If you have time you can also visit this site :
Photo Tech Photos and Photographers

http://www.godammit.com/2010/03/31/a-genius-speaks/comment-page-1/#comment-79057

In the same way that Bush is a war criminal, Richardson is a sexual predator. While the former won’t be brought to justice, the latter could be, if pressure is put on his clients.

Money is all anyone understands, so let money talk.

” …. but she cant blame him.”

Well, she can expose him, if he is a predator, (assuming the accusations are true), and then even more people will be informed. I think you have assumed that she, like “everyone in the industry” knew about his reputation. This is an unfair assumption.

Amazing sensitivity!
Still all about TR.

Agreed. Most women, gay or straight, appreciate the inherent qualities and power of a beautiful woman.

http://www.terrysdiary.com/post/461129664/i-just-want-to-take-a-moment-to-say-im-really

Seems to be some dissonance between your first post and the post above…

“Mutual consent seems to be the operating principle here, so while he might be a creep he’s not a criminal”.

“…constitutes harassment because, they say, the power differential creates a dynamic in which “mutual consent” is impossible.”

Sexual harassment is a crime. A person consenting to be involved in a crime does not make it any less of a crime. That doesn’t matter if they think it does, or not.

He should be in jail.

2) the story isn’t that surprising to me as there are people at all levels who hold a camera hoping that gives them admission to the ‘fuck-a-model’ attraction.

3) i don’t think it’s good to pressure someone to jerk you off at a (non-porn) shoot. to say that the above people you quoted are cool with sexual assault might be a bit misleading, don’t ya think?

ps: why comment anonymously? you are putting yourself in the ‘noble’ position, wouldn’t you want to let all your potential clients and friends know that you are such a good guy/gal? be a pal and give in to my prodding. reveal yourself gladiator.

When I was in school I took a lot of critical theory classes. What I learned is that critical theory is like a stereotype: its mostly false but contains some bitter truths. So while I reject the thought that fashion is a male dominated power structuire like GE, I do think the larger paradigm of the culture is reflected in the output, especially fashion taht is closer to pure commerce on the art-commerce continiuum.

I never bought Berger’s thought in Ways of Seeing, sinmply because I think that fertile young women are at the core of humanity, for men and women. Reproduction is as core a function as eating, and a beautiful, available fertile and healthy young woman probably touches something in our (both men and women) limbic system. I don’t think its all conditioning that makes a straight female admire the beauty of a beautiful woman. I think that denying this causes cognitive dissonance. If we could deny our core humanity, Modernism wouldn’t have been such a failure.

Good talking to you Sophie. I enoy your thoughts.

There are lots of hacks that are “successful” and get farther along than most would ever expect, they just don’t stay around too long before they fall in on themselves. Terry’s world is built on a very week foundation, and he is “rocking the house” and taking huge risks pretty hard right now.. sooner or later the house is going to crumble.

I’d like to add,

““For the record, Peck hardly seems bitter about it:”
This is the (Jezebel) writers take on this incident. She is quoting this article:

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

The article is days old. If Peck is over it, why the article?

I read it. How does that condone his behavior?

Is there enough information to make an assumption on the print?

Maybe she wants to do a ritual burning of the print.
Maybe she wants to sell it while TR is still favorable.
Maybe she want’s it as evidence in a suit.

Only she knows, but receiving a print is not condoning his behavior.

Why are there no boundaries when someone accepts an interview, a job, or a shoot?

What does wanting a signed print have to do with anything?

Sophie,

As I read your words, I’m wondering how much of your thoughts are being supported by pre-existing beliefs, and how much by actuality.

The photography market does not gainfully employee most photographers. I’d say something like 80% of those that graduate photography schools are not doing well, or may not even be practicing. In an environment like this, the woman that became art buyers may have made much better career choices than the (mostly male) photographers. Further, in academics in general women are kicking ass over men.

As far as this: ” With Richardson, it always comes back to his penis, http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/07/14/photography15707_wideweb__470×296,0.jpg ”

This is what appears to be a cow or other farm animal. Though you may wish to perceive it as something else.

As long as you are going to critique the content of images in regard to how “we see ourselves”, why not focus on the entire *Consumer culture*? Or idealization in imagery? The ‘ideal’ is still the ideal regardless of who (or what) is on which side of the lens.

“Do we aknowledge that images have power to shape perception and affect the world?”

Do we all perceive images or anything else in the same way (or should/could we)?
Do we all make the same “assumptions”?

“Of what value is our ‘vision’?”

Vision is fine. You don’t have to make a living with “vision”. You can do your *vision* as a hobby.
The bottom line here: there are no free lunches. We all live with that gravity. That may not be satisfactory to your ideals but that is the way civilization works.

btw – It’s my experience the fashion industry is far more gay (male) than hetro, and there are many women in the industry as well.

Also aesthetics go back much farther than “Western Art” and may very well be genetically coded in our beings.

In some cultures, it doesn’t matter who is the subject, or image maker. Images of *people* are verboten.

Keep in mind, nobody chose their parents, era, culture, or location in which they were born (spiritual aside). We are to a large part products of things which we have had no control over.