News, People Are Talking
Will There Be Consequences for ‘Horndog’ Terry Richardson?
By Britt Aboutaleb
Last week’s comments from Danish model Rie Rasmussen have caused a deluge of anti-Terry Richardson stories.
At the end of Paris fashion week, she said, “He takes girls who are young, manipulates them to take their clothes off and takes pictures of them they will be ashamed of.”
A few days later, model Jamie Peck wrote, “This man has built his business/pleasure empire on breaking the cardinal rule of asking a young girl you don’t know to come over to your house and hang out naked: don’t be a fucking creep.” And yesterday, Jezebel’s Jenna Sauers published a handful of stories from models who’ve had similar experiences with the legendary photographer.
As more models come forward, we’ve started to wonder if this will actually affect his career. The man shoots for everyone, and we do mean everyone — from American Vogue to Purple, from H&M to Tom Ford, even Lacoste — and our instincts say no, he’ll continue to be one of the most in demand fashion photographers.
So we went to the source. We asked a few editors, writers, publicists and stylists what they think of what’s happened, and what will happen to Richardson within the industry, and promised anonymity. Surprise! Almost everyone thinks the same thing.
One of the first people I emailed, a well respected fashion writer, responded to my question about, “the Terry Richardson stuff,” with, “Put it this way, I totally missed the news about this, and when I read this I immediately knew it had to be sex-related. Why? Because it’s Terry Richardson!”
As for whether these stories will change anything, “I wish I could say, ‘Of course!’ but this could also blow over before April…it’s interesting that if this same thing happened like ten years ago (which, of course it did!), not nearly as many people would know as many details, and it would just be chocked up to rumor…Who knows if anybody really gives a shit about the models, because really, has anything else with models (weight, age, race) been resolved?…Maybe agencies will at least stop sending younger girls to him.”
That seems to be the major issue, agencies saying no to younger girls. One editor agrees, “The bigger issue is underage models, and I think at some point it would just be better to say models need to be 18,” while another says, “You’d think this whole situation is such a bad photographer/model cliché that you’d only see it on TV, but when you think about how many young—REALLY young—girls are trying to become the next Karlie or Chanel, it’s not surprising that they would do whatever it takes to get discovered. The most surprising thing to me are the adults on Terry’s team that reportedly stand by and let this happen.
One person adds, “Is Terry a bit of horndog? Yes. Does everyone know that? Yes. Does that give him license to ill and take advantage of underaged girls? Of course not. But the two women who’ve openly complained about Terry – Rie Rasmussen and Jamie Peck – are women known for being pretty wild and sexualized themselves. Rie was interviewed by my friend [name redacted] and she was outrageous talking of her obsession with vaginas and photographing them. That’s all good and what two people over 18 do is their business. Certainly any model under 18 should not be photographed nude or put in uncomfortable situations without a parent and agent there to protect them, but I haven’t heard any concrete allegations about Terry doing that. I know plenty of women who would get naked and blow Terry or Olivier Zahm or Vincent Gallo to be photographed by them. If you don’t want to give Terry a hand job you need to say ‘No’. Jamie says she didn’t say no because she didn’t want to be the killjoy in the room. So for her to now act like she was forced into something is a bit disingenuous.”
Another industry insider, who’s spent her fair share of time on set, says, “Shooting in that style and in that laid back environment there’s sure to be some indiscretion at some point. Being on set there’s always a friends and family feeling to the crew and shooting provocative scenes always increases that mood.”
So will it affect his work? The consensus is no.
One person compares it to Kate Moss’s drug scandal, which lasted about a month before she booked almost every major campaign under the sun. Another says, “Aside from being a great photographer, Terry’s very popular. I think his friends in the business won’t throw him overboard because of some Page Six scandal.”
And finally, “Maybe a few parents won’t let their girls shoot with him, but aside from that, no way.”
