OMG, Will People Get Over This Glee Thing?

40 Comments

1. 1
   Nikki Hughes
   Posted October 22, 2010 at 11:01 am

   Good grief…..if they watch the show, they know that it’s not even for younger viewers, with all the sex ~ especially the most recent episode. Whatever. I’m a parent and I’m tired of parents blaming shows when it’s their job to supervise what their kids are getting into. blech

2. 2
   sarcasatire
   Posted October 22, 2010 at 11:13 am

   I used to assist Terry Richardson’s stylist and anyone who knows his work knows that young people will be photographed in their underwear. It’s his schtick. He uses a disposable camera or sometimes really amateur lighting but it’s his subject matter that has made him famous. I can remember casting for one of his shoots, along with the stylist, and having girl after girl appear, and respond to my only request, “do you mind taking your top off?” I was instructed to polaroid their boobs and staple it to their info page. My boss prided herself on being a principle ‘boob caster’. Good times.. Terry. Thanks for the memories. (and nightmares)

3. 3
   baymenxpac
   Posted October 22, 2010 at 11:21 am

   seriously! 3 people in their mid-20s do a photo shoot and people lose their collective shit?! i don’t get the outrage.

4. 4
   Zombie Cheez
   Posted October 22, 2010 at 12:24 pm

   What kind of amazes me about this whole brouhaha is why the real story isn’t getting more attention. This photographer is banned from publications like “W’ because he’s viewed as a predator who walks a VERY thin line with teenage models, and is notorious in the fashion industry for openly and grievously sexually harassing models on shoots.

   The fact that he’s sexualizing high school subject matter in the face of those kinds of allegations speaks to his arrogance and inability to understand why his work translates as so offensive in so many quarters.

   Working with well-known and respected subjects like the cast from “Glee” further legitimizes him, and makes him even more dangerous to the young girls who are looking to make a name for themselves in an industry infamous for scams and predators. Having one of the worst of those examples be a so-called “legitimate photographer” is just plain disturbing.

   http://jezebel.com/5495699/exclusive-more-models-come-forward-with-allegations-against-fashion-photographer

5. 5
   tvaholic
   Posted October 22, 2010 at 12:42 pm

   ZCheez-that guy is a sexual predator who needs to be in jail. Disgusting. You’re right, all the PT Council cares about is the pictures, how about doing something to protect the kids who end up being in the pictures. If even a portion of what that article said is true, I cannot fathom how any reputible company could hire him, much less how anyone can work for him or continue to send models to his shoots. I’m sure I’m just naive nver having been in this business, but how can anyone justify this behavior? Yuck, I need to go scrub my brain.

6. 6
   Zombie Cheez
   Posted October 22, 2010 at 12:46 pm

   I hear you @tvaholic, the problem is that the guy operates in broad daylight (metaphorically), he’s not even acting out in private – it’s all right out there. No one does anything about it.

7. 7
   sarcasatire
   Posted October 22, 2010 at 1:15 pm

   When I worked with him (almost 10 years ago), the models we worked with were over 18 and few of them came from agencies. I do remember some castings from strip clubs for some of his more risque shoots. But while I was with his stylist, we did cast from the agencies when he shot for Vogue Omo, Sisley ads, and editorials for Spoon (where I worked and said stylist was Creative Director). One particular shoot involved bare breasts, dildoes, and Vincent Gallo. Go figure.

   What makes him so succesful, besides the fact that his father is/was legendary photog Bob Richardson, is that he was always pushing the envelope when it came to sex and we all know how much fashion loves it’s lolitas. (Just look at Victoria Secret and the lolita vibe of some of their top girls..Miranda Kerr, anyone? Or Adrianna Lima at the tope of her fame)

   He is very convincing on set. He even convinced the stylist to even take her top off and appear in a shot, which she felt compelled to even though she was a successful advertising stylist also running the US office of a (at the time)major European magazine! Her reason when I asked her why she did it? “It’s Terry.” Oh, did I mention she was 38? So I can only imagine what he talked younger, more impressionable girls into doing..but thankfully, I wasn’t around to see it.

8. 8
   Mister_Dangerous
   Posted October 22, 2010 at 2:31 pm

   Uh, those girls look real slutty. Has Itchy been alerted?

   I AM OUTRAGED that there weren’t any photos of guys in jockstraps! I object!

9. 9
   itchy
   Posted October 22, 2010 at 2:43 pm

   I’m right on top of it, Mr. D. Thoroughly engorged by those scandalous photos.

