Emily Ratajkowski

[magazinewhore]

Sorry if there's a thread for her. I couldn't find it.

I've never given much thought to her other than as the boobs girl in Gone Girl movie.

But I just read an article about the photographer she's accusing of assault, and I couldn't sleep last night for thinking of it.

Yes, she's a body model known for her figure. But she still should be treated professionally in her work. And she was so young: 22-24 and she's supposed to fly into a strange city, get picked up by a photographer, do a shoot, stay at his house(!!). This was in 2012. She didn't make all the purest choices, but my God, who would? I don't know technically if what happened is assault, but it's not cool. And the way that guy has profited off her is really gross. She should get part of that money.

[butternut]

I feel terrible for her and the response from the publishing company is so gross.

[canuckcutie]

Her article was so well written, thought provoking and infuriating!

One photographer got to use her Instagram pics to sell expensive art of her and the other got to sell books full of pictures of her and she didn’t make a dime!

And the response from the photographer who sexually assaulted her to say that because she was naked in Robin Thicke’s video she can’t be a victim? I want to scream fuck you buddy from the mountaintops......

[hellsbells]

FUCK YOU BUDDY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(I'm not on a mountain, canuckcutie, but that felt good!)

[Beyle]

That photographer is a piece of shit.

I think Emily is attractive (and seemingly harmless). I've never understood all the hate she gets from other women all over the internet.

I'm sad she's going through this because I feel like she still won't get much sympathy because she's a body model and has often posed nude.

[Carolina]

It's sad but not suprising that this is a still a problem in the modelling industry. It makes me think of the murder of Linda Sobek 25 years ago. Linda Sobek was an actress-model who met a legitimate photographer, Charles Rathbun, and they worked together a few times for Autoweek. The last time they worked together he raped and murdered her. There just aren't very many protections in place for models.

Full disclosure- Emily Ratajkowski kind of annoys me since she seems to get an outsized amount of attention for very little and seems to turn up at the opening of an envelope. Still, this is absolutely awful and her story is sadly very believable and probably very common. She just has enough clout to speak out hopefully without it harming her career.

[Ginger]

I only have a couple of issues with Ratajkowski. One is that as she was trying to launch her movie career, she complained that people didn't respect her as a serious actress. That's something you to have earn. You can't just announce that you are a serious actress and then shame people for not treating you like the next Meryl Streep. She didn't deserve disrespect, but if your career is 100% based on flashing your really nice boobs in a music video, nobody owes you anything in the acting arena. She was incredibly lucky to have landed a part in a David Fincher movie with no acting experience (or acting talent, for that matter) and she did all of this complaining about how she was entitled to more.

The second is how she and her wealthy husband are/were attempting to squat rent-free in an NYC loft they can't afford and saying they were entitled since he grew up in NYC and gentrification is wrong.

As for the assault story, sadly it seems to be very common for models to be exploited that way. She never should have been sent to a photographer's home and her agent failed to take very basic measures to protect her legally as well.

There were a lot of interesting threads she tied together in that essay. However, there are some things that she still has to take responsibility for. Making an unwise investment deal worth tens of thousands of dollars with a (now-ex) boyfriend is her own doing. She heavily implies that her ex-boyfriend is a bad guy and not trustworthy, and indicates that he possessed nude photos of her on his phone that he could illegally release, which worries her.

Ok...so what was the plan then when she posed for those photos? She knew they were on his phone and would belong to him. She knew they were not in a permanent relationship and could split up and the photos would still be there. If the issue is controlling one's image, then you can't just remove from the equation Step #1 in the process which is choosing who you pose for and how you pose. She did have control over that when it came to the ex-boyfriend...who apparently hasn't done anything with the photos, so she's just the victim of worry at this point.

[famvir]

She's 29 now, (amended to) 23 when she posed for the photographer that assaulted her, mid 20's when the Instagram art pieces/boyfriend was purchased, 22 when Blurred Lines came out, 14 when she first started modeling.

No one should have to deal with creeps and harassment and rapists in their place of business, but at what point does one need to take agency for their choices?

She was an adult and had been in the business for 10 years when the assault happened. It was her responsibility to make sure she was safe, not her agent. It was her responsibility to make sure contracts were signed protecting her and her images. And it is her responsibility to bring an action to stop publication of that image or receive a percentage of the profits.

She and her husband seem to have the means to bring a suit, but instead she complains.

She complained about Blurred Lines. She complained about not being taken seriously as an actress. She complained about the Richard Prince art pieces.

Get a good contract, make sure it's signed by all parties, keep a copy, and get a good lawyer and sue if it's breached. That is her responsibility as a independent contractor.

[Wol]

I was surprised that no lawyer would take her case about the books. If the books sold and there's money she's entitled to, a lawyer might take the case on a contingency. So either she hasn't interviewed enough lawyers or the books didn't sell that well. Doesn't mean she wasn't exploited.

IMHO I feel badly for her that she's suffered for poor decisions, for bad representation, and for trying to do well in a career notorious for victimization. That said, she's worked several times with Terry Richardson, and as long as she is ok with whatever contract was made for that work then that's fine, and if she feels legally protected she can take off her clothes all she wants (hell, if my breasts looked like hers you'd have to hold me down to put clothes on me. I'd go topless everywhere), but I'm not going to suddenly call her a feminist icon if she's ok with Terry Richardson.

[Ginger]

I think when it comes to the career stuff, there should be standard protections in place so a model is never asked to go upstate and spend the night with a photographer at his house. She shouldn't be put in the position of having to say no to that. It should be out of the question no matter what. Just like meeting with a movie studio executive in his private hotel room - that should never be acceptable as a meeting place, with the burden on the model/actress to say that she's uncomfortable with it and request a change of plans.

Likewise, nudity is supposed to be negotiated and agreed to in writing prior to a shoot. Photographers should not be confronting models with that on the spot but it still goes on.

I'm less sympathetic to the stuff about her ex-boyfriend. She's not the first female celebrity to identify as a feminist and still act as if everything that goes on in her relationships is out of her control. A woman can say no to a boyfriend who wants to take nude photos of her. If a boyfriend is sketchy and untrustworthy, just don't do it. It is not a relationship requirement.

It reminded me of when Jennifer Lawrence said she took her nude photos because she was in a long distance relationship and she had to provide that to her boyfriend or he would stray. I can't think of anything more messed up and un-feminist.