Tags: Jamie Peck, Jezebel, NSFW, Rie Rasmussen, Terry Richardson
Most Popular Stories
Comments [73]
Popular Stories
The 10 Best YouTube Hair Tutorials
The 10 Best YouTube Makeup Tutorials 
Fashion's Most Stylish Guys Give Mark Zuckerberg an (Almost!) Hoodie-Free Makeover for Facebook's IPO
Style and Substance: 10 Ladies Who Have Proven You Can Have Both
10 Beauty Boards You Should Be Following on Pinterest
I'm glad you are finally discussing the issue, I think its great that you got input from others in the industry! I think it is extremely sad what models go through, I'm glad I chose not to go down that road when I was a teenager. Overall, it seems to be a pretty destructive career these days.
What’s sad is that disgruntled models who are a bit pissy that their time playing sexy for the photog and doing something they regret turned out to be a waste of time when they become yesterday’s news. They are attention whores, ganging up to bring the spoltlight on them and their “cause”. In the meantime talented photogs’ (whose only mistake was to trust these models) careers get black marks and will have to spend the rest of their lives trying to make up for it. It’s true that there can be a laid-back “chummy” atmosphere at a shoot, and maybe the photog will try push the boundaries by hitting on models, if they oblige because they are famewhores does that mean the photog is a predator? These words are thrown around way too much in the industry and it’s said how nasty the models can get….
I am speaking as a model myself dating a photographer who has thankfully stayed out of the drama. But I witness this happening to other photog friends and amongst fellow models with a penchant for jealousy.
Jamie Peck is not a “model”.
Blind Melon reject
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2660/3763058405_…
the interesting thing is that he REMOVED all the images from his blog of him grabbing models breasts and posing with his thumb up and a grin next to bare asses. obviously there is some heat there. the amusing thing is that he is so obvious so for people to be upset now is interesting….did they not see that a week ago? a month ago? c'mon. (not that i approve AT ALL of his behavior)
No, I don’t think they did see it. Many people – even those that say they are “into” fashion – aren’t really that familiar with the backend of the industry (no pun intended). Richardson’s blog is likely getting the most traffic it ever has. And besides, I don’t think there’s should be a statute of limitation on outrage; it’s never to late to denounce sliminess.
Perfectly stated, Eighty. You’ve nailed exactly why people are so outraged: His behavior has gone on far too long and no one had the nerve or opportunity to speak up until now. His time is coming to an end.
I agree with you!
By the way….i love Terry Richardson work…Terry keep going…you and your photos are hot!!!!
People need to open their eyes and realize this is not limited to Terry in the least. The perversion includes various straight male bookers, photographers, etc. With very very few exceptions, you cannot work with these people without sleeping with them. I lasted only a few months as a model in Paris before I was pressured to have sex with my agent and quit. People need to open their eyes and realize this is not limited to Terry in the least. The perversion includes various straight male bookers, photographers, etc. With very very few exceptions, you cannot work with these people without sleeping with them. I lasted only a few months as a model in Paris before I was pressured to have sex with my agent and quit.
shit. i double copy pasted. sorry.
You are 100% right. Even though I'm straight, I will never cross any line that will embarrass my mom.
i at least haven't forgotten the scandal that was miley cyrus “naked” on the cover of vanity fair. she had a sheet over her! but if it's not a disney teenage superstar, an “example” to younger girls, it's ok to take advantage of the insecurities and young age? hmm… i'm not exactly surprised by any of this but i hope they do something about this instead of saying “oh well it happens…” but the thing about how nobody ever really does anything about models' weight is true.
He's clearly taking the piss just because he can. Adult women have to continue to stand up for themselves and refuse to be exploited – there are other options, don't give creeps like him free reign to treat any beautiful woman as an object only their for his own personal pleasure. As far as underage girls goes – anyone who see's this going on and allows it to happen is as guilty of rape or abuse as the perpetrator. Sadly not all young models have caring families or agents to take care of them, so any adult who is around them should understand, no matter what their bodies look like, that they are still practically children and they need to be protected.
It needs to be discussed. I am happy it is. I have a SERIOUS problem with 15-17 year old girls in shoots that would otherwise constitute as child porn if it wasn't for him shooting. I hope this actually changes things and not just becomes a topic for a while and then is never mentioned again.
