Interesting read for SuicideGirls members

alonzomourning23

CAGiversary!
Feedback
26 (100%)
I know there are a bunch of suicidegirls members here, so I figured this may be interesting. I always thought it started off as a small, female run soft core porn website and just took off from there. The fact that it's basically sold out didn't bother me that much, until I found out who ran it. It seems that the site is actually the brainchild of male jerk, like most porn sites, who found a way to make a boatload of cash. 30 models have recently left, most notable being Apnea and Voltaire.

Until recently Molly was a Suicide Girl, having posed nude for the site twice, once alone and once in tandem with another girl. She was paid the usual rate of $300 for each shoot and didn’t spread her legs on either occasion. She’s well-spoken, but her complaint is much the same as those of most every other girl I’ve spoken with: “SuicideGirls is the Wal-Mart of alt-porn.” She’s said the same at her page on the site, but you won’t find the comment there; it’s been purged, along with just about every other critical comment any Suicide Girl has made has made about SuicideGirls.

The bloom, it seems, is off the rose.

SuicideGirls’ carefully cultivated claim of being female-run has been attacked as a marketing ploy, and one of its male owners attacked as a woman-hater. About 30 of the site’s best-known and most-popular models have left or been booted from the site in the last month, and their online journals purged. The idea that the site was as much about the girls’ minds as about their bodies—always transparently false, but for some reason accepted at face value by the girls, by a press all too eager to promote purportedly female-empowering porn and by a large female viewership willing to play along—has been exposed as a fraud.

Those women who have moved on to other sites have been threatened with lawsuits (as have sites running their photos) that appear to claim that for the generally $300 a shoot they were paid that all images of them—not just those taken for SG—are property of the site forever and throughout the universe.

Those former SGs that have nonetheless continued to publicly attack the site say they have been threatened with spurious but costly and time-consuming lawsuits, and with having the pictures they took for the site sold to hardcore sex sites.

The new, enlightened sex is looking awfully similar to the old exploitative porn, which is a shame, but no surprise. In the 2004 SuicideGirls coffee-table book, a collection of sexy photos and sample profiles, Missy Suicide claims to have created