Models are Human Beings

[Ajax Knucklebones]

Here's my two cents. It seems lately that every woman who does a photoshoot seems to think..."I'm a model." Yet alot of them just aren't model material. Not even close to it. But because we've become so PC, nobody tells these girls that there isn't a chance in Hell that they're gonna actually become professional models, so they keep trying to do new photoshoots, even paying for them, because everyone's being so polite and making false accusations like, "Beautiful pictures!". No...The pictures aren't. If nobody critiques them, then how long do they waste their time and money and energy at something that's never gonna pan out. Just because I can pick up a baseball bat and take a swing, does not make me a professional baseball player. Real baseball players have been critiqued their whole lives, and in the end that critique was positive enough for them to finally make it to the big leagues. The baseball players that sucked? They been critiqued a long time ago...Found to have sucked and never even made the junior high baseball team...So, either they cut their losses and do something else or practice alot and see if they can make the next years squad...But it doesn't take years for them to figure out if they have the right stuff...Or at least some inclining that they have the right stuff. By being honest and making honest critiques about models, at least the "models" can see how many positive statements vs negative statements they get, as time goes on, to figure out how far they may one day go. But just having a photoshoot doesn't make a person a model....Yet...It seems like so many men and women out there think so. If I had a dime for every woman on M&space who did a photoshoot and then puts down "model" under occupation...I'd be a friggin' millionaire.

[Raza]

Baseball ability is a lot more objectively measurable than beauty, though. And honestly, what attempts at a universal set of beauty standards do exist are exactly the boring tripe most of us are trying to reject or at least evolve from here.

[keiko]

...and I resent being called "Human"....
~K

[Ajax Knucklebones]

Baseball ability is a lot more objectively measurable than beauty, though. And honestly, what attempts at a universal set of beauty standards do exist are exactly the boring tripe most of us are trying to reject or at least evolve from here.

Hmmm...That's true....But at the same time if every woman only received good comments or none at all...At what point can they be seen as a model vs. just some woman who someone took some photoshoot pictures of, yet...Really...They are not, per se...models...And probably will never really be seen as such? I mean, Raza, you don't just go to this site; Truthfully, how many women have you seen all over the internet, who call themselves models, when really...No...They are not? But in their heads...They really do believe so. To me, models, today, seem to be the "New" garage band. Just because you have a singer, a lead guitarist, and a drummer, doesn't really make you a "rock star".

[Raza]

Well, I think profession titles are pretty useless all round. Technically, you're a model when you deliberately pose for a picture. Keeping that title after the act seems a bit silly to me, but that's how identity works for a lot of people. Being is seen as 'deeper' than doing, even if it is really a derivative containing zero additional information.

I could call myself a model, or a photographer, or a designer, or a philosopher or a bicyclist or a writer or any of a bazilion things I do now and then - but it sounds to blatantly pretentious it's not even charming to me. Being something is only fun when it's at least halfway negative, I think, like a pervert or an asshole. 'Freak' is already too glorious, these days.

So, nutshell: Those girls may technically 'be' models, but yes, they're making a silly-sized deal out of it. I wouldn't say they need their eyes opened by your shining light of critical reality though, so only rip on them if you can make it funny.

[Mr Karl]

aren't models just another medium that people use to express what kinds of things are going on in thier brains?

[One Eyed Cat]

I don't really differentiate between models and non-models. I make aesthetic judgments, but generally just comment on what I like or find funny.

[Rockwulf]

Man, this thread got so deep. And to think, it started 'cause I made a toss-off fat joke and a couple people noticed a tiny pecker....

[incog]

I just say fuck the haters but I have made what most people consider a lot of money from the things which put me in the public eye. Someone who just wanted an avatar for their ******* or did a dozen photoshoots is really getting the short end of the stick. People are still being plain haters even for the little things and I just don't let envious little bitches get to me too much.

The hate reflects on the hater more than who they try to tear down.

[TheDeathKnight]

And the bottom line is that there is something for everyone. There are people who go crazy for fat people in nude shoots, or fat person porn. So what if the rest of the society thinks those photos are gross, or think those people are out of shape? Does it really matter? Everyone has their opinion of what they think is sexy or artistic. My point is that once you toss it out there for public viewing, some people will like it, and some people won't. And you can't ask them to not express their opinion. Or to give fake polite answers.

I do feel bad for celebs that get hounded by the paparazzi though. They get photographed in all kinds of unflattering poses and situations, and they aren't asking to be part of a photoshoot... That's different than some amateur goth "model" who has her boyfriend take pics, and post them on the net. As soon as you put them out there, you are up for critique...