10. 10
    itchy
    Posted October 22, 2010 at 2:44 pm

    Oops. Enraged.

    Damn.

11. 11
    sarcasatire
    Posted October 22, 2010 at 2:46 pm

    LOL!!

12. 12
    Zombie Cheez
    Posted October 22, 2010 at 2:47 pm

    A 13 year old’s perspective on Terry Richardson:

    http://www.thestylerookie.com/2010/05/can-i-just-say.html

13. 13
    jersey4041
    Posted October 23, 2010 at 11:09 pm

    The point is not that children will be reading the magazine, in my opinion. The point is that he is hyper-sexualizing the IDEA of underage girls. You want to take pictures of naked 24 year old’s who play high schoolers, fine. But dressing them up as high schoolers half naked is the problem. Making them spread their legs and suck on lollipops in what is obviously a high school locker room or high school hallway sends a whole other type of message. It’s a magazine for adult men. Then we’re surprised when our teenagers end up pregnant or disgusted when grown men are chasing after underage girls. I don’t think I’m a prude but in this case I can see the argument. It’s just in really poor taste.

14. 14
    itchy
    Posted October 23, 2010 at 11:54 pm

    Well, the whole sexualization of young girls started long before last week, you know. Somewhere along the line it became acceptable for 10 year olds (and even younger) to dress like their slutty older cousins. Or slutty mothers. It’s just one of the consequences of targeting marketing at young kids.

    And teens have been getting pregnant long before this photo shoot, and long before little girls’ mothers started dressing them like hos. And men who chase after underage girls do this because they are psychologically damaged, and for no other reason.

    So it’s difficult to blame these things on this photoshoot. You could make a better argument for it being cliched and overdone and just lacking in imagination in general. Definitely successful in generating attention, though.

15. 15
    Zombie Cheez
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 12:16 am

    My problem with it is the fact that a sexual predator continues to profit from imagery that is often obtained in circumstances that would not be acceptable in any other context.

    Terry Richardson is victimizer of young girls both underage and of-age; and he operates with a fully compliant staff and roster of people who facilitate him.

    The “Glee” actors are full-grown adults, and the sexualization of school-girls is nothing new. In Mr. Richardson’s case however, his personal history and notoriety make this imagery just a little harder to take, and knowing this isn’t a man who does things just to be provocative but actually acts on those impulses makes us all just a little complicit in legitimizing him when we allow his “work” to pass without comment or understanding what drives it.

    I honestly don’t get what makes him stand out at any rate – he’s gimmicky. There are so many truly talented photographers out there who’s work I would rather see.

16. 16
    ratchet
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 12:18 am

    “So it’s difficult to blame these things on this photoshoot. You could make a better argument for it being cliched and overdone and just lacking in imagination in general. Definitely successful in generating attention, though.”

    Here, here! I agree, completely.. If you guys want to go after someone, go after all of the porn sites dedicated to teen lookalikes, babysitters, barely legals.. this is also seen by adult men and goes a lot further than lollipop licking. I mean, that’s if you really want to take up a cause.

    As far as the wrong message to young girls, I think Miley Cyrus’ new video is a whole lot more detrimental than a spread in GQ magazine, from what I hear. The ‘innocent children’ would not have known about the photo pread had it not been broadcast on every news channel/newspaper/gossip site by ‘outraged’ people..thus exposing it to the innocent children! Ironic, at best. Ridiculous, at worst.

17. 17
    Robinez
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 12:20 am

    The Stylists like him. Didn’t the girl that is a stylist say she worked for him?

    Robin

18. 18
    ratchet
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 12:25 am

    Gimmicky or not, he sells..GQ knows it and so do countless others who continue to hire him. I wouldn’t let him around my (future) daughters, however. But, just as bringing attantion to the ‘outrage’ of the photoshoot’s indeceny. Bringing unneccesary attention to the photographer will further legitamize him. Because in the day where everything is on the web, these print magazines want to sell. Sex and notoreity sell. So, why add to it by bringing T. Richardson’s indiscretions to light? I’m sure most people who viewed the spread had no idea who the photog was and there sure hasn’t been much mention of him in connection with the story either, aside from on here.

19. 19
    Zombie Cheez
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 12:32 am

    “If you guys want to go after someone, go after all of the porn sites dedicated to teen lookalikes, babysitters, barely legals.. this is also seen by adult men and goes a lot further than lollipop licking. I mean, that’s if you really want to take up a cause.”

