Terry Richardson’s Work is Degrading to Women

[KateTheGreatest]

^ Just because you can take advantage of someone, it does not mean that you should.

 

[dsamg]

I like Terry's work, he's a good fashion photographer. I do not think at all that his type of photography is more or less p*rn*gr*ph*c or even mysogynist than the work of other fashion photographers, look at Juergen Teller, he's simply more crude and not so good for people to think it will be a great loss if this accusations are proven true, and we do not see another photo from him again. He's no Woody Allen.

Richardson does not have "nine lives" or has been evading accusations he has never actually been accused by the police of a sexual offence. That's the crux of the matter. Those allegations are strong enough in itself for people to decide not to work with him anymore, but at the same time those who do want to work with him can simply disregard this allegations if they choose.
Reading the testimony of that 19 year old model, I find it baffling that the police simply said that there was no crime at all, how is that even possible?

Because he asked her to do things and she didn't say no, she did them. That is consent. She wasn't an underage girl, she was 19 and old enough to know better. If she had said no or expressed th a t she was uncomfortable and then he kept going, that would be a crime.

 

[kokobombon]

imo unless oneself has been in the type of situation that the models have described, how can you tell how are you going to react? it´s easy to speak rhetorically but there are factors that are inherent to each person. There are ways to make people do something they don´t want to do that doesn´t involve a gun to the head.
The same way that these models felt violated there must be lots who didn´t, yet the audience can perceive the images as misogynistic. His fashion work is safe but check out his "private" work, some images are down right p*rn*gr*ph*c... one particular image of Terry and actress Juliette Lewis comes to mind.

I´m curious about the images that the girls have described, were they printed in a book or shown in a gallery?

 

[StoneSkipper]

^The absence of a "no" doesn't mean a "yes". Have you heard of coertion? It's a powerful tool, especially if you're exerting some power over the victim, like, for example, being a famous fashion photographer that could ruin your career and your life with a few calls.

Sex of any kind must be done with actual consent! And not just an absence of a no, but a glorious, full-sounding YES!

 

[kokobombon]

^is that an answer to my post? cause I agree with you, I wasn´t saying otherwise. I was expression my opinion regarding a couple of posts...

 

[StoneSkipper]

^Oh, no, it was referent to the poster above you. I typed that up before I saw your comment.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

Just a quick definition of sexual harassment from Wikipedia (I realize this isn't the best source and not a legal/official definition but for the purposes of this discussion it should suffice

Sexual harassment is bullying or coercion of a sexual nature, or the unwelcome or inappropriate promise of rewards in exchange for sexual favors

By the sounds of some of the models' experiences and accounts this is precisely what they experienced when working with Terry Richardson.

Birkin: When are women going to take responsability for their own actions instead of putting the blame on others? i wonder.

This comment is rather contentious taken generally. Surely sometimes men, too, don't take responsibility for their actions and "put the blame on" others? Indeed, I believe there are sexual assault charges being launched by a young man right now against the Hollywood director Bryan Singer. So there you go. I guess that young man is not taking responsibility for his actions either? At least if that's how you see it...

As for what has allegedly happened at some of Richardson's shoots, note that we can probably all agree that a nude photoshoot does not normally (or necessarily at least) include a blow job, but if the model goes to the shoot and feels coerced or bullied into it, or if offers are made to her suggesting her career will benefit by her performing the act, then that constitutes sexual harassment by the definition above.

 

[Birkin]

^ I wasn't refering to the sexual arrasement issue , i don't know the details and i can't give my opinion. I was talking about all the humiliating, degrading and misogynist thing surrounding the fashion world and photography. One photographer doesn't take humiliating and degrading pictures if he has not a model who agrees to take that kind of photographs, and if she agrees, then you will have to blame the photographer as much as the model for dregrading and humiliate women, that's my point. i don't buy women are always the victims, they are grown up people and they know what they are doing. As for example, Miley Cyrus knows what she is doing when she sticks her tongue out and shakes her *** in the scenary. I find that degrading and humiliating too and i think there is no one coercing her to do such kind of things, and i'm not judging her, if it is her decision go ahead with it, but don't blame others for the decisions you make, you had a choice and you chose, name it to be a famous singer or to be a famous model or whatever, but it was your decision.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

^ But some people, especially young people, say 17, 18, even 20 years old, will sometimes do things because they think they need to do them to further their career.