Unless it's not voluntary, like the paparazzi example...

[mystoo]

I know the subject is 'models' but it's the same for everything. A picture, a book, song, poem, anything really. If you put it out there for people to see it then just a matter of public opinion. And like everyone already knows, opinions differ. You kind of just have to suck it up and take the good with the bad. You can't please everyone.

[ForrestBlack]

There is still a big difference between what your opinion happens to be at any given time and what you would say to someone's face, and/or how you would say it. I wouldn't walk up to someone and say "hi, pleased to meet you, it must be difficult to go through life with those jacked up teeth, huh?' I mean, it might be my opinion, but it's still pretty rude.

It's my job to evaluate people's physical strengths and flaws, I can't imagine how obnoxious it would be if I just blerted whatever came to mind just because it was my opinion. But, I can also see the good and I think it's healthy to share that with people. Life is hard enough as it is.

The problem is that particularly online, people have a hard time differentiating what is and is not saying something essentially to someone's face. So, I think it is reasonable to take the position that whoever you are talking about will probably see it and you might just meet that person under circumstances where it could be inconvenient if you said something unnecessarily caustic. You also have to evaluate what is wrong with yourself if you are frequently driven to publicly pick apart other people's perceived flaws.

[TheDeathKnight]

I think the main distinction is between photos that appear to be "art" photos, and photos that look like glamor-porn. In my experience on the web, there is a HUGE proliferation of softcore and hardcore porn photography, and nude photography, that is mostly done for sexual stimulation. Starting with Playboy and Penthouse, and spreading out like wildfire from there. And most of it is pretty decent photography. So when I see a nude girl on a pretty basic background, I am going to evaluate that photo in terms of sex appeal. Unless it has some artistic merit, I am mainly evaluating the girl. Not the photo. Maybe that's just due to oversaturation of nude photography and porn. So the way I look at it, if you toss a nude photo my way, that girl's body is getting compared to every porn star, supermodel, bikini girl, etc. I won't usually see it as "art", unless the photo or model is significantly unique. And I think that's probably why Forest and Amelia feel a little in the middle of two worlds. Because on one hand, they see it as art. But since the format is good-quality photos of nude girls, they get lumped in with all the other glamor-porn photos out there. But if those photos were seen as "art" photos, people would be less critical of the models. But the format puts you guys kind of in the middle...

[mystoo]

I wouldn't walk up to someone and say "hi, pleased to meet you, it must be difficult to go through life with those jacked up teeth, huh?' I mean, it might be my opinion, but it's still pretty rude.

Don't get me wrong, I would never do that either but not everyone lives by that ' if you don't have something nice to say, don't say it at all" rule.

[ForrestBlack]

...But the format puts you guys kind of in the middle...

That's really not how I see it at all. I don't differentiate. There are no separate worlds. Just because you perceive someone as being in a separate world does not excuse being rude. Some of my friends are virtually unknown and some of my friends can be seen all over the place, but if you make a fat joke about either one of them, it goes over equally bad with me. There is no excuse. Holding someone's relative fame or whatever against someone and using that as a justification for petty cutting remarks is just evidence of internal personal problems.

I think for example some of the types of people you mentioned earlier feel it's ok to be rude and cutting because they feel the people they are being critical of "tried" and somehow that makes it ok to be rude and I couldn't disagree more. Not every try is going to be a winner and discouraging people because of your own insecurities has no place in my world. The unrequested 'critique' really isn't helpful to anyone. It's just some spectator patting themselves on the back for remaining safe from public scrutiny by holding their position of relative obscurity. I don't want to be around people like that. They amount to nothing more than bitter discouragement.

[ForrestBlack]

Don't get me wrong, I would never do that either but not everyone lives by that ' if you don't have something nice to say, don't say it at all" rule.

I guess I'm just sick of people using "it was just my opinion" as an excuse. You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not always justified in sharing it.

[Rockwulf]

Some people just crack a joke 'cause they think it'll get a laugh.

[Wickedanima]

I guess I'm just sick of people using "it was just my opinion" as an excuse. You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not always justified in sharing it.

[TheDeathKnight]

That's really not how I see it at all. I don't differentiate. There are no separate worlds. Just because you perceive someone as being in a separate world does not excuse being rude.

Well, I understand that even a supermodel on a billboard has feelings.
No matter how famous, or how over-exposed someone is.
Even the biggest, most public celebrities have feelings
and self-image problems.