Horndog? Are you living in the 1950's? This man is a predator! Way to go Fashionista as far as standing up for women! And because a woman enjoys sex or even photographing vaginas it's assumed that she's down to be anyone's receptacle? Only frigid prudes can be sexually assaulted? And women who wear short skirts are asking for it? Or does every woman who's 'lucky' enough to be shot by Richardson owe him something for the privilege? I am DISGUSTED by the tone and language of this entry. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
THOSE ARE DIRECT QUOTES FROM PEOPLE IN THE INDUSTRY. If you are so upset about this post, why don't you sign in as yourself, not anonymously?
has anyone actually proven/investigated these allegations? that seems the logical next step before repeating them over & over again and trying to get him fired from his jobs.
obviously, if he's responsible, he should be called to task. but it seems like right now everyone just wants to jump on the “terry richardson is a perv” train & tell stories about a friend who had a friend who worked with him…
it would be nice if we double-checked facts before reacting like this is all true.
http://oneporktaco.tumblr.com/post/459184570
Yo, horndog is in a direct quote, and in quotation marks in the headline. And I actually think the analysis is pretty well-balanced here.
His photographs themselves are proof that he gets very young girls to take off their clothes for him. And I can't stand the way that so many people are blaming the women/girls in this situation. It is so typical. Even if the women are over 18 (19 isn't exactly adulthood) they are still operating in a situation with a very clear power dynamic. He is the one in control, and he should have to own up to his behavior. Obviously he knows that he is doing something wrong because he ran away when Rie called him out, and he took photos off of his blog. He isn't intelligent enough to provide an intelligent artistic defense for his work.
I don't understand the appeal of his photos at all. I love fashion, especially the photographs which cause me to buy too many high priced Euro rags, but I can't even get to that he is talented but not my taste. I just think he is not good but obviously I am in the minority.
I find these quotes incredibly sad and disappointing. And strange – this is an industry dependent on the female consumer. And strange that it's not taken any more seriously than the non-issue of Kate Moss doing drugs. Maybe we don't care when beautiful girls and women are victimized? I don't work in fashion but I'm pretty sure that the magazines are happy to have my eyes on their ads, the brands are happy to have my money, and the designers are happy to have my recommendations to others. There are plenty of women who are paying attention, and will take their attention and their money someplace else.
How can you compare the Kate Moss scandal to this? Kate Moss abused drugs but she NEVER affected others with her behaviour!
Richardson and Zahm are using women like objects and are rewarded with attention and fame. I just don´t get it. It´s a sick world.
yes, proof girls take their clothes off for a modeling job. not proof that a crime has occurred.
furthermore, (though i do like rie) her argument, “i hope you know you only *** girls because you have a camera” is incredibly weak…sounds like she's attacking his personal life to me, not actually calling him out on doing something illegal.
his refusal to respond to this doesn't prove he is in the wrong. it merely says he's not dignifying being attacked in a bar with a defense.
again, doesn't mean he didn't do anything wrong. doesn't mean he did, either.
I think you hit the nail on the head with the female consumer bit. I mean we for the most part keep the industry going, so we should have a say in its practices in regards to sexual harassment. I'm not sure that it will change though, because not all people “interested” in fashion follow it closely. So, until it gets some good traction in traditional outlets this guy will be able to keep doing whatever he wants. Unless, you know to catch a predator does a special episode on him.
It's sad that these insiders can't take their heads out of Terry's a** for one second to look at the multitude of other fashion photographers in the business. They “nurture” dozens of street style photographers. But they can't nurture others. Instead, they use this skeezy, disgusting man who cannot even defend his work.
Thanks for doing a post on this because it has bothered me for quite some time. Obviously everyone knows about it, and sadly, it looks like they're just going to turn their heads and let it continue.
http://www.speakfemme.blogspot.com
What I believe that Guest is upset about, and what I myself am appalled by, is your failure to address the issue in serious terms. The whole article reads as though this is just some passing scandal that will blow over in time, and we'll all forget about. We all have a responsibility (particularly those involved in the fashion industry such as yourselves) to CREATE the change we want to see, not just wait for it to happen, and if it doesn't, just move on. If the allegations are correct, Terry Richardson deserves to be in jail. Also, the quotation which refers to Rie Rasmussen and Jamie Peck as “sexualized themselves” implies that they either deserved it, or were asking for it, which is textbook rape apologist rhetoric. I am disappointed that you didn't point that out – by failing to do so, it is implied that you agree with the statement.
