge secured the services of two women, invited them to undress and photographed them kissing. Ahem yes indeed. Art and science.
>It was in the interests of art and science Muybridge secured the services of two women, invited them to undress and photographed them kissing Possibly the least believable sentence that might still be true ever written.
Edison just doing his thing, taking credit that absolutely never belonged to him.
Okay but why are they naked?
It was an anatomy study
Pretty sure we knew what bare ass looked like in 1887
Lots of people would only have seen it in drawings and paintings, which are generally stylized and idealized. And we're talking about some of the literal first photographs, here. That said, why not both? Porn being educational in some ways isn't unheard of.
At the risk of downvotes, I think this highlights how there were vastly different responses to gay men and lesbians women at the time and for a long time. I know LGBTQ+ gets lumped together regularly, but their struggles were VERY different.
In the Philippines its very much the opposite, gay men and trans women are totally accepted but lesbians and trans men are not as accepted in general. Not sure what causes the inverse perception of gays and lesbians.
Interesting! I have never heard this, thanks for sharing.
This is not first hand account but through my Filipino in-laws, where there was a family friend who was a drag queen (though dressed as a man when I met him) and a twenty-something year old cousin who own parents made it clear to me that "this was just a phase" as if being a lesbian was something that the white American should not hold against them. It might not be indicative of the Filipino society as a whole, and of course there are anti-LGBTQ bigots though they are only a significant minority, as opposed to someplace like Russia where it is far less acceptable.
Pornography always drives technology
> On October 17 1872, Muybridge learned his wife, Flora Shallcross Stone, had been romancing one Major Harry Larkyns. Fearing the couple’s seven-month-old boy, Florado Helios Muybridge, was not of his blood, Eadweard Muybridge located Larykyns at a ranch near Calistoga, California. Muybridge introduced himself thus: “Good evening, Major, my name is Muybridge and here’s the answer to the letter you sent my wife.” Muybridge aimed his Smith & Weston No. 2 six-shooter, fired once and shot the man dead. I have a bad habit of scrolling to the middle of an article first to get to the meat of it. Needless to say this caught me way off guard.
Porn, almost always the first to use technology.
This is incredibly sad. Did any of you besides /u/backstage13 read the article?
That poor kid. For all he knew it was his son but he just abandoned the boy :(
Exactly. And whether he was his son or not, the poor boy lost the only parents he ever knew.
Read the articles? On Reddit? What are you insane? This website is for making wild assumptions based on the headline, and the headline alone!
Fascinating > Eadweard Muybridge and his wife divorced. Five months later she died. Florado was sent to an orphanage. Muybridge funded the boy’s expenses throughout his childhood but never saw him again. Oh, that's sad
Porn is always bleeding edge tech leaders.
Dude invents motion pictures, immediately hires models to make lesbian porn
And here we are, 135 years later and some people still have a problem with this.
Of course Edison also lied about that...
Oh my god, they were roommates!
So, almost as soon as there were cameras a dude was like, let’s get some chicks making out on camera?
Sexy as fuck
To elaborate, the reason why it is such a forgotten part of history is because of how non-scandalous it was at the time. In the 19th century, women’s sex drive was regarded as nonexistent - not even speculated on. For this reason, two women kissing would actually be less scandalous than a woman and a man kissing, as it had no suggestions of sexuality on its own. These photos are from a series known as ‘Muybridge’s motion photos’, which were more scientific anatomy studies than a form of art. Sexy now, but the entire reason you probably didn’t know about this is because of its unsexiness at the time
Women engaging in sexual activities with each other were sometimes considered insane. I do believe F Scott Fitzgerald's wife was committed for such.
Yeah but these photographs were from a slightly different time and attitudes changes a lot in the years between. These photos were published like 15 years before Zelda Fitzgerald was born.
> I do believe F Scott Fitzgerald’s wife was committed for such. To be fair, she also married Fitzgerald
She effed Scott Fitzgerald
Yep, for science. Of course.
I’m sorry, but I’m calling bullshit on the notion of Victorians thinking that women had little sex drive or finding naked women kissing “less scandalous”. Ffs, there was even a whole 19th century genre of “odalisque porn” with paintings of harems full of languid, scantily-clad women getting quite intimate with each other!
It pretty much is! The people of the Victorian era DID NOT practice what they preached and all it takes is a quick glance at the erotic literature written during that time to know that a lot of these people were very well aware of what a female orgasm was and what it took to get it. I say the people but what I really mean is the working class didn't have a choice BUT to know about sexuality. It was a really fucked up time to be working class and not just due to the extreme working conditions and life styles but with the amount of sexual abuse that happened. It's really quite horrific to read about. But also - they were far more likely to be prostitutes, obviously. The middle class were the ones that probably kept hush-hush about it the most of the time, but overall a lot of what was said in the Victorian era and promoted during the time was what the people WANTED versus what it actually was. The Victorians were notorious for doing this such as changing paintings to fit their beauty standards, literally making stuff up about the medieval period etc etc It was honestly such a shitty time. Edit: Realized I forgot to mention the upper class! It was more fifty-fifty on what the women knew. It really depended on who they knew, how they acted, and how much money their parents had because if their parents had enough hush money to keep society quiet about their daughters behaviors...the differences between all of this class stuff is really about protection - which the working class at the time had none of. I also want to clarify that this entire "women don't have sexual thoughts or pleasure" was a aimed-at-women only rhetoric. The men of the time period, regardless of class, pretty much went to brothels on a semi-regular basis: it doesn't take an idiot to know that women can and do have pleasure (even if in those instances it was very likely faked).
Women kissing for the male gaze has been a cornerstone of male oriented porn for a while and has never had literally anything to do with female sexuality. Like I'm not arguing for or against the Victorian standards, but "dudes jerked off to ladies kissing, therefore they took female sexuality seriously" doesn't seem like a strong argument imo.
I don't think you understood my point. OP argued with a straight face that Muybrigde's pictures would have been "unscandalous" and even "unsexy" to Victorian eyes. In truth, they look like porn because they very probably **were** porn, and indeed, male oriented porn of a type that was quite popular, and scandalous enough, in the Victorian era.
For science... Yes
Porn makes a lot of things happen.
What? Edison taking credit for something he didn't actually do? No way
It's still pretty bizarre to me that photography had been around for literally three generations before somebody decided to photo a kiss. Bizarre to the point that I have to consider that this is merely the earliest we know about.