But once you agree to be part of a photo shoot that will put your image out there for millions of people to see, you have to be willing to understand that people will compare your image to all the other images out there.

I am not suggesting that people should be rude, or that it's ok. But I am saying that it comes with the territory, once you put your stuff out there.

[Morning Glory]

The truth is that models are treated differently, for a variety of reasons. Are we supposed to pretend like there is not a difference between the "employees" of the company that runs this site and the people that use it? Beyond just a business level there is also a personal level difference. Many of the models and the photographers actually know each other and spend time together or interact with each other IRL and I'd say it's generally a rule to the extent that it's the opposite for 99% of the rest of people on this board.

I'm not making a value statement about how those people will be judged, just stating that there is a mindset that they are being viewed from. Case in point this article wasn't about trolling on the board or disrespectful members. It was about models specifically. So that distinction was already made and not just be "us". Is that a double standard?

[iamcuriousblue]

"It does not make you intelligent/ and/or nonconformist, if you aggressively criticize all erotic media and the people who appear in it, especially members of your own gender."

On this topic, has anybody here seen the "What Happened To All The Ferocious Female Punks?" post at the NME blog, essentially blaming SG "and its spinoffs" (grrrrrrr.......) for the decline of girl power punk? (I'd link to it, but it looks like this board unfortunately blocks posting of URLs. In any event, google the above title.) Its fashionable to blame porn for seemingly everything these days it seems.

[ForrestBlack]

"It does not make you intelligent/ and/or nonconformist, if you aggressively criticize all erotic media and the people who appear in it, especially members of your own gender."

On this topic, has anybody here seen the "What Happened To All The Ferocious Female Punks?" post at the NME blog, essentially blaming SG "and its spinoffs" (grrrrrrr.......) for the decline of girl power punk? (I'd link to it, but it looks like this board unfortunately blocks posting of URLs. In any event, google the above title.) Its fashionable to blame porn for seemingly everything these days it seems.

Hey CuriousBlue, nice to see you. I'll look up / hook up the link in the morning. My knee jerk opinion is that it's more complicated than that and has a similar trajectory to actual Punk rock, as it was made a mockery of it's own self and packaged for mass merchandised 'disaproval' in some of the bands a lot of people seem to think started punk but really didn't. I honestly don't think SG would mind getting credit for ruining it, on some level, but I think it's more than them and their kind.

[One Eyed Cat]

Hey CuriousBlue, nice to see you. I'll look up / hook up the link in the morning. My knee jerk opinion is that it's more complicated than that and has a similar trajectory to actual Punk rock, as it was made a mockery of it's own self and packaged for mass merchandised 'disaproval' in some of the bands a lot of people seem to think started punk but really didn't. I honestly don't think SG would mind getting credit for ruining it, on some level, but I think it's more than them and their kind.

True. It goes beyond erotic media. These days, you just do anything and it happens. I don't mind it that much, I do wonder why people take the time to try and tear down models, musicians, you name it.

OEC

[iamcuriousblue]

Hey CuriousBlue, nice to see you. I'll look up / hook up the link in the morning. My knee jerk opinion is that it's more complicated than that and has a similar trajectory to actual Punk rock, as it was made a mockery of it's own self and packaged for mass merchandised 'disaproval' in some of the bands a lot of people seem to think started punk but really didn't. I honestly don't think SG would mind getting credit for ruining it, on some level, but I think it's more than them and their kind.

I read the NME post as pooh-poohing alt porn more generally, though SG is certainly the most visible and mainstreamed symbol of it. The article's reference to "SG – and the copycat sites that have sprung up since" also implies that the author thinks they're solely responsible for the whole genre.

But, yes, I agree with you – as with any movement, there's clearly a dynamic where it goes from being new and very revolutionary to being co-opted. At this point in history, wondering aloud about why punk isn't revolutionary anymore is a lot like wondering what ever happened to revolutionary hippies. Especially when you look back and realize punk happened only 10 years after the hippie revolution and is hence almost as old. The NME article posits a bit more recent of an era – the Riot Girl wave of the early 1990s as a kind of a golden age of feminist political punk, but considering that had largely came and went by 1995, its a bit of a stretch to think of that as something that wouldn't have been co-opted by now.

And more generally, its idea that doing punk porn is some kind of sellout of punk ideals posits punk as aligned with anti-porn radical feminism in a way that it never really was. Even Kathleen Hanna had serious reservations about Dworkin and her brand of radical feminism.

