Body Confidence, Modeling, Influencers and Adult Entertainment

Another topic's touching "morals" made me finally want to talk this out. 

I've really been struggling with the complexity of "do no harm" and the impacts of social media's body confidence, paid influencers, and adult entertainment. 

I've met people who are solidly "if someone wants to show off their body and get paid for it, let them." 

I've also met people who are very concerned with how young people, well, all people, are manipulated by sex. The old adage of "sex sells." 

We see this even amongst friends with teenage kids. Girls coming out of puberty with tons of body confidence - great, but also expressing their sexuality, or at least, what they perceive as their sexuality with great gusto to the world...to an extent that they could really care less about anything else besides looking good. Grades drop. Interests in hobbies drop. Necklines as well. 

I guess I kind of view it like I do sports. It's not a bad thing to be good at, but you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket. If it's a means to a end, great. If it's out of desperation...maybe not so great. 

More complicated is how the opposite sex treats it. I heard a story of a instagram influencer who had one of her pictures shared far and wide. She got lots of followers, even got some money out of shilling for products on her instagram, but she felt TONS of pressure to post more of that same type of picture. She was at first happy to have other people repost her stuff and that "famous" image, until it started circulating in the wrong context. What started out as respectful appreciation for her hard-earned toned form turned into a toxic situation, that apparently is not too uncommon for women in modeling. 

I recently saw a debate on a instagram post where the poster was asked to remove an image of a scantily glad woman because it had little to do with the poster's "theme". The person asking to have the photo removed was concerned that the image was being used to drive page view, not to the woman in the photo's personal account, but to the unrelated instagram. He was bashed pretty heavily, but I did understand his concern. 

Therefore, I have a hard time with "influencer" marketing when people use sex to sell something, but haven't actually asked approval to "reshare" someones pictures - all in an effort to drive page views. 

This also touches on a lot of the debate about online communities uploading media without the permissions of those in that media. I read another article about a woman who was a model in 90's or something, and said that back before the internet, she got paid for the reproduction of her images, and that made it worth it, but with the advent of the internet, it was all of the fame with none of the fortune, and now images she was less than proud of circulated freely while she was out trying to find work in a different industry. 

Thoughts?

I will say this about teenagers today.  I work with high school kids in technical theater.  They are smaller adults.  I'm 47 and many of them are more emotionally capable than I am.  Not as experienced in those emotions, but still remarkably mature.  When I was that age all I wanted to do was goof off and see if I could get away with it, or touch a boob, or stick a foil gum wrapper in an electrical outlet to throw the breaker so the teacher had to stop with the overhead projector BS.  These kids (mind you, most of them very wealthy kids) have zero time for entitlement, classism, sexism, non-inclusion, or racism.  They have more stress piled on them than I ever dreamed and for the most part they take it in stride and beat the snot out of it.

My best friends' kids are 21 and 23.  The 21 year old is taking IT at Penn State but he already has a software/coding company AND an IT business started and successful.  Her 23 year old has one year of teaching under her belt and is gearing up to run for State Senate in Maryland.

In my generation, there were no gay kids.  There were feminine boys and masculine girls, but the idea of being gay was just not thought of.  It took them decades to overcome the repression and some of them still haven't figured it out.  Now they are free to express it with less of the scrutiny and criticism.

In the 80s, our parents fell into two basic categories:  The hippies who did all the drugs and knew enough to warn us not to, and the non-hippies who didn't do drugs so they also warned us not to.  Parents knew more than the kids in the 80s.  Now it's the other way around.  I think my generation's kids in general are teaching their parents the new world.

I know there are some older generations who worry about these whippersnapper video-gamer kids and how they'll be in charge of the country some day.  I say, bring it on.  I'm excited for the hundreds of teenagers I work with to take over.  

While the kids do have more social media crap to influence them (to the point of increased suicide rates), I think it is making highly resilient, intelligent humans who have learned how to properly interact with peers.

When I first took the job at the High School I was dreading working with brats.  I knew what I and my friends were like at 15 and I didn't want anything to do with it.  Boy was I wrong.  I now work with a few high schools and the same is true across the board.  Wonderful little humans.

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:

They are smaller adults.  I'm 47 and many of them are more emotionally capable than I am.  Not as experienced in those emotions, but still remarkably mature.  When I was that age all I wanted to do was goof off and see if I could get away with it, or touch a boob, or stick a foil gum wrapper in an electrical outlet to throw the breaker so the teacher had to stop with the overhead projector BS.  These kids (mind you, most of them very wealthy kids) have zero time for entitlement, classism, sexism, non-inclusion, or racism.  They have more stress piled on them than I ever dreamed and for the most part they take it in stride and beat the snot out of it.