Also, I don't see what an anonmymous/non-anonymous post has to do with that commenter's opinion.
The tone of the quotes from insiders are disgusting.
“But the two women who’ve openly complained about Terry – Rie Rasmussen and Jamie Peck – are women known for being pretty wild and sexualized themselves.”
Oh well, in that case, why bother respecting another person! Terry totally acted within reason!
I don't want to speak for Britt, but I will say this: Britt didn't offer her opinion in this piece–she offered industry opinion. As for your opinion, it's a valid one and we're happy to have it. However, it's not what most of the industry believes.
In regards to why it irks my when people sign in as guests–We're trying to have a conversation here and regardless of whether you use your own name or a pseudonym, it's nice to identify someone with a string of comments and understand where they are coming from. To just attack the story without any rhyme or reason is frustrating. So thank you for signing in–and offering a strong and compelling argument.
I'm very heartened by the comments here: Consumers do not want to see child porn-like imagery! Fans of fashion do not want their favorite models (or any models) to be pressured into compromising positions in order to be famous!
Talent and integrity are not antonymous. There are slews of very, very talented photographers out there waiting to be discovered who won't exploit girls and women. Vogue, et al, should grow up, do the right thing, and give Richardson's future work to someone respectable.
You're right, but I think most people are suggesting that his behavior shouldn't be encouraged, not that he should be thrown in jail. In that case his photos are plenty of proof that his behavior is at least off-color, if not necessarily illegal.
I think there should have been a warning on this article before it opened– “Warning: Get your teenage sons out of the room. Boobie picture ahead.” Sheesh.
I need for someone to point me to that documentary you guys posted last year about that ex-model who interviewed various models about being in situations like the ones we are discussing. The trailer was very good but I totally forgot about it.
i think this is the one you are looking for: http://www.fashionologie.com/Sara-Ziffs-Picture…
(apologies if this double posts. having disqus tech issues)
awesome, thank you very much!
Finally something piercing and rational about the whole Terry-things! It is indeed the model agencies and models themselves to be blame, not Terry. Remember his exhibition “Terry's world” several years ago? It's all porn naked and somewhat disgusting pictures featured a bunch of young girls with him. Terry is that kind of person and do that kind of thing, I thought it've been a shared idea in this industry, so why serious about the so- called new details? Everyone imagies and knows and is familiar with his stuff( just think about the Purple editorial) Terry hasn't responded to any source because he know it's not all his fault and it's just a cliche. I think talking about this whole thing is kinda nonsense and I will still love Terry's work( not himself of course)
OK- most of the responses have been made by outsiders. Let me explain my situation in terms that ay be easier for you all to understand.
Let me start with some stuff: I'm a fashion photographer in NY. I'm no where near Richardson's level but I'm doing fine. My friends are models, photographers, stylists, agents, artists, etc… I'm also friends with people in business, the medical field, educators, researchers, and just about everything else.
One of my good friends is dating a fashion photographer who shoots nudes. I shoot nudes for some projects and asked my friend if she wanted to shoot with me, she said “Oh- I don't shoot nudes. I don't even shoot nudes with my boyfriend” End of story. I won't pressure her because I don't need to. There are tons of girls who want to shoot nudes and I'll work with them on THOSE projects. (In fact, when I travel, my friends who have regular jobs usually ask if they can commission me to shoot nudes of them. My work is considered sexier and more mature and they like it). Just like everyone else, I tell agencies when I'm shooting nudes and they will send the appropriate girls who are over 18 and expressed some sort of interest in shooting mature content. And, if you stick around in modeling after the age of 18 then you know: you will be asked to shoot sexier stuff. You can ALWAYS say “no” and you can always leave modeling to go to school or do whatever.