[iamcuriousblue]

On this topic also, I think the really polarized reactions I've seen of late toward Sasha Grey show the tendency toward either trashing or slavish agreement toward somebody who puts their body and sexuality out there in the media. On one hand, I've seen some really ugly trashing of her as of late, mostly by self-described "feminists". Typically, such trashing is all about how the kind of sex acts she does on screen say that there's something fundamentally wrong with her as a human being – really bigoted messed-up stuff that says more about the writer then it does about Sasha Grey. The flip side is that a lot of people who like Sasha Grey are very quick to hold her up as an "intellectual", which, name checking of existentialism, French New Wave, and Throbbing Gristle aside, I'm not so sure of either.

[TheDeathKnight]

It's also important to realize that kids emulate the things they see. So if porn websites and stripper/gogo dancers are the main things a "bad girl" does, it seems pretty logical that if a teenager wants to rebel, they are going to do whatever seems "bad". Maybe join a gang, do some crimes, etc. There are just not as many role models for wild and powerful women out there. As far as how that relates to punk, punk imploded, and became a mockery of itself. So people in society didn't take it seriously anymore. It fails to shock. So if a girl comes home with a mohawk or a tattoo, it isn't going to shock and offend people as much as it used to. So young women are pushing the envelope. And porn is just the current outlet for a lot of them.

[incog]

Well, I understand that even a supermodel on a billboard has feelings.
No matter how famous, or how over-exposed someone is.
Even the biggest, most public celebrities have feelings
and self-image problems.

But once you agree to be part of a photo shoot that will put your image out there for millions of people to see, you have to be willing to understand that people will compare your image to all the other images out there.

I am not suggesting that people should be rude, or that it's ok. But I am saying that it comes with the territory, once you put your stuff out there.

People like you are the reason I can't post under my real name online.

I am not going to speak for Amelia, but if you read the article, she is not talking about having an opinion about someone's appearance in a naked photo. I don't even think she mentioned nudity in the article. She is talking about being either all rude asshole or all suck dick hanger-on and not treating people as human beings.

You have posted pictures of yourself on this site. Does that mean I should just judge you on those and be constantly rude to you and make a bunch of assumptions about who you really are because you obviously put some effort into those costumes?

[TheDeathKnight]

Keep in mind, I am only expressing what I observe.

I personally try not to make rude comments to anyone.

But I have my own personal private observations and evaluations of almost any photo I see online. Regardless if it's nude, or normal, or amateur, etc. I still compare photographs. Both the appearance of the model or models, as well as the quality of the photography. Some people are just more vocal about their opinions.

And yes, because I put photos online, I fully expect people to make all kinds of comments, both good and bad. I've had people come up to me in person, and say,

"What the hell are you supposed to be?"

I have also had people think I was trying to do a replica of some other costume, and say I did a crappy job of it. Like someone thought my Deathknight costume was a crappy version of Sauron from Lord of the Rings. Even though I made mine years before the movie came out...

So yeah, anything you put out there in the world, there will always be assholes who put it down, or don't like it, even though they can't do it themselves. I mean, who the hell is brave enough to strip naked for a photo shoot? Not me! Because I know I would be evaluated and criticized.

When I put something out there, I do so knowing that the majority of people will hopefully like it. And I think the same should be true for models, nude or otherwise. Some people will enjoy your image. Other will not. That's just the way life is. If you aren't thick-skinned enough to handle the people who dislike your stuff, then don't share it.

[moonwolf]

some people are just pathetic!!! I dont understand that if you do decide you want to be a model they expect you to be like kate moss and look like you havnt eaten properly in over a year, ok there are very few models out there who are normal looking and not kate moss skinny.
At the end of the day immage is'nt everything and your producing a sence of style or being artistic and are producing a public immage, if you decided to become somthing like a porn star you dont have to look at certan way.
If you pose nude for example if dosnt mean you have to be judged and people thinking your a whore when your not selling your body for money, you'd also have to be too careful if you have a profile on sites incase you get perves trying to get in your knickers.
Meny models get rejected just because they drink and celbs have delt with that sortta thing for a long time, getting knocked back just because there 'too fat' when there not and could get the cover of vogue if they realy wanted to.
Money doesn't buy perfection, it should buy happieness and youd want to be happy doing what you do and not become a lifless junkie because of the way you're treated or you can't handel it anymore

[Rockwulf]