Is it any wonder that they're more mature?  Look at what they've had to go through.  Monthly (weekly?) school shootings.  "Once in a lifetime economic collapses" have happened twice.  Even on the older end of the scale they grew up without the Twin Towers and all that happened post-9/11.  

In reply to Mr_Asa :

So much agree.  They're dealing with more stress than any of us could fathom.  I grew up taking my rifle to school and checking it at the office because Dad was picking me up from school to go hunting.  School shootings?  We never thought about it.  I had to google it.  I won't go into details because I do NOT mean this in any political way, but there have been more school shootings since 2000 than there were from 1840-2000 combined.  More in the last 20 years than in the last almost 200.

Again... not a debate topic, I'm simply pointing out what kids may be dealing with in their lives.  I went to school during the end of the cold war.  We worried if we touched Suzy Dinklemeyer's boob we would certainly die slowly from AIDS like the fear-mongering newsreel films we watched in health class.  We worried that the girls we dated might get braces and they wouldn't be good kissers... if we ever got around to kissing them.  We worried about Apple IIe computers starting a global war because the Ferris Beuller kid hacked a government computer to play chess.  We worried about having enough money to rent the Prom tux with 6 pleats in the hammer pants instead of 4 pleats.  We worried about Christa McAuliffe exploding on a shuttle. 

If we failed, it was a typeset or hand-written on a piece of paper.  It wasn't entered into a federal database.  You got caught speeding in Maryland?  No worries.  Your insurance rates won't go up and you won't get points on your license because there were no computers.  You paid $50 to Maryland and didn't think about it.  These days, these kids are forever tracked, mined for info, and their entire lives are globally available.  I have a friend who spent 9 months in jail for embezzlement and misappropriation of funds.  She can cross the border into Canada because it was all pre-computers and Canada doesn't know.  I got a DUI a few years ago and it's expunged and I get crap every time I cross the border because it's all digitally shared with every UN ally who has diplomatic relations.

These kids are under intense stress.  When I was a kid I worried when someone said I had a booger in my nose I would be embarrassed to be called "snots" for a month.  These days, kids would likely have an FBI record for a "nasal abnormality" and get targeted facebook ads for Benadryl for the rest of their lives.

I used to teach junior high back when social media existed, but before smartphones became ubiquitous. Hormones kicking in and adolescents (especially girls, but because it generally took the boys another year or two) trying to flaunt budding sexuality but not really understanding it yet, and having hormones overwhelm their brains. So that part is nothing new. There's just more instantaneous social media and we're the old guys talking about "back in MY day..."

I'm glad those 14 year-olds didn't have smartphones in their pockets though. They were trying to figure things out, but mostly dealing with a limited number of people in person with some caring teachers keeping a close enough eye to not let things get out of hand, but distant enough that they still got to navigate and figure out their adolescence on their own.

I generally roll my eyes at the whole "influencer" culture. Whatever. I'm fine with adults having autonomy.

I don't like the idea of kids under 18 being influencers and using their body and sexuality to gain approval from a wide net of strangers. They're still children with rapidly developing brains. They don't understand what they're doing yet. Part of being a teenager *is* not understanding yet, and going through the struggle to figure it out. But figuring that out healthily really should have in person feedback, and ideally a bit of inconspicuous or even invisible adult oversight, and that doesn't exist on the internet.

That all said... people are still people. The times have always been changing. We've survived until now. These kids aren't any dumber than we were. The kids will be alright.

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

Curtis, I just want to say that the more I read your posts, the more I like you.  I wish I had been able to pay you a visit back when I lived in Baltimore.  I was in theater back in the 90s in high school and it sounds like I was just like you.  I'm really glad to see you talk about how kids these days are better than we were.

On the original topic, sex sells.  Sex has always and will always sell.  I think we're moving a bit towards a society that accepts that rather than shames it.  I also think that it's less important to worry about a woman's neckline, and instead we should focus on how men tend to view and treat women as a result of their neckline.  

In reply to infinitenexus :

Long distance hug, friend :)

Beer Baron said:

These kids aren't any dumber than we were. 

Highlighted for emphasis.

These kids have grown up never knowing a time when their country was a peace, school shootings, social media, divisive politics, economic collapses, pandemics, etc. I have teenagers and work with a few people in their 20s. 

The absolute contempt they hold for influencers is staggering. Every generation has a thing or two that makes headlines and is supposed to instigate the decline and fall of Western Civilization, but almost all of those things are both created by and reactions to the generations that came before them.

