Terry Richardson is probably one of the world’s most prominent photographers. But personally I feel rather disgusted after I see his photography. True, the man has talent but he is known for his shoots being sexual and horny. There is this simplistic yet an inconvenient truth that sex sells. DOES it?
Last year he was accused by one of the models that he got naked made her touch his dick. Let us look at the whole ordeal, shall we? A modeling agency sends an underage model (19 years of age) to do a nude with Terry who is KNOWN to be sexual. If you cannot handle it, then why go? There are flaws here. First, how can a modeling agency SEND an underage girl to do a nude? And second, if the underage girl is not mentally ready to do this, why does she insinuate it?
(Blake Lively, Terry Richardson and Leighton Meester of Rolling Stone)
You might be wondering- who am I supporting? A man who cannot keep his dick under control or the underage girl who was sent out for a nude and got too disgusted? I am supporting the truth. The truth is that Jamie peck (underage model) whom none of us have heard about, infact shouldn’t have gone the first place. She states that- “I’m not a model, just a vain girl with nice tits who likes to pose for the occasional cheesecake photo”. AND- “I got naked, danced around a bit, smiled, and squeezed my tits together, yada yada. The Yeah Yeah Yeahs’ first album was playing on repeat. He asked me to call him Uncle Terry and I obliged, because why not?” Definitely fishy.
(Terry Richardson with Kate Moss)
So obviously this is what the model did. She danced around let him click her pictures, gave him a hand job and then accused him. But when does the model say no? I deem that the model wanted some publicity because the photos never actually came out. And WHO is this Jamie Peck?
(The Olsen Sisters)
There is always this thin line between Terry’s work- Art and Vulgarism. Art is reflected on all his shoots but so is vulgarism. I have nothing against nudes but have you actually seen his nudes? (He has nudes of himself to. Jerk.)
I am not supporting the model. Nor Terry. They both are flawed. He is a bachelor so he has a legal right to imply sex. The fault is of the agency that sent the underage girl because nobody else has actually accused his controversial art before. They should have simply sent an older woman.
I conclude with a simple yet intriguing question- Is Terry Richardson’s work Art or Porn?
Source- The Gloss