Now- rewind a year ago when I was dating a model who was called by her booker to go to a casting at Terry Richardson's. They asked her “Are you familiar with his work? What do you think of it?” She knows the rumors about him and said “I'm not going to fuck him but I'd love to meet him. PLEASE send me.” She went, met him, and was done within 5 minutes (I know because I walked with her to the casting and we grabbed food afterwards.) Another friend (model) went to a Terry casting, met his crew, hung out and left. Neither girl was pressured to do anything and nothing happened.
I've shot with enough models who have worked with him to get an idea of how he rolls. Terry is Terry. He is the equivalent to your coworker who hooks up with all the new interns. He's the friend who has game and talks about his dick. He's your cousin who has hooked up with everyone else in your small insular town. You know these guys (and girls) and you secretly hate them for having extra sexual prowess you lack but you also know they're just fun and interesting people (otherwise they wouldn't be getting laid so much). You also know people who regretted their one-night stands with these people.
I've worked in the business world as an upper level manager and I KNOW these people exist in whatever world you're in. Here is the thing: some 19 year old girls will fuck the boss at her new job. Some 19 year old boys will fuck the senior exec at their new jobs. Sometimes a new radiology tech will fuck a head surgeon for the sheer excitement. Sometimes an intern will blow the President. Sometimes a college student will fuck her professor. Sometimes groupies fuck rock/rap/country stars. Sometimes strippers fuck golf pros with squeaky clean images. Some people cheat on their spouses. The point is: People fuck their coworkers and other people. Sometimes they feel icky about it. Sometimes someone gets pissed, runs to HR and random shit hits the fan. This industry lacks an HR (thank god) so the media is the HR/parent/boss/whatever.
This all came out because a washed up model freaked out on him at a bar (was she drunk? Was she high? Did she just get dumped?) This is the same model who said she did Victoria Secret so she could hook up with a model. (which is like saying “I'll go work at Jamba Juice because there is a girl I wanna hook up with). Only one other person came out. The rest are unnamed.
The fact is: our job is to create art. Art can be controversial. Good art challenges people. People don't always like things that challenge them. To read people freaking me out reminds me why I love this industry so much: because we're actually the sane ones!
The people in this environment have a different lifestyle. No one forces anyone to stay in. Fashion IS sexy. It always has been and it always will be. If you want to change that: design something people actually want to wear, make it, market it, and sell it. The people in this world recognize how sex is used and it is very blase. You may not understand it but we don't understand have the things people do in the auto/finance/film/food/technology/service/consumer goods/travel/engineering/design/whatever industries. Our world is not perfect and could use some improvements but Jezebel is being absolutely trashy by the way they're covering this. Why do they have to show the victims? Why don't they show the heroes? This just makes people feel less powerful and empowers the publication.
The personalities in the fashion and art worlds are different in some ways. We seem odd to the people outside of our world. But you know what: people working 50 hours per week under fluorescent bulbs shuffling paper for a boss they hate seem fucking wacko to us. And their weird sex lives seem just as insane (people REALLY are scared to talk about sex at work?! People can get fired for dating coworkers? People have to hide relationships?! How WEIRD!)
And for the people who say he has a ped-mustache. REALLY: get over yourself. That's just low and sophomoric. He chose to groom himself in a way he prefers. Should we look at your pubes and say they look like you have daddy issues? Or maybe your pubes say “1970's porn star!” Maybe your colored hair says “Low self esteem.” And maybe your uncolored hair says “dirty hippy.”
****NOTE: Jezebel wouldn't publish this so I posted it here.
****NOTE 2: Jezebel is Terry's photo f Meghn Fox for their piece on sexy lip gloss:
http://jezebel.com/5493413/new-lip-gloss-subtly…
(Obviously this is not directed at everyone… it's 2:30am and I was tired when I wrote this. It was to be put on the Jezebal page since they're launching a full attack on the guy. There may be typos, grammatical errors, and other syntax errors)
Really impressing and genuine! Jazebel just shouldn't criticize Terry's lifestyle and the personality of fashion insider
Mr D. Thank you for explaining to all us “outsiders” how “things are”. I think I get it…..As long as you're creating “art” we don't need to worry about the thousands of underage who are doing sexual things they can never undo just to keep from being fired.