Maybe they're even told that by the photographer in question, and so they pose in such a way or in such a state - or even perform sexual acts if the allegations are to be believed - which they then regret and which may even hinder their career.

Would they have done those things if they hadn't been coerced by someone powerful and older than them who they saw as an authority figure?

Maybe, but maybe not.

And may I reiterate that this is not an issue that applies only to women. As I mentioned in my previous post, there is a young man right now saying he was victim to similar exploitation, only in his case by a male director.

 

[StoneSkipper]

^ I wasn't refering to the sexual arrasement issue , i don't know the details and i can't give my opinion. I was talking about all the humiliating, degrading and misogynist thing surrounding the fashion world and photography.

It's interesting how you talk about misogyny, degradation and humulliation in the fashion world and yet you say that "women should learn". What is your line of reasoning? I'm not being ironic, I really wanna know, because these two things sound extremely contradictory to me.

^ One photographer doesn't take humiliating and degrading pictures if he has not a model who agrees to take that kind of photographs, and if she agrees, then you will have to blame the photographer as much as the model for dregrading and humiliate women, that's my point. i don't buy women are always the victims, they are grown up people and they know what they are doing.

Here's the thing: nude photography is not p*rn. (And even in p*rn, actors and other staff (in almost all cases) don't go around abusing and r*ping the actresses they work with.) A nude body by itself does not necessarily correlate to sex, and, unless wanted, shouldn't be interpreted as an invite to it. And that seems to be the logic photographers like Richardson adopt - "Hey, this girl wanted to shoot naked with me, so it's obvious she wants me inside her. Why else would she agree to that?" And thus begins the rapefest (pardon the term).

As for example, Miley Cyrus knows what she is doing when she sticks her tongue out and shakes her *** in the scenary. I find that degrading and humiliating too and i think there is no one coercing her to do such kind of things, and i'm not judging her, if it is her decision go ahead with it, but don't blame others for the decisions you make, you had a choice and you chose, name it to be a famous singer or to be a famous model or whatever, but it was your decision.

This follows the logic of "she was asking for it" (and we had a huge debate about this issue back here in Brazil, when a fraudulent research appointed that 65% of the people interviewed agreed with the statement I previously mentioned, which caused a lot of rage. The number was actually 25%).
Thankfully, we own our bodies. We can decide who are we gonna have sex with - and that's a great thing! We can also choose how we express ourselves through our appearance and clothing, the thing popularly known as fashion - another great thing! We can, too, combine fashion with sexuality and flaunt our physical assets, to look more appealing and desirable to people. Does that mean that my body is on display, for anyone to grab a bite? Unless I want to, no! I am the owner of my body - no one else is. I have the right to decide who is going to touch me, and wearing revealing clothes does not cancel that right in any way.
Just like you wouldn't steal an artwork from a museum just because it's there, flaunting its beauty to the people in the room - and later, say that it was the artwork's fault for being stolen, after all, it was too beautiful to just leave it there. It should've been protected by a glass, so it wouldn't showcase its beauty to anyone, so that no one would have the desire to steal it! See how that makes sense? It's basically the same thing as the "she was asking for it" trope. (Apologies if the metaphor was confusing or misleading.)

See, I think that the problem is this negative view of sex that we have (and believe me, it's not just you - it's a worldwide problem). You describe "erotic" acts like nude photography and dances that emphasize the sexually charged parts of the body as "degrading and humilliating". But sex is a natural thing; not only an act of intimacy, but the most effective method of reproduction avaliable to us. The nude body is there to be explored, otherwise we wouldn't have been born with it at all! All the different parts of the body are there for a reason. They're there to be used.
We've been teached since little kids that sex is something wrong, that shouldn't be talked about, that is indecent and shameful. We've been teached since little that men can have sex as much as they like, but a woman's virginity is to be saved and taken by the right guy, the knight in shining armour; and that creates, as you can see, a OMFGHUGE double standard (since a standard, hetero sex involves both a male and a female). Once we realize that sex is normal for both genders and sexes, that it's natural (perhaps the most natural act that we still carry, but I digress) and that isn't something to be ashamed of or disgusted by; by comprehending that sex is also a very intimate and bonding act between two (or more) people who are, at some level, attracted to each other; we can easily wrap our heads around how very disturbing r*pe is. It's a violation of intimacy. A violation of the body.