Some people are just pathetic!!! I dont understand that if you do decide you want to be a model they expect you to be like Kate Moss and look like you haven't eaten properly in over a year. Okay there are very few models out there who are normal looking and not Kate Moss skinny.
At the end of the day imXage isn't everything and you're producing a sense of style or being artistic and are producing a public imXage. If you decided to become something like a porn star you dont have to look aX certain way.
If you pose nude for example if dosn't mean you have to be judged and people thinking you're a whore when you're not selling your body for money, you'd also have to be too careful if you have a profile on sites in case you get pervXs trying to get in your knickers.
Many models get rejected just because they drink and celebs have dealt with that sortta thing for a long time, getting knocked back just because they're 'too fat' when they're not and could get the cover of Vogue if they really wanted to.
Money doesn't buy perfection, it should buy happiXness and you'd want to be happy doing what you do and not become a lifeless junkie because of the way you're treated or you can't handle it anymore

"Aye, 'tis a sad day indeed when even those in England can't speak English."

[Raza]

some people are just pathetic!!! I dont understand that if you do decide you want to be a model they expect you to be like kate moss and look like you havnt eaten properly in over a year, ok there are very few models out there who are normal looking and not kate moss skinny.

Shove it with the 'skinny is unhealthy' thing, please. Plenty of people look like that just eating what they want to eat, or at least everything they really need. Different people have different genes and different habits, so the same reasonable choices will result in different outcomes. They're not better than you, but you're not better than them, either. 'Normal' is crap.

Which body types you find good looking is a matter of taste; you have yours, others have theirs, and it is absurd to object to either on an ideological basis. Nobody owes you their appreciation; nobody owes you their contribution to your decision to 'be a model'. If you want to set your own criteria for success - which I heartily encourage - you should be prepared to celebrate by yourself when you get there. If their game sucks, don't dream about winning it; invent your own game and find like minded people to play that with instead..

[TheDeathKnight]

Most of the girls who pose for Blueblood would not be seen at attractive by 75% of America. So already they have to accept that a lot of those "normal" people will say they look ugly or unattractive, compared to some blonde, tan, beauty queen Barbie girl that they might prefer. So you have to do it, knowing that only a small percentage of people will find you attractive. So why is it so hard for models to accept criticism? In this scene in particular, a shitload of people out there will NOT think you are sexy or attractive. So? Who cares? Some of us like it. Do it for the people who like the photographs, and the models.

[Raza]

That's not entirely true; a lot about alternative aesthetics is about uncovering styles, combinations and applications that are really easy to like, but somehow restricted through social custom.

Many completely normal (nonsubcultural) people like the way brightly colored hair looks on pale skin. In fact, I imagine these people provide the better part of blueblood.com's revenue. Similarly, I find that when perfectly normal people create characters for things like computer games or manga, they absolutely love brightly colored hair, badass black leather clothes or outfits far sexier than they would themselves wear in real life.

There's just a certain social pressure that keeps people from applying these aesthetics to their own person; a force that has less to do with something being pretty or not and more with staying within the expected realm of humanity as not to forfeit the favor of ones peers. Threading outside these limits, a lot of the negative feedback you get is more moral than aesthetic in nature - although as is the nature of disapproval, people will be inclined to package in anything they thing will make it hurt on impact.

[keiko]

"Aye, 'tis a sad day indeed when even those in England can't speak English."

Some days, Rockwolf, I absolutely love you.

~K

[Morning Glory]

What I want to know is why all the "alternative" porn models look just like the ones at Vivid?

In the days when coprophilia is a top ten search on corporate-owned YouTube, tattoos and dyed hair haven't been "alt" for nearly two decades.

[TheDeathKnight]

There's just a certain social pressure that keeps people from applying these aesthetics to their own person; a force that has less to do with something being pretty or not and more with staying within the expected realm of humanity as not to forfeit the favor of ones peers.

Yeah, that's true for some people, but not the majority.

I'd bet you that 75% of the people in midwest America don't like the look.

But I agree that I do have some clean-cut friends who say they would like to look more alternative, but their job prevents them from doing so, or they don't want to upset their family, etc...

[Rockwulf]

Some days, Rockwolf, I absolutely love you.

~K

Meet me out back in 20 minutes, don't tell your boyfriend.

[Amelia G]

Most of the girls who pose for Blueblood would not be seen at attractive by 75% of America. So already they have to accept that a lot of those "normal" people will say they look ugly or unattractive, compared to some blonde, tan, beauty queen Barbie girl that they might prefer. So you have to do it, knowing that only a small percentage of people will find you attractive. So why is it so hard for models to accept criticism? In this scene in particular, a shitload of people out there will NOT think you are sexy or attractive. So? Who cares? Some of us like it. Do it for the people who like the photographs, and the models.