Mr. D: I think you are missing the point a little. No one has a problem with the sex The problem in Terry Richardson's case, as in all cases of sexual harassment, it's NOT the sex, it's the abuse of power. While maybe no one “forced” those girls into uncomfortable/embarrassing situations, it does seem as though they were coerced, which may not be illegal, but it's very icky.
Also, just because Rie might have done VS to hook up with another model doesn't make her point (Terry Richardson abuses his power to get laid) any less legitimate, or less true, apparently. After all, no one has said she's a liar (just a slut and burnout, which is apparently fair game). Further, you have made an ad homenum attack against this woman, then later you defend Terry Richardson against personal attacks from people who don't like his mustache. A little more consistency would be nice.
Personally, I'm glad that Jezebel is doing some muckracking in the fashion industry. It seems like accountability and safety are lacking, and the community is unwilling to fix itself.
(For the record, I work in a very conservative environment–just like the ones you describe with the bad lighting and long hours–and I've dated co-workers. Everyone has known and no one has had an issue. Also, I love my job for many, many reasons. One of which is that every treats me with the utmost respect and professionalism. Also, one of the reasons we don't talk about sex at work is because we are too busy WORKING.)
While I agree that Richardson's actions are a whole other level of magnitude, it seems beyond naive that abusing drugs doesn't affect anyone besides the user. Addicts can become really mean, awful humans. It's not their personalities, it's the drugs, but that doesn't mean it doesn't affect others
Not to mention the whole supply chain that goes into getting your cociana…
Just out of interest Mr D, have you ever noticed that men, about half the population, wear clothes too?
It's curious that, as a self-proclaimed 'fashion' photographer, you only describe your big sexy lense being pointed at nude young women to produce mature content projects. Then a big blur about sex and idle gossip and suddenly you're onto art, edginess and um, I'm not sure I read this right, heroes?
Do you mean heroes as in the men and women who go to war and get killed fighting so that guys like you are free to take and distribute any photographs you like? Or do you mean, like, heroes of the fashion world?
Oh and BTW I'm an 'insider' and I work on fashion photography all day long. It's not art, it's yesterday's news. And when it's nude it's just editorial. Get over yourself.
So Mert and Marcus's piece with Lara stone is just an editorial but not art? I have to disagree.
I thnk the point MrD was trying to make is that people use sex in all industries and it isn't just limited to the fashion world. He didn't seem to condone the behavior but he did put it in to context.
Most people in fashion are gay. Gay designers, gay photographers, gay male models, gay art directors, gay bookers. I'm sorry to hear you got stuck with someone trying to abuse his power. It will happen again wherever you go. Just learn to be strong and say no.
Theres a big misconception about fashion: NOT all the guys are gay. A majority, yes. But less than you think ESPECIALLY when it comes to agents and bookers (which as a model is your closest person in the business).
Every single male model I’ve worked with has been straight and easily more than half of the male photographers were straight. Much of the editorial is managed by straight women. Almost all of the designers I’ve worked with, however, have been gay. Otherwise you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Jesus! It went from two hacks complaining about how they don't like that he gets laid to a couple girls who will not speak on record to “thousands or underage girls being manhandled and abused.” Give it a rest!
lol. exactly.
Hey oliver, are you still in China?
Nope. Still downtown, giving blow jobs, apparently : )
You lost me when you said ” washed up model freaked out on him at a bar (was she drunk? Was she high? Did she just get dumped?”
First of all. Rie Rasmussen is not just some petty, unknown models. And I CANNOT believe you've never heard of her IF you work in this industry. Secondly, you tried to discredit her story by suggesting her being drunk or high without even talking to her beforehand. So you credibility is as questionable as those you tried to question.
You lost me when you said ” washed up model freaked out on him at a bar (was she drunk? Was she high? Did she just get dumped?”
First of all. Rie Rasmussen is not just some petty, unknown models. And I CANNOT believe you've never heard of her IF you work in this industry. Secondly, you tried to discredit her story by suggesting her being drunk or high without even talking to her beforehand. So you credibility is as questionable as those you tried to question.