(To finish off - and I'm not sure how off topic this is - I suggest you watch a few videos by Laci Green of Sex+, who you might or might not have heard of. She 's dealt with issues like these in some of her videos, and she's, of course, far more articulate than anything I could ever write here, as she's a specialist on the subject. Watch it. She's amazing.)

 

[jennifer~]

Here's the thing: nude photography is not p*rn. (And even in p*rn, actors and other staff (in almost all cases) don't go around abusing and r*ping the actresses they work with.)

You would really be surprised.

 

[fashionista-ta]

The only person to blame in that kind of photos is the model who posses in them. I don't think there was a guy pointing a gun to her head to take the photo. When are women going to take responsability for their own actions instead of putting the blame on others? i wonder.

Really, the only person? Not the person who conceived of the photo shoot? Not the person who paid for it? Not the photographer, the stylist, the publisher? Only the model? Really?

 

[fashionista-ta]

Because he asked her to do things and she didn't say no, she did them. That is consent. She wasn't an underage girl, she was 19 and old enough to know better. If she had said no or expressed th a t she was uncomfortable and then he kept going, that would be a crime.

I really dislike that phrase, old enough to know better.


If there's someone in this situation old enough to know better, it would be the one in his 50s ... ahem, 40s (wow, not looking too good for someone born in 1965).

 

[Birkin]

Really, the only person? Not the person who conceived of the photo shoot? Not the person who paid for it? Not the photographer, the stylist, the publisher? Only the model? Really?

Yes, the one and only person. If there is no model, there is no conceived photoshoot, nor person who pays, nor photographer, stylist or publisher.

 

[Birkin]

It's interesting how you talk about misogyny, degradation and humulliation in the fashion world and yet you say that "women should learn". What is your line of reasoning? I'm not being ironic, I really wanna know, because these two things sound extremely contradictory to me.



Here's the thing: nude photography is not p*rn. (And even in p*rn, actors and other staff (in almost all cases) don't go around abusing and r*ping the actresses they work with.) A nude body by itself does not necessarily correlate to sex, and, unless wanted, shouldn't be interpreted as an invite to it. And that seems to be the logic photographers like Richardson adopt - "Hey, this girl wanted to shoot naked with me, so it's obvious she wants me inside her. Why else would she agree to that?" And thus begins the rapefest (pardon the term).



This follows the logic of "she was asking for it" (and we had a huge debate about this issue back here in Brazil, when a fraudulent research appointed that 65% of the people interviewed agreed with the statement I previously mentioned, which caused a lot of rage. The number was actually 25%).
Thankfully, we own our bodies. We can decide who are we gonna have sex with - and that's a great thing! We can also choose how we express ourselves through our appearance and clothing, the thing popularly known as fashion - another great thing! We can, too, combine fashion with sexuality and flaunt our physical assets, to look more appealing and desirable to people. Does that mean that my body is on display, for anyone to grab a bite? Unless I want to, no! I am the owner of my body - no one else is. I have the right to decide who is going to touch me, and wearing revealing clothes does not cancel that right in any way.
Just like you wouldn't steal an artwork from a museum just because it's there, flaunting its beauty to the people in the room - and later, say that it was the artwork's fault for being stolen, after all, it was too beautiful to just leave it there. It should've been protected by a glass, so it wouldn't showcase its beauty to anyone, so that no one would have the desire to steal it! See how that makes sense? It's basically the same thing as the "she was asking for it" trope. (Apologies if the metaphor was confusing or misleading.)

