Terry Richardson’s Work is Degrading to Women

[Harumi]

He's not the only artist, or the first to try to elevate p*rn*gr*phy to an art form.

Not to mention the fact that what is called 'tasteful nude' today would have been called lewd p*rn*gr*phy 60 years ago.

What now, are his supporters gonna defend that as artistic p*rn? Because there is no way in hell that picture was artistic.

So far the only people 'defending' Terry are Les sucettes and I (so much for his detractors being the minority ) and we both acknowledge that his work is p*rn*gr*ph*c (I even say I don't see any artistry in it at all).
If you find Terry's work vulgar, gross, etc, fine. I fail to see how that is personally demeaning to you or any other woman but fine.

However, the issue here is Terry being accused of being a sexual predator, and you better have so proof to back up that serious accusation.

Where are the pictures of young girls Terry's done all these horrible, nasty things to?

Exactly. Is there any basis to these accusations?
I have seen that p*rn*gr*ph*c picture posted. The woman in it us a p*rn actress. She isn't a 'poor teenager' dragged into the shoot against her will.
Where are the pictures of underage models doing p*rn shoots with Terry? It seems everybody is in agreement that it's what he does, but where are the pictures? Where are the pictures of 16 years-old giving him oral sex?

The editorial in Purple Magazine with Magda, Freja, Abbey Lee and Eniko just about did it for me. This man is a very sick individual. How did he even come about asking the models to do such acts?? I agree with Karen, some of his work is good...but most of it is very lewd and degrading to the models in them.

According to whom? The models certainly had no problem with the shoot. Abbey even got on record about how much she enjoyed it.
Maybe this would have been degrading to you, but here you are just projecting.
If, as I believe because I've never seen evidence of the contrary, all the models from his most explicit shoots are legal and willing participants, then who cares? What another woman choose to do with her body and/or her vagina is her prerogative and says nothing about you.

I am also disturbed by the double standards. Why trash Terry for his work when so many women are happy to indulge his fantasies? Why not trash the women too? Oh, I forgot, the women are defenceless victims...
This pseudo-feminism is usually thinly veiled 'sl*t shaming' or people trying to enforce their own moral standards onto others (i.e., moral proselytism). Call me when Terry break any decency laws.

 

[model_mom]

Call me when Terry break any decency laws.

What's your phone number?

 

[Harumi]

^oh please! There is nothing illegal about p*rn*gr*phy with consenting adults. What is this? A Mormon website?

By decency laws I mean child p*rn*gr*phy, sexual harassment, molestation, etc.
If you have any evidence that's what Terry is involved with, it's the police you should be contacting, not me.

 

[Ciao!Manhattan]

First, as many pointed out, I think this thread is a kind of joke. No one complains when the agencies, the fashion industry put 14, 15, 16 years old models on a runway, with really short dress, and sometimes in dresses which show their t*ts.
And Terry isn't using under-age models for his sex-oriented shoots, they're always models who speak out about their sexuality and stuff ( Abbey Lee, Frida ... ). They're not young fresh girls who never heard about sex before.
And why no one is talking about his work with men. No one is saying that his work is degrading to Men, even is he doing the same kind of stuff with men than women. It's hypocrite.

It reminds of a polemic in France there was like one week ago with that picture :

Some women were saying that it was degrading to women because now, some women jumps in everything they can because they see it as degrading. It was a critic of the consumer society but nowadays you have to do politically correct stuff because if you don't, you're attacked.
( Off topic, sorry but it just reminds me of that )

And, I think that some people forgot that he's not only taking pictures which are sex-oriented. Some of his photos for VP are amazing, like all of his eds with Emmanuelle Alt. Maybe we should start a thread for every photographer who did naked shots. I wonder why no one speaks against David Lachapelle, for example.

 

[tigerrouge]

The thing I find most offensive about Terry's images is the amount of times that Terry has to be in the frame. I don't just want him to put his dick away, I literally want him to take himself out of the picture entirely.

I have seen him do some decent stuff for fashion magazines that doesn't involve nudity of any sort, and that does get overshadowed in how people assess his work.

David Lachapelle did cause the occasional stir at the time when he was getting more coverage for his work, when his aesthetic was new. Now no-one's that interested in yet another bubble-gum tableau where everyone's made of plastic (and surgery has reached the stage where some of those looks have become reality).

 

[sarehak]

I think there was sort an off tangent going into underage girls in adult photographic situations, whereas initially this was about Richardson's work being demeaning to women.