    As far as I know those girls are neither underaged, nor are they being sexually victimized in those situations. Terry Richardson engages openly in predatory practices in a professional capacity.

    It’s not a cause, it’s acknowledgment that young girls have been and are being damaged by this man and are coming forward to address it. The photo shoot is besides the point, the fact that the man doing the photo shoot is a sexual predator is the issue here. Maybe people won’t be so inclined to support his “work” as those facts circulate in the mainstream – I know I won’t. Knowledge is power.

20. 20
    Robinez
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 12:32 am

    For goodness sakes! The dude has a record of being innapropriate with girls. I just cannot fathom a conversation taking place when a child as a matter of fact, according to article(S), Children, are telling adults that they feel wierd around an adult male and y’all are talking about Miley Cirus? Take it up with Billy Ray..These girls were worried! They deserved to be taken seriously!

    Robin

21. 21
    Pixielated
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 12:36 am

    The concept of sexual harassment does not seem to have been introduced to the fashion industry.

    I’m amazed that this little freak hasn’t been charged with indecent exposure. And he doesn’t even deny what he does.

    Anybody that says “it isn’t my bag” (as he does in one of the interviews) is living in an Austin Powers movie in his mind.

    BTW Lea Michele is in Marie Claire this month, pouting in panties with her legs spread. The other girl (Agron) has apologized for the GQ spread, and said she didn’t feel comfortable doing it.

22. 22
    sarcasatire
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 12:38 am

    “The stylist” has a name, my dear. But continue to take swipes..it’s petty but amusing.

    Let’s list all of the people who “like” Terry Richardson, shall we?

    Here is a link to some of his advertising work, with clients such as Belvedere, Tom Ford, Sisley, Harper’s Bazarr, Vogue Hommes, Vogue Paris, Lacoste, Diane von Furstenberg, Jimmy Choo.
    And also celebrities such as Leighton Meester, Pamela Anderson, Evan Rachel Wood, Docle and Gabbana..I could go on, but i don’t want to bore you. Call him what you want, and he may deserve it, but that won’t stop him from being hired because his ads get noticed. And for designers, producers, magazine editors..that is the primary goal each and every time.

23. 23
    sarcasatire
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 12:41 am

    Oops..I forgot the link.

    http://www.trendhunter.com/slideshow/terry-richardson

24. 24
    Pixielated
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 12:41 am

    I think young women are regularly demeaned, harassed, and mistreated in the fashion industry, and that’s why this is sort of accepted. They need to set up a trap for this perv and get criminal charges against him, then he will have to register as a sex offender. What a slimy little troll–blecchhhh!

25. 25
    Robinez
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 1:26 am

    “The stylist” has a name, my dear. But continue to take swipes..it’s petty but amusing.”

    I have no clue what your name is. Not swiping, or being petty. Just don’t know or care what your name is. But I can tell you this much, my name is not “my dear”. So in as much as you think that I know you,don’t you ever get so familiar with me as to call me dear.

    I have seen what you write to people and some of it is pretty bad. I will never allow you to do the same thing to me. You are a bully. Always have been. Go ahead and cry to the masses. I dont give a flying fuck.

    It isn’t funny.What you do isn’t funny.

    This place is supposed to be funny!!!

26. 26
    sarcasatire
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 1:47 am

    If you cannot respect me enough to use the screename that I have provided then you are being petty. I mean, if you didn’t know my screename then how would you know who you are responding to?
    You have consistently engaged in conflict and it’s now a source of amusement for me to see who you go after this week. But, you don’t intimidate me, I just find you a tad bit ridiculous. But that’s ok.. I’ll just continue to ignore you. I know how much you hate that. In the meantime, I’ll wait in the background to see who you go agter next. I shan’t wait too long..

27. 27
    sarcasatire
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 1:48 am

    @Pixie: I agree that young women are regularly demeaned and exploited in the fashion industry. I also believe that the crimes extend far beyond one wayward photographer. Who are the agents scouting and signing 13 year old girls? Sending them far away from their families and sending them on photoshoots with photographer famous for their racy, lolita-like material? I am sure many of these girls have complained to their agents. Yet more girls get sent for the next casting. Why? Because the industry, like any other, is motivated by profit and greed. And an agent who receives 20% of a model’s earnings, knows the high visibility of appearing in one of Terry’s ads or editorials would mean marketability for that model and more money in his pocket.