Blame Photoshop, video games, Tony Hawk, aggressive advertising, easy divorce, celebrity and fashion culture, sound byte driven 24 hour news cycles, Jackass, Youtube and whatever else you want for it, but to quote a kind of famous anti-drug advertisement of my youth:

I learned it from you, Dad!
 

Some of us did grow up having bomb drills and hiding under our desks.  And overhearing muted conversations between our parents... "Sputnik is bad, very bad.  The Reds could drop a bomb on us from up there."

Is that worse than what kids deal with now?  I'm not sure.  We found out what was happening from Walter Cronkite on CBS at 6:00 PM Monday through Friday.  My grandkids, on the other hand, are bombarded by information - some of it extremely questionable - from any number of services and platforms.

What I am absolutely sure of is that we are not doing a good enough job teaching kids how to evaluate the news they are getting.  We need to fix that.  Soon.

CJ (FS) said:

What I am absolutely sure of is that we are not doing a good enough job teaching kids how to evaluate the news they are getting.  We need to fix that.  Soon.

This thread is worthless without pictures. 

infinitenexus said:  I also think that it's less important to worry about a woman's neckline, and instead we should focus on how men tend to view and treat women as a result of their neckline.  

If women didn't want us to look at their cleavage they wouldn't show it. That's a truth they don't want to admit. But we're misogynist creeps if we steal a glance.

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

I hear you complimenting the capabilities of today's teens (I agree), as well as recognizing the stresses and pressures they are under (I also agree). But neither of those address the OP's question as I understand it. 
 

I believe the question was "What are our thoughts regarding the moral stance we should consider regarding influencers and body image?"  AKA "What's healthy as a society?"

Teen suicidal rates are at an all-time high. They've increased by 60% in the last decade, and girls attempt it now 3X as often as boys. 
 

I agree with the positive points you've outlined. Our kids are monumentally capable, but they are killing themselves, and I can't accept that as a societal positive. We are not healthy, regardless of how many "feel good participation trophies" we hand out. 

ddavidv said:

If women didn't want us to look at their cleavage they wouldn't show it.

my first viewpoint:  women are not a monolith; and neither are men.  they are composed of a multitude of complexity and individuality.

viewpoint the second:  the above quote implies that "men" (implied via 'us') are supposed to have veto power over what women decide to wear; and it's offhandedly ignorant of the ways this has been, and can be, exercised over even the smallest amount of sexualized anatomy: ankles, wrists, toes, noses, knees, etc.

ddavidv said:

That's a truth they don't want to admit.

see viewpoint 1 above.

viewpoint the third:
Yes, there are some women who may dress in a way that is more 'avante garde' compared to the mores of their dominant culture; and some of those women may derive pleasure specifically from doing so, and some of those women will avoid admitting as such.  But that does not account for all women who dress and show some portion of their anatomy.  Equally, there will be women that will dress within their understanding of the strictures of the dominant cultural mores, who will be judged and sexualized, even without crossing the strictures of the dominant culture.  I would expect a majority of that subset of women to not enjoy said treatment, especially in light of their understanding that they are not transgressing the boundaries of the mores.

viewpoint the fourth:
based on my understanding of this argument, and the time/place that we live in, This set of conditions creates an environment where each person they meet will have a different opinion of what the 'mores' are, and/or should be.  And, a society that stipulates that one subset of the society is to have veto power over deciding what the mores are... leaves those without the veto power to continually be in a state of inadvertently transgressing those mores, based on who they happen to meet in everyday life.  And then they may subject to a whole spectrum of violence for the transgression:  sexualized visual judgement, verbal abuse, etc.

ddavidv said:

But we're misogynist creeps if we steal a glance.

"stealing a glance"  does an excellent job of explaining why what's being done is wrong, in it's own words: You are taking something without permission.  In this case, the person's self-esteem and self-image, via sexualized visual judgement.

caveat lector, y'alls' mileage may vary, imho, no I don't want to fight about this, etc. ad nauseum

In reply to sleepyhead the buffalo :

Everything you said is true. 
 

Doesn't change that a particular woman who makes a particular choice to expose a particular part of their body (whether it is ankles or otherwise) has made a choice to be seen. 
 

It's not "theft" when people choose to show something that is then seen. 
 

I've got pretty good looking arms.  I never wear long sleeves, even in winter.   I've made my choice, and no one will ever hear me complain that people are looking.
 

Yes, I enjoy the occasional compliment, and I do it intentionally. 

I promise I won't call you a misanthropic pig if you compliment my arms. 