Sorry about double post.
He's basically the equivalent of an Irish priest
there are probably a lot of people in Bolivia who might disagree with the idea that someone's cocaine use never affects others…. but as you say, this is a very different topic and clearly draws focus from the main issue raised in this post.
I never even liked his editorial in Purple. It is not art, it looks like a huge P***TAKE.
And the question is not only if these girls are underage. I did a lot of stupid things when I was 19. And I had a lot of respect for famous photographers and editors. I'd never have thought that one of them is a t**t who abuses his power and the others would be like “oh, it's Terry… you know” WTF?
If an agency sends girls for a job and Terry is all like, waging his d*ck around and asking if they want to s*ck him off, THIS IS NOT OK! No matter how old they are! (he doesn't do 60 y/olds, does he?)
And I'm really sorry for swearing. Just thinking about my little daughter who might face this one day, and I can't believe I'm gonna have to warn her.
If you're wondering why Jezebel wouldn't publish your opinion, just read over what you wrote and ask yourself, “Do I at all sound misogynistic? Have I attempted to discredit any female by mentioning the fact that she is functioning sexual being and implying that any overtly sexual woman is not to be taken seriously, whereas their male counterparts are intelligent people who should have free passes to do anything? Have I just reasoned why it is okay for male artists to consistently force women into a position of sexual submission for the sake of 'art'?”
voguedissent.blogspot.com
As a sister who's seen two of my brothers go through substance abuse problems – one drugs, the other alcohol, I can assure you Moss' drug abuse DOES hurt others besides her.
This is definitely sexual harassment! Just look at the guy, surrounded by half naked girls, smiling ears wide! That's exploitation personified! I don't care if the guy is a famous photographer. That's a blatant insult to the opposite sex. It couldn't entirely be his fault, agreed, but look at how old he is and how young those girls look!
ok, I'm not going to touch the underage girl stuff or the non-English speaker stuff, because that would certainly be skeezy and illegal, but so far nobody's proven anything, so far as i know.
but as for the models like jamie and rie, i have less sympathy. terry is a perv, but for pete's sake, i'm not even in the fashion industry and i know that. it's like a guy posing for mapplethorpe- you have to know what you're getting into! i do happen to think terry is a talented and unique photographer who changed fashion photography dramatically, but he's also got some serious issues. be that as it may, these models signed up for NUDE shots. and i'm sorry, but i don't see peer pressure as a good enough excuse for giving someone sexual favors. you are an adult going voluntarily to a nude photo session with a photographer whose work is all about sex. why do we expect kids to “just say no” to drugs and alcohol but grown women can't say no to a wheedling man? so far as i've read, terry never threatened anyone if they did not comply- the most they'd lose is the opportunity to shoot with him. if your career really needs that boost, that's a choice you have to make- fame or your morals. and it's obviously a choice those models made. both of them could have walked out, but they wanted to be photographed by such a famous guy in the industry. you can say it's their careers on the line, but i don't think that's valid. you can be a model and not do porn-y nudes. it's not like he was even paying them- they were doing it for a picture for their lookbook! if their career is so important and they need the money, go to school. work in a coffee shop. i don't buy the whole “i just HAD to do it for my career”. i just don't think jamie and rie were “exploited”- they are both experienced models, consenting adults, and were not subject to any threats, violence, or totally unexpected activities. if a situation is too creepy for you, WALK OUT OF THERE. and if you choose fame, then don't complain about it later. YOU made the choice, and you can regret it, but part of being a legal adult is TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR MISTAKES without pawning them all off on other people.
i'm only defending terry in the two specific cases mentioned here- again, i think that photos of girls who don't speak the language are exploitative, and that fully nude photography of girls under 18 should either be illegal or much more strictly regulated. i am a feminist and i've volunteered as a crisis counselor for a domestic abuse hotline for five years, and THAT is exploitation and abuse. choosing as an adult to give a creepy perv a handjob to further your career may make you feel disgusting, but it's not abuse.