First of all, you are completely wrong that 75% of America won't find any hot girls on BlueBlood.com, but I wasn't just talking about people who are both female and naked and appear in the Blue Blood VIP anyway.

Part of the point is that, if there is no support from within the community, what is the point of creating anything and sharing it with the world?

Secondly, I felt like I was very clear in my article that the problem is NOT that some people might have a different preference. My primary point is that it is wrong to dehumanize someone for being in a photograph. It is wrong whether that means you decide they have all sorts of perfect qualities because you like the photo or bad qualities because you either dislike the photo or are envious.

I realize that man's inhumanity to man is the subject of most of the world's great literature, but I'd like to see a little more humanity in my own backyard. Is it really so much to ask to suggest that human being should treat the other people in their own community with a bit of humanity?

I could certainly take a broader view and ask why it is that my specific community attacks everyone who actually tries to do anything and attacks everything within it which might actually be a good thing. Why do you feel compelled to cannibalize your own?

I never see these mythical "Barbie" girls being casually cruel or dehumanizing to people in my community. They are not the enemy; the enemy is on the inside.

[Amelia G]

What I want to know is why all the "alternative" porn models look just like the ones at Vivid?

In the days when coprophilia is a top ten search on corporate-owned YouTube, tattoos and dyed hair haven't been "alt" for nearly two decades.

Vivid is aggressively trying to get into the alt market. They asked me to come in to head up an "alt" division for them. I didn't take the meeting, but I'm quite sure that no one in my community is going to like me one iota more for not selling them all out. My only payback on that is that the guy who does head up their alt division really hates me, partly for not wanting his sell out job.

Vivid does pay "alt" talent and directors far far less than they pay what they consider their real bread and butter, which shows what they really think. I don't think everyone I work with looks like they work for Vivid though. But I don't make porn either; I make erotic

I hate the term altmodel because, when I started 17 years ago, I didn't publish photos of "models" but of my peers and compatriots. I assure you that then you could get thrown out of the mall for having a pierced nose. Now you can get it pierced there.

Nobody ever wants to engage on this, but that is why I ask where one draws the line on what constitutes a model in 2009.

[Amelia G]

Here's my two cents. It seems lately that every woman who does a photoshoot seems to think..."I'm a model." Yet alot of them just aren't model material. Not even close to it. But because we've become so PC, nobody tells these girls that there isn't a chance in Hell that they're gonna actually become professional models, so they keep trying to do new photoshoots, even paying for them, because everyone's being so polite and making false accusations like, "Beautiful pictures!". No...The pictures aren't. If nobody critiques them, then how long do they waste their time and money and energy at something that's never gonna pan out. Just because I can pick up a baseball bat and take a swing, does not make me a professional baseball player. Real baseball players have been critiqued their whole lives, and in the end that critique was positive enough for them to finally make it to the big leagues. The baseball players that sucked? They been critiqued a long time ago...Found to have sucked and never even made the junior high baseball team...So, either they cut their losses and do something else or practice alot and see if they can make the next years squad...But it doesn't take years for them to figure out if they have the right stuff...Or at least some inclining that they have the right stuff. By being honest and making honest critiques about models, at least the "models" can see how many positive statements vs negative statements they get, as time goes on, to figure out how far they may one day go. But just having a photoshoot doesn't make a person a model....Yet...It seems like so many men and women out there think so. If I had a dime for every woman on M&space who did a photoshoot and then puts down "model" under occupation...I'd be a friggin' millionaire.

You could be pedestrian at baseball and play on an amateur team without being told every day that A-Rod is better than you and maybe you should just give up.

I agree with you so very much about how annoying it is to live in a time when everyone needs an avatar, but every female who gets an avatar photo taken decides she is a model and should be paid just for existing and not for doing anything.

However, my point is not just that someone might have an opinion on a photo, but that I believe we should all treat one another with humanity. Deciding someone is awesome or awful, based on a few pictures is not a good thing.

It is unnecessary for strangers to be casually cruel. If someone thinks they should be a model because a couple of people said "nice dress" or something when a picture of them posted, they will learn soon enough that they need to do something besides that to keep a roof over their heads. Fact of the matter is that most times the girls you see on the covers of Vogue aren't going to make a lifelong career out that either. ******* wannabes do not understand that. Which sucks. But that still doesn't mean it would be cool to go through ******* on a search for occupation model and send mean emails to every not-ready-for-primetime girl you found.