See, I think that the problem is this negative view of sex that we have (and believe me, it's not just you - it's a worldwide problem). You describe "erotic" acts like nude photography and dances that emphasize the sexually charged parts of the body as "degrading and humilliating". But sex is a natural thing; not only an act of intimacy, but the most effective method of reproduction avaliable to us. The nude body is there to be explored, otherwise we wouldn't have been born with it at all! All the different parts of the body are there for a reason. They're there to be used.
We've been teached since little kids that sex is something wrong, that shouldn't be talked about, that is indecent and shameful. We've been teached since little that men can have sex as much as they like, but a woman's virginity is to be saved and taken by the right guy, the knight in shining armour; and that creates, as you can see, a OMFGHUGE double standard (since a standard, hetero sex involves both a male and a female). Once we realize that sex is normal for both genders and sexes, that it's natural (perhaps the most natural act that we still carry, but I digress) and that isn't something to be ashamed of or disgusted by; by comprehending that sex is also a very intimate and bonding act between two (or more) people who are, at some level, attracted to each other; we can easily wrap our heads around how very disturbing r*pe is. It's a violation of intimacy. A violation of the body.

(To finish off - and I'm not sure how off topic this is - I suggest you watch a few videos by Laci Green of Sex+, who you might or might not have heard of. She 's dealt with issues like these in some of her videos, and she's, of course, far more articulate than anything I could ever write here, as she's a specialist on the subject. Watch it. She's amazing.)

@StoneSkipper , yo have beeen quoting portions of my text and then answering to them with statements that have nothing to do with the things i have written. If you want to say what you want to say i'm ok with it, but don't twist my words and then say something completely unrelated.

I find especially serious that you implied in the 3rd paragraph (This follows the logic of "she was asking for it" ) that behaving this or that way is an invitation for something you haven't asked for. Maybe you have imagined it in your mind because i've never suggested such a thing and would never do.

 

[StoneSkipper]

You would really be surprised.

I guess that was a bit naïve of me, huh? I wonder if it's just the minority of these famous actresses and actors that have the privilege to not being raped, huh? Guess that's another thing to research. I still want to keep my hope in the human race, though...

@StoneSkipper , yo have beeen quoting portions of my text and then answering to them with statements that have nothing to do with the things i have written. If you want to say what you want to say i'm ok with it, but don't twist my words and then say something completely unrelated.

I find especially serious that you implied in the 3rd paragraph (This follows the logic of "she was asking for it" ) that behaving this or that way is an invitation for something you haven't asked for. Maybe you have imagined it in your mind because i've never suggested such a thing and would never do.

First and foremost, I am truly sorry if I have offended you or deturped your words in any way. I take my debates rather seriously, as you can see, and I very much value your opinion (or whoever else's).

Second of all, I realize what you're saying about this. I believe I misinterpreted your original statement and got a little carried away with it, and again, I profusely apologize (and I am glad that you've never suggested such thing and never would). I believe that the rest of my post still stands, however.

 

[kokobombon]

Yes, the one and only person. If there is no model, there is no conceived photoshoot, nor person who pays, nor photographer, stylist or publisher.

it's a nice thought though not very likely to happen in the real world, like there wouldn't be any wars if there weren't any soldiers...
keep in mind that the allegations were made by "unknown" models, girls trying to built their careers, maybe in need of money. I don't think it's so black and white, specially taking in account they were young.


On another note, something like this would have never happened to me in any circumstance. But I can still sympathise with these girls, is that so hard to think beyond your own frame of mind.

 

[Birkin]

^ Of course it is not going to happen, because women in this world are so different one from another, and evryone of them thinks in her on way, so what is right for one is wrong for the other, just like men.

But the truth of this matter is that women are a key piece in this chess board, and they have the power to change this situation. If instead of that they choose to accept the money, or accept the fame, or do it because other girl will do it anyway, then we'll have to question ourselves who is degrading who when things like this happen, are the photographers, editors, the fashion world degrading women, or are women degrading themselves?

 

[HeatherAnne]

...

But the truth of this matter is that women are a key piece in this chess board, and they have the power to change this situation. If instead of that they choose to accept the money, or accept the fame, or do it because other girl will do it anyway, then we'll have to question ourselves who is degrading who when things like this happen, are the photographers, editors, the fashion world degrading women, or are women degrading themselves?

I highly suggest you look up the term r*pe Culture. More specifically, Victim Blaming.

 

[Birkin]

^ Sure, everyone who doesn't treat women like helpless victims is an evil misoginyst.