Hi friends! I wanted to write a little blog about my experiences in the last few weeks, and some of my thoughts about what has been happening, on a platform where I wouldn’t be silenced. Welcome to my personal website!

For the sake of clarity, I’ve divided topics up into bullet points.

• SuicideGirls is a business, first and foremost. While I agree that models who have been on the site longer, are more active, and have tons of sets up “deserve” the pink title, SG is not obligated to buy anyone’s sets. I wish the idea of member review was more transparent and honest, but when it’s just a handful of people who have all the power to choose what ends up on the front page, people are going to feel cheated when they hit those “milestones” (i.e., 2k+ likes) and aren’t SotD. SG is exploitation disguised as exclusivity; meaning they ask models to submit sets with no guarantee of payment, for the chance to join this elite group. While I think the business model is shady to say the least, I believe Missy herself made it clear that even if you submit 20+ sets, SG doesn’t owe you anything. Beyond that, SG preys on models’ need to fit in; they tout themselves as a safe place for models who have otherwise “committed social suicide.” They prey on the insecurities of models who just want to be accepted somewhere. We wouldn’t be upset about the lack of a safe space if they hadn’t promised it. We wouldn’t have been so angry about how models who aren’t conventionally pretty are treated, if they had been more transparent about just how much social suicide we’re allowed to commit.
• I believe wholeheartedly that favoritism is alive and well at SuicideGirls. From Penny’s overexposed, poorly shot sets of the day, to repeatedly purchasing sets from photographers with accusations of misconduct (but completely blacklisting others for less), I’ve seen several models complain of favoritism when it comes to certain photographers. SG would be STUPID to not purchase their work, as they are incredibly talented photographers. However, some of these photographers also have several allegations of using their staff positions to sleep with hopefuls, inappropriate comments, and refusing to shoot certain models they don’t think would make it. The first two are unforgivable; allowing a photographer like that access to nude models for your company makes YOU complicit in any of his inappropriate behavior. SG is beyond complicit, with a record of not only refusing to take action against their photographers, but punishing the models who speak out about it. SG openly and continually comes to the defense of their staff/team photographers and ignores victims who are just trying to warn others. I can neither confirm nor deny these rumors – I am not here to spread hearsay, or throw any particular photographer under the bus. That being said, no photographer should feel obligated to shoot any particular model. While I think there are much kinder ways to word a “no thank you,” these photographers are allowed to pick and choose who they want to include in their art.

• In regard to being archived… what a mess. I commented on the Suggestion Box thread (which had been labeled as a safe space to bring up issues) with legitimate concerns; the model coordinator, Penny, is a bully. I expressed that I was uncomfortable with her handling complaints when it seemed like dozens of models had problems with her. I called out gaslighting when Penny’s friends came in to comment that she was a good person and trying her best. How is that productive in a suggestion box thread? How does that promote a safe, repercussion-free environment? Seeing Penny clap back at another model with private screenshots was sickening. Seeing Missy lock the thread instead of chastise her staff made it worse.

• R Girardi’s blog defending himself, and Missy’s blog defending him as well, came out of nowhere. I expressed my feelings that it seemed like a retaliatory way to discredit Hartt (the model who brought up the concerns as a spokesperson, NOT the model who made the reports) and that their “investigation” wasn’t thorough. I agreed with another user that it was an incredibly unprofessional way to conduct a business, and that I was disappointed in Missy for handling the situation the way she did. I stand by what I said; SG is not a safe place, and speaking your mind WILL get you archived.

The days since have been a blur of name-calling, defamation, and unfounded accusations from the Model Council SG put together to handle complaints. Members of the model council have repeatedly responded to blogs and comments with retaliatory statements such as “get fucked.” Are you sure that’s the kind of person you want representing your company?

When I first started responding to threads and voicing my concerns, it was because I loved SG with all my heart for over half of my life (I found the site as a teenager, and am rapidly approaching 30 years old as I type this). When you love something, you want to see it grow and thrive and be the best version of itself. Unfortunately, SG made it abundantly clear that thoughts that don’t follow their staff’s aren’t allowed.

Do I think some of the people commenting went a little too far? Absolutely. Do I think there could have been a little more grace for the missteps on either side? Yes. Do I think Missy was wrong for archiving the people she did? 100%. Silencing dissenting voices does nothing to help your cause. It makes you look like someone who can’t take criticism, someone who is abhorrently against accountability and growth and change. It’s not a good look for anyone, let alone the CEO of a multi-million dollar company.

Now, on the other hand, do I think they’re making steps in the right direction? Truthfully, yes. Change takes time, which I believe they deserved more of. I commented on the blog about changes with a positive comment: I was SO HAPPY they’ve changed the rules regarding trans models (I can’t wait to see another trans model on the front page), and implemented a keyword blocking filter on Instagram. Those are awesome steps in the right direction. Yet I’m considered one of the “perpetually negative” voices that was silenced.

This is all really messy. I’m eager to hear thoughts and opinions, as I am banned from the site and unable to see anything anyone has written in my defense or against me.