    I think the agents are the true criminals here. They have an obligation to protect these girls who are taken from Eastern Europe or whereever and stuck in a model’s apartment with little or no supervision, little contact with family, and sent on on jobs with known predators.

    And what about the people who continue to hire Terry, in wake of the accusations brought against him? Do they have no culpability, as well? Have people boycotted the designers that hire Terry in an effort to bring attention to their products and fashion lines?

    This goes far beyond Terry Richardson. This is an industry where the younger the face, the tighter the body, the more probability of success. Don’t hate the player..hate the game.

    There is a documentary due out, if it isn’t already, called Picture Me. It was done by a former model who wanted to expose the secrets/shame of the industry via home videos and interviews with other models. They are candid on the discussion of the ‘extreme youth of the girls’, the eating disorders, the exploitation of girls from poor countries who see modeling as a way to support their families, and the dark underbelly of predatory photographers.

    “There were a few instances where there were really young girls staying in a hotel and they commented on the fact that they thought it was premature for girls to be working at 12, 13-years-old. One girl related seeing a girl working on a coloring book backstage.”

    “The more sinister aspects of the industry are fleetingly touched upon—some of the girls discuss being sexually taken advantage of during shoots by photographers—and that there are not more models talking about what the film hints is a widespread practice, is probably due to fact that it’s a subject too painful for most to talk about on camera.”

    Here is the link to the article: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-08/the-ugly-truth-about-models/full/

    Jezebel weighs is on Terry Richardson’s antics and wonders why these underage girls aren’t chaperoned during shoots? Any why they continuously send underage age to his castings: http://jezebel.com/5501317/to-catch-a-predator-what-are-agencies-doing-to-keep-models-safe

    But the most important artic to read, imo, is about the agency owner Jen-Luc Brunel who made a fortune ‘pimping out young girls to rich clients! He consistently sent models to billionaire Jeffery Epstein, who was later charged with rape/molestation of 40 underage girls. The agent, although investigated, has not been charged. Just how pervy is he?

    “Pervy enough to drug and rape numerous teenagers, according to 60 Minutes and Diane Sawyer, who investigated Brunel in 1988. The program interviewed nearly two dozen models who said they had been sexually assaulted by Brunel and/or by his fellow agent, Claude Haddad. Even at that time, Brunel had a reputation as a man one could go to to procure a “date” with a young model.”

    And he’s still at it. He is now scouring the globle to sign “5’10″ 13-yr old girls from Eastern Europe and (the whiter parts) of South America.

    http://m.jezebel.com/5603638/meet-the-modeling-agent-who-trafficked-underage-girls-for-sex

    There are so many more links, so many more stories, so much more injustice. I wouldn’t focus on one person, I would focus on stopping the pattern of exploitation of young girls by any one who can profit from using them as chattle.

28. 28
    itchy
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 2:15 am

    What is definitely creepy is the quote from Michele saying “I don’t know how they got me to do half the stuff I did.”

29. 29
    sarcasatire
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 2:23 am

    @itchy: That’s what Marc Jacobs said in one of the links I posted! He then goes on to say..well, if I thought it was too much, I could’ve always said no.”

    I think it was the Jezebel- to catch a predator article.

30. 30
    Zombie Cheez
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 4:59 am

    “What is definitely creepy is the quote from Michele saying “I don’t know how they got me to do half the stuff I did.””

    @itchy – his assistants and crew participate in it, and often take pictures of HIM while he’s sexually abusing the women. They models get cajoled into it because it’s essentially them against a room full of “so-called” industry professionals.

    http://thegloss.com/fashion/terry-richardson-is-really-creepy-one-models-story

31. 31
    Angela Parisi LaRoe
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 6:33 am

    Personally, I can side with either issue. While it isn’t like the whole Miley Cyrus Vanity Fair Deal (I fall on the She is WAY too young to do that) with age, it can be a complication with other kids. However, they were talking about scissoring and other sexual stuff on the show itself. It isn’t always a kid show (unless it is animated and has a character pointing to an object with a blue paw print on it) and people should know that.

    I think the photographer had poor taste in the shoot in general. Playing up stupid fantasies about schoolgirls and cheerleaders is cheesy and outdated. If the girls were uncomfortable, they should have said something to someone, their agents, the stylist, etc. Then again, it is GQ. Isn’t that the magazine that had Jennifer Aniston naked on the cover except with a tie in the USA colors?