Still, I'm not a fan of his work & stand by the notion that he's gross & overrated. I'm still scarred by that particular photo ..

 

[Cammy]

When i first saw some of his work i thought it was ironic, but now i do just think its degrading and pointless. Ive said this before in another thread but its totally unfair that women in mens magazines are seen not as real models and as smutty when the images richardson takes are usually a lot closer to p*rn but because he is "respected" its acceptable. Its exactly that double standard that gets guys like roman polanski support from people who say he did nothing wrong.

 

[Les_Sucettes]

Mert and Marcus pics in the latest Interview magazine.

http://www.interviewmagazine.com/fashion/lara-stone/

Terry Richardson in the latest Purple

http://www.fashionising.com/pictures/b--Models-topless-for-Purple-surprise-3261.html

Why is Terry singled out? It it less demeaning to woman if you use soft light, use tons of photoshop, and make women look like they are in some sort of high class fantasy?
( and just for the record I do not find mert &marcus pics offensive, i just think there is something not quite honest about them.).

 

[iperlchen]

I completely agree with this.

I don't find Terry's work to be demeaning to women because he's not claiming to have some message about what being a woman is about. He's only interested in sexuality. His pictures have no message: they are utterly one-layered and intended for instant gratification. There is no manifesto behind the image: it's really just his sexual fantasies, nothing less, nothing more.
In a way he is the Robert Crumb of photography: a sex-maniac who uses his camera to explore his fetishes and obsessions. Looking at his work is like looking deep into the psyche of male sexuality (considering his work looks a lot like standard-fare p*rn*gr*phy, I think his fantasies are shared by many men. And similarly, it's not surprising most women are grossed out by it).
I agree with you that his work is very honest: it's not a Hollywood or idealized form of sexuality (which is the kind of representation of sexuality that appeal the most to women it's crass, lurid, sleazy yet oddly shiny and sanitized like Californian p*rn*gr*phy.
Does it appeals to me? No. Like most women I prefer the suggestive to the graphic. I also don't see any artistry in his technique (or lack of thereof). But does he offends me ? No.

I cannot be offended but another's person fantasies or sexuality, as it says nothing about me. I don't think it says much about how Richardson view women either.
I have never heard Richardson talk about women in a context other than his work and sexual fantasies, such as how he relates to women in term of friendships and relationships. I won't assume he thinks of women only as sexual object just because in the context of his work he only talks about sex.
For example, there was this great TV series called Family Business about p*rn producer 'Seymore Butts' that would show him in all aspects of his life. What was clear was that he had the utmost respect for women in spite of his chosen profession. Why? Simply because while his work was about sex, in his private life he expected much more than sex from a woman. Maybe Terry is the same?

Regarding the claims that he is sexually exploiting teenagers: I always though he did his most explicit shoots (as in actual sex-acts) with p*rn*gr*ph*c actresses. And while I'm not super familiar with his work, I don't get the vibe that his models work under duress (the Purple ed and the Pirelli calendar, for example, were clearly not exploitative: the girls knew what they were doing and had fun doing it).
Doing p*rn with teenagers, even under the pretence of fashion, would fall under the child p*rn*gr*phy laws, no?
If those claims are indeed true, then it's highly disturbing and most definitely should be investigated by the police.

I agree with you in the sense that I do not feel offended by his images, and I think nobody should. However, we live in a world that is cluttered with media and we are taught to look for something in images that we can identify with (in order to be a good consumer etc). So I can see why a lot of women, who are overall sensitive human beings, would feel offended by his work. And I think they have good reasons.
Personally I can't see what such an overt viewpoint of sexual fantasy has anything to do with fashion (or clothes ), but that is just my opinion. Women are over-sexualized in the media, although it has nothing to do with me I would hope for a more realistic image because that seems like common sense. In a world where anything is possible I think some regulation is healthy and needed.

 

[iperlchen]

Mert and Marcus pics in the latest Interview magazine.

http://www.interviewmagazine.com/fashion/lara-stone/

Terry Richardson in the latest Purple

http://www.fashionising.com/pictures/b--Models-topless-for-Purple-surprise-3261.html

Why is Terry singled out? It it less demeaning to woman if you use soft light, use tons of photoshop, and make women look like they are in some sort of high class fantasy?
(and just for the record I do not find mert &marcus pics offensive, i just think there is something not quite honest about them.).

I think you are right. This is fashion, this is our world. It comes down to the same thing, but the difference is that M&M hide it with sophistication. The sex in their images is stylized. The result might be more complimenting to the woman in their pictures, but sometimes it just looks very crafty.