...I have also chosen to never show my genitals, my midriff, or my butt crack. It's not a pretty sight, and I'd rather not be judged for it. 
 

No one gets to "steal a glance" of my ass. Because I don't show it. 

I used to avert my eyes from people's tattoos. It felt inappropriate to stare. 
 

Then I realized, "Wait a minute!  They put this stuff all over their body TO BE SEEN."

Now I go way beyond overt staring. I almost always ASK about people's tattoos, and start a conversation about it. I love the art, but I'm actually more interested in the PERSON, and the story behind their tattoo. No matter how beautiful the ink, I always find the story and the reason someone chose to imprint their body permanently with a message far more interesting than the actual ink. 

I'm way past my own Victorian modesties and prudishness. If someone has taken the time and energy to show something beautiful, I will both admire and compliment. And I'm not gonna feel guilty about it because someone else is insecure and wants to label me as a creep.

At the same time, my wife and daughters are all much more comfortable with a degree of modesty. They don't want people staring at them, and choose to dress in ways that encourage people around them to behave in ways they feel comfortable with. 
 

I support them UNRESERVEDLY in this. I can admire their modest attire as easily as I can admire someone else's choices that are different. They hear my compliments regularly, and know that I find them beautiful. 
 

And it's not a "creepy guy" thing. One of my daughters is gay. When she dresses modestly, it's because she chooses to not have WOMEN look at her body parts in ways she does not enjoy. 

Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) said:

Beer Baron said:

These kids aren't any dumber than we were. 

These kids have grown up never knowing a time when their country was a peace, school shootings, social media, divisive politics, economic collapses, pandemics, etc.

I was born at the beginning of 1965 and except for school shootings and social media, I have never known a time that wasn't like that.

I don't really have a solution for what to do about minors sexualizing themselves.  As has been stated numerous times above, both genders (or your alternate number of genders here) are learning about their own sexuality and will make mistakes.  Except now instead of making those mistakes in front of your high school cohort (usually a couple hundred people at most) those mistakes can now be made on a worldwide scale.  The stakes there are definitely higher.

I will kind of side with ddavid above, though.

As an adult, if you choose to make a physical, visual spectacle of yourself, you waive your right to be upset about being looked at.  I don't care if that is via minimal clothing or body modification.

The one area that might be grey is athletics.  There are sports where the best clothing for performance also happens to be pretty revealing.  But really, this is a relatively percentage of the cases compared to young (or not so young) people wearing an immodest amount of clothing in the general public.

It is absolutely no ones' right to dictate what others are or are not allowed to wear (beyond the, ahem, bare minimum of keeping genitalia covered).  If you don't like it, don't look, or don't wear it yourself.  But as touched on above, if you choose to focus on your physical appearance, and to display that physical appearance, then you can't get angry if you get looked at.  That is, after all, kind of the point.

Note the phrase LOOKED AT.  No matter what you're wearing, dressing provocatively does not give anyone the right to comment or touch you in any way.

In reply to Duke :

Comment?  What about compliments?  
 

I don't think I agree with you on that part. This is the age of social media. Everyone is free to comment. There is no law that mandates people be silent, nor say nice things. 
 

Part of choosing to display one's self includes the implied understanding that others may or may not like what you display, and will comment (both good and bad).  

ddavidv said:

infinitenexus said:  I also think that it's less important to worry about a woman's neckline, and instead we should focus on how men tend to view and treat women as a result of their neckline.  

If women didn't want us to look at their cleavage they wouldn't show it. That's a truth they don't want to admit. But we're misogynist creeps if we steal a glance.

Dude, if you're being labeled as a misogynist creep "stealing a glance" is not why you're being labeled as such.

SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to Duke :

Comment?  What about compliments? 

I don't think I agree with you on that part. This is the age of social media. Everyone is free to comment. There is no law that mandates people be silent, nor say nice things.

Part of choosing to display one's self includes the implied understanding that others may or may not like what you display, and will comment (both good and bad).  

If you ask for comments you're certainly not guaranteed good comments or protected from bad ones.

But in general I don't expect to violate anyone's privacy by making an unsolicited comment on any personal subject like that.

In reply to Duke :

And yet every one of us would feel perfectly free to comment on anything whatsoever that showed up in the meme thread (or any thread of online photos).  We don't restrict our comments if it's "the people of Walmart", or brodozers dressed stupid, or people of varying body types, or revealing outfits. 
 

Are the rules different in person?

Its not private once someone voluntarily makes it public. If it was, Google Streetview would be committing  heinous crimes on every block of the entire country.