(Immaculate) Storm in a teacup

The world of all things adult is evolving, as highlighted by subtle shifts in the media. Did I say subtle? My mistake! Pick up any woman’s glossy and you’ll see articles such as “My lover is a pornstar” “I lapdance for Christmas cash” and so on and so forth. – articles from normal people who just have a slightly more exciting job than the norm! And television and film increasingly show that porn is becoming more widely accepted in most social circles…..you could even go out on a limb and say it’s becoming mainstream! And under the assumption that all is legal and consensual and kept away from the under-age (at least, to the extent that they have to try really hard to circumvent our safeguards!) a sexual revolution can only be a positive thing. If more people enjoyed regular, healthy sex lives and concomitant satisfaction I’m certain there would be a lot less crimes committed the potential wrongdoer simply far too busy rolling over in bed and ecstatically puffing away on a fag!

But in any revolution there is always the resistance. Those that drag their heels, see everything in black and white and oppose change. Yet even in this industry where there is a fine line between art and glamour and pornography, there are those who not only have their very staunch opinions on this, but could be said to be guilty of hypocritical tendencies. For the resistance – a nude woman splayed like a starfish but shot in monochrome with some depiction of tragedy… or failing that a fancy border – is art, ‘pure art for arts sake darling’. However if you add colour to that image and put it on a website for 5.99 then it becomes ghastly ghastly porn! Also should you find yourself very comfortable (ta very much!) with your liberal attitude, this is to be frowned upon and opposed by the resistance!

(Fair warning: About here, I diverge somewhat from the interesting intellectual discussion above… ok, ok it’s rant time!)

And this resistance can arise from the most unexpected places – modelling casting sites for example. Now I can understand why some websites try to avoid too much association with anything adult if the reason is because it may cause them problems with their payment processors. I can also understand why they might impose reasonable rules to safeguard the models well being. What does confuse me though, is those that allow some mention of adult unless they take umbrage to it for whatever reason., and those reasons are usually as clear as the bottom of Satan’s potty after a dodgy all you can eat buffet at The Taj Mahal Tandoori restaurant! I also question any casting site or forum that takes a nice wad of your money for a yearly membership, then disables the features for which you paid. Oh perhaps they might “improve” the sites features by adding a casting call section – which makes searching for suitable jobs within 25 miles rather complicated as you may only search by region! Also if you want to advertise a model studio day (as a model) this is forbidden for whatever reason. Confusingly, reputable models may not advertise shoots or projects that need filling, although it’s perfectly acceptable for an unknown entity with no proven track record to set up a “photographer” profile and groom….I mean advertise for models with just the offer of some blurred, out of focus (and possibly sticky) photographs…..that is if they remember to remove the lens cap in their keenness!

I do not tend to become embroiled in forum politics and usually tend to bite my tongue on most matters. But it is increasingly beginning to appear that a certain website are not consistent in their rules and tend to target those with some involvement in the adult market and sadly the models that pay the yearly fees on the pretext of self promotion. If such a site prohibited ALL adult activity then it would be understandable to take such measures if these rules were disobeyed. Yet to allow a paying member to mark a casting call as “adult” , then appear to act with bias towards these despicable, implorable paying philistines – is not only inconsistent and intolerant, but is just not good cricket – or much of a customer service for that matter!

A truly successful system would allow reputable members with a good track record to advertise that which would benefit it’s main member base. Perhaps even offer a models only section in which models could ask for genuine references. It has been noted that the feedback section on one particular site is ineffective as many models have confessed to being afraid to leave public negative feedback for fear of backlash.

I have noted various photographers in said forums voicing their concerns over inconsistencies and defects. Yet any line of questioning from the models themselves is met with intolerance and censorship. A swift removal of the offending article ensues, along with a stern telling off for daring to question ye who has spoken! I have not yet stumbled across any possible reasons for this….apart from the ludicrously silly notion that “girls heads are full of fluff and they are not capable of possessing considered and intelligent opinions!”

The following excerpts highlight a few of the issues that I have addressed in this blog:

*Casting call was posted today by myself at 15:46 and was removed several minutes later

Letter from myself posted to the FAQ section and requesting a reason for this:

Dear Mods and anyone else this applies to……

I wonder if you could clear this up for me please?

I have just had my casting call removed from the castings section by admin. I also received a notification informing me that models cannot use the casting call section to offer other models work. I was wondering if there was a valid reason for this as I was not given one.

I understand that you have many of your rules and regulations in place for a reason, but I can see no obvious benefit to this additional limitation. Before my casting was removed, I had already received 3 responses in the space of a few minutes from interested models, who were either looking for content and/or help with marketing their content! This would indicate that my project is relevant and would be beneficial to models looking to make and sell their own content.

Furthermore the email stated that I should use the models seeking models section. Unfortunately however, there is not an option to leave any details! So any responses I might receive would be rather hit and miss, given that the models will not know exactly what they are applying for! Also, although I filled in the date of 7th August as the date of the shoot, it then appeared on the thread as “dates – any”.

I am curious as to the reasoning for the above, and also wonder if you have any plans to improve or enhance the ‘models looking for models’ section?

I find it a little hard to understand why a longstanding platinum member with lucrative projects available is prevented from offering [them] to models whom it would benefit? Especially considering any Tom, Dick or Harry with no credentials or references can buy a camera [claim to have bought…?], set up a profile on purestorm and put up a casting call!

If the photographer working with me on the shoot date had placed the casting then it would not be removed. If Billy Bob the plumber tog (with no photography skills and a happy-snaps disposable) wanted to book a model for a TFP shoot that would be permitted, despite it not being in the model’s interest.

Perhaps you can enlighten me as to your reasoning… as with all due respect, it does sometimes appear that the models have a lot more restrictions imposed upon them. If I am missing some vital information and you can advise how best to make use of my yearly membership I shall look forward to your suggestions and answers.

Kind Regards


Thread deleted just minutes later along with a verbal spanking not to post questions in the FAQ’s. For those of you who are unsure – FAQ stands for – frequently asked questions!

Thread deleted. If you have a question for Admin please use the [Contact us] link, allowing 24-48 hours for a response, rather than starting a Forum Thread. The rule preventing models seeking models was introduced a long time ago as a Model Safety measure following serious problems. A moderator will respond in more detail later but please bear in mind that the rules are in place for the smooth running of the site as a whole and it would be both wrong and difficult to implement them selectively.”

Which – offering no reasoning and attempting to fob one off with meaningless management speak – is a pretty poor effort really!

It’s a shame; I really like the site and there have obviously been some good intentions there initially with the site’s features, but at the moment it penalises those who have supported the site over the years a little too often. I am now uncertain whether I should pay anymore into a system that is currently flawed and discriminates with inconsistency… particularly when that luxury is already imposed upon us by our dear government.

(OK, that’s enough ranting for now… I had planned a lovely segue back into the original topic, but it seems to have gotten lost in the vitriol! Ah well, never mind, I’ll go and write about some pretty flowers and kittens instead methinks 😉

Kaz B

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *