MODELS : PLEASE READ THIS WARNING, it's IMPORTANT

[Emily Cartwright]

Stockie wrote:

> Emily Cartwright wrote:
>
> > It's been said and said and said again, but girls need to be
> > chaperoned. Always. They always should. Even if it's not a CP
> > shoot, even if it's just a bog standard topless shoot, unless
> > you're working with someone who has a cast-iron reputation
> and
> > three hundred spotless references, bring someone with you.
> >
>
> So what happens when working with the many photographers and
> producers who don't allow chaperones? the shoots where it's not
> possible for another body on set?
>
> Should everyone in every job ALWAYS have a chaperone? After
> all, the official crime figures show that one of the most
> dangerous job is shop work (now consider that most shops have
> more than one member of staff and all sorts of cctv yet still
> shop staff are one of the most likely groups likely to be
> raped, assaulted or abused)

This debate has been done and done. Everyone will always have wildly differing opinions on the subject. What it boils down to for me is that we'll never have an industry in which models take a virtually foolproof safety precaution with them as standard, because there are some photographers who feel mildly uncomfortable with a third person present.

I've personally worked on hundreds of shoots, in virtually every situation, always chaperoned, and the people I worked with almost universally agree with me that there is absolutely no reason to disallow chaperones beyond unavoidable technical reasons.

I don't honestly care what the figures are, if putting a chaperone with every single model can prevent even one brief instance of one model being hurt or sexually abused on a shoot, it'll have been worth it. I can see why some photographers continue to try to dissuade models from doing this for their own comfort, but personally I find that attitude rather selfish.

[Emily Cartwright]

Stockie wrote:

> Not saying you shouldn't take a chaperone if that's what you
> want Emily. I'm just saying keep things in reality and don't
> exaggerate, making a comment about 6 billion rapes and assaults
> tends to give off an image about the industry and those that
> work in it that is unfair.
>
> Yes even one single case is one too many, but the reality is it
> happens everywhere, there isn't a single job where it doesn't
> happen and so me I just think its unfair to single out
> modelling and say things like all models should always have a
> chaperone.

Yes, but as it happens we're dealing with modeling in this instance.

To be honest a throwaway comment like that is aimed at those who systematically attempt to play down the vulnerability of models who travel and work alone. Porn is an industry that attracts a small percentage of dangerous perverts, a larger proportion of idiots and timewasters, and thankfully a majority of respectable professionals. But the first two categories can't be ignored, especially not the first one.

The reality is that there are models out there who don't protect themselves, who do travel alone, some go to hotel rooms to work with perfect strangers on the basis of an easily-falsifiable reference and to be frank are damn lucky to not get raped or worse. On the other side there are some guys out there who try to dismiss the very real and very serious cases of models getting assaulted because they would prefer it if all girls came without a chaperone. It seems to me that that's not a good compromise.

[nikonman]

I much prefer a model to bring a chaperone along if not working in a bona fide studio.

I find it better for the peace of mind of both the Model and the Photographer and find a better shoot occurs with everyone more relaxed.
Don't forget the photographer could be accused of something they have not done as well as the models own safety.

Anyway all the chaperones i have met always seem to keep well clear of the shoot after thay have met you. In fact very often wander off either to the pub or the shops until the end of the shoot. I only hope i don't drive them away.

Hope this is not classed as odd
Peter

[Stockie]

nikonman wrote:

> Don't forget the photographer could be accused of something
> they have not done as well as the models own safety.

If you were accused of something then a chaperone would make the situation ten times worse for you because it'd be two peoples word against yours.

[nikonman]

That is very true "Stockie" but you have to have faith in someone otherwise the world is more sad than it is already.
You sound has cynical has i normally am

[Stockie]

nikonman wrote:

> That is very true "Stockie" but you have to have faith in
> someone otherwise the world is more sad than it is already.
> You sound has cynical has i normally am


Having faith, agree 100% but that should also apply to the model who should have faith in the photographer or producer she is working with so as not to need chaperones.

We could all go round in circles argueing the for and against of chaperones, I suppose at the end of it all it's upto to each individual, if models want chaperones ok and if photographers don't want to allow then ok, each to there own, the only problem I have is when someone like Emily makes exaggerated statements suggesting that bad experiences are more common than they really are and giving the industry and photographers a bad image.

[nikonman]

Knowing the girl concerned i would stake up life on her telling the truth