    The whole issue can go either way. I don’t watch Glee (sans the scissoring episode I heard so much about) but I can tell instantly it isn’t a kid show. The actors and actresses are adults. The photographer shouldn’t have pushed the actors and the actors should have stood up to him. I know it is hard (I am a photographer myself) but at least it is on record they told the guy.

    The flaming has to end guys. It gets depressing after a while.

32. 32
    hollagirl2
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 7:46 pm

    @sarcas… Sounds like you’ve had your share of interesting work experiences to say the least!
    Thanks for the inside scoop!

33. 33
    Pixielated
    Posted October 24, 2010 at 8:24 pm

    Wow, @sarcas, that is a stinging indictment of the fashion business, and well-deserved. This guy is just the highest profile example.

    These young girls should absolutely be chaperoned.

    The thing that sickens me (well, one of the things) is that people in the industry are saying, “Well, they had the choice. They could say no. Of course, that might mean they lose the booking and don’t work in the industry again…”

    That is the definition of sexual harassment. First of all, many of these girls are underage. Secondly, they believe (probably correctly) that their employment is predicated on their stripping and being sexually abused or posed suggestively. They are not equal to the people who are exploiting them.

34. 34
    itchy
    Posted October 25, 2010 at 12:14 am

    Another perversity of the fashion industry is that they’re using these extremely young girls to sell clothing to far older women. Who then hate themselves and their bodies because they don’t resemble 13 year old girls.

    Maybe Mao was onto something?

35. 35
    sarcasatire
    Posted October 25, 2010 at 1:24 am

    @ itchy..you’re onto something. The film, Picture Me, explains that tween bodies are naturally skinny in the way a thirty-something figure, is not. They cite this as a reason the fashion industry uses young girls. But all that does is promote body issues in older women, the women who could actually afford these pricey clothes yet are devastated that they don’t look ‘straight off the runway.’

    @Pixie: yea, Terry, and many others should be held accountable for their actions. Marc Jacobs also mentioned how professional Terry is with actual celebrities because they are accompanied by publicists, agents, and the like. Yet, these poor young models arrive to shoots alone. It’s weird, because I have also worked on films and the children/teens MUST be accompanied by an adult when on set. So, why aren’t the same regulations made for models as they are for actors?

    @Hollagirl2: Giiiiiiirl, if you only knew the stories I could tell! Truthfully, most aspects of my job is unglamorous at best; schlepping, steaming, pinning, shopping, RETURNING,..but there are some highlights. I once assisted a Celebrity Stylist (hip-hop) for a year and a half. The music videos shoots were crazy! I met tons of strippers and the models who looked down on them. From this experience, I not only learned how to lie to designer showrooms to procure high-end clothes (Jennifer Lopez is doing a shoot for In Style..editorial credit!), I also picked up invaluable skills. Like perfecting my booty clap.

36. 36
    itchy
    Posted October 25, 2010 at 6:55 am

    Okay….”booty clap” led me to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBMETVlnk5Q

    Which made me wanta go thirty. ;-D

37. 37
    Zombie Cheez
    Posted October 25, 2010 at 7:06 am

    @itchy – UGH! LOL, I don’t know what was worse – the depressing digs, or the freak show! Haha – I want my money back.

38. 38
    sarcasatire
    Posted October 25, 2010 at 7:53 am

    @itchy..LOL..yes, go thirty! Actually that seems to be just a coupla kids having fun, very PG, and no booty clap in sight. Since, I hate for you to be led astray on one of the most cultural phenomenons of our time, I have come to the rescue. You see, in order to see the real effect of a booty clap, one must be in a thong. So, this next vid may be a little NSFW, click at your own risk, but it does show a woman with the skills and ‘tools’ to give a proper instructional…even if she is a little rough in the face.

    (For itchy’s eyes only! )
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGGjOPmW4Hg

    And yes, while not always done in thongs, these shenanigans did happen on music video sets..especially the ones in the South! And I don’t care what anyone says, strippers are selfless people, happily giving free tutorials between takes. Of course, apropos to their craft, they quickly learned how to turn a profit, and we now have ‘stripper pole fitness’ videos. (which you can always head to youtube to learn for free!)

    It’s where I go to Zumba; great excercise, and something I can do in a nightclub without embarrassing my mother.

39. 39
    itchy
    Posted October 25, 2010 at 10:01 am

    I…have….seen….paradise…..

40. 40
    sarcasatire
    Posted October 25, 2010 at 10:21 am

    Haha…makes you wanna go thirty, eh?