 

[m.j.]

well if one is going to call him out on that how about making it a case for the entire industry then? it seems fruitless to make him responsible for the nature of the objectification of young girls when young girls have been objectified in this industry for ages. as much as i would love to say he's a prime example,he's merely an aspect of an entire machine that's happened for a long time. and i speak specifically on the work...now,whether the issue is that he pushes himself onto young girls that's really an issue for their agencies and the authorities. where is their responsibility in all that?

i agree with post, imo its the most objective one. yeah, he crossed some lines few many times, but it just made him more wanted in the business. editors hire him, agencies hire him, hes just another fish in the sea... and if rie thinks she can change the industry she should start with her agency, people who book 15yrs old girls to work with terry.

 

[Squizree]

His "photography" isn't just degrading, it's grotesque and sexual predatory.
He looks like the dirty old man from the pub down the road who does nothing all day but wank over p*rn and fantasize about sex.

He's nothing short of an exploiter.

God, how long has Rie been away from the fashion industry? She's a fantastic model.

 

[Squizree]

and if rie thinks she can change the industry she should start with her agency, people who book 15yrs old girls to work with terry.

Oh please, Rie was just pointing out an issue, not being elected as the industry's new leader.
If the guy had any self respect he'd stop taking such vulgar photographs.

Give me a camera and a condom and I'll take better photos.

but it just made him more wanted in the business. editors hire him, agencies hire him, hes just another fish in the sea...

Right, so as long as you're earning cash and getting popular in the industry, exploiting underage girls is fine.

 

[Squizree]

I wonder why no one speaks against David Lachapelle, for example.

Trust me, they do.

 

[Squizree]

really an issue for their agencies and the authorities. where is their responsibility in all that?

Right you are. But the fault is equally from both sides. We're all humans and should all have common sense and self respect.

 

[m.j.]

Oh please, Rie was just pointing out an issue, not being elected as the industry's new leader.
If the guy had any self respect he'd stop taking such vulgar photographs.

Give me a camera and a condom and I'll take better photos.



Right, so as long as you're earning cash and getting popular in the industry, exploiting underage girls is fine.

its not me, it is how things work.... and its not just terry to blame, which straight man would refuse to do his job? money, pretty girls on plate, what else is there?
i didnt call rie a leader of anything, i just think that if u want to prove a point than do it rite, cos this could look like some personal argument gone public.... and everyone will forget about in a week...
what i dont understand is why famous women still work with terry...

 

[sarehak]

which straight man would refuse to do his job?

I would. Just because a man is straight, doesn't mean he likes seeing women expose themselves in these type of publications. I prefer a lady who knows to cover herself from other lustful eyes.

I'm not attacking you by the way, just wanted to clear that not all men like this.

 

[woemwoem]

If, as I believe because I've never seen evidence of the contrary, all the models from his most explicit shoots are legal and willing participants, then who cares? What another woman choose to do with her body and/or her vagina is her prerogative and says nothing about you.

I suppose that this would also excuse pimps. I mean many prostitutes are over 18 and "willing" to put out their vaginas and mouths and anuses for cash. So it's all the girls fault and not the pimps who are merely, what? channeling commerce in their way?
No one would ever excuse a pimp, why the hell would you expect anyone would excuse the fashion biz equivalent?

I am also disturbed by the double standards. Why trash Terry for his work when so many women are happy to indulge his fantasies? Why not trash the women too? Oh, I forgot, the women are defenceless victims...
This pseudo-feminism is usually thinly veiled 'sl*t shaming' or people trying to enforce their own moral standards onto others (i.e., moral proselytism). Call me when Terry break any decency laws.

Absolutely the models, should be held accountable as well as the agents and the fashion designers, everyone in the biz. But somehow that's not an excuse for Terry. And there are definitley stories of girls who DON'T want to do the kind of work that Terry does but feels like they have to if they want to have any career in the business. So what are we supposed to do, just ignore them, especially the under-age ones b/c it's just too inconvenient for a dirty old man who can't get laid otherwise and his sycophants who have even less talent?

 

[ad041715]

His "photography" isn't just degrading, it's grotesque and sexual predatory.
He looks like the dirty old man from the pub down the road who does nothing all day but wank over p*rn and fantasize about sex.

He's nothing short of an exploiter.

God, how long has Rie been away from the fashion industry? She's a fantastic model.

I feel the same way!

 

[Psst!It's...Evie]

Yes, I find many of his pictures degrading too. And although I think women get exploited more explicitly than men his pictures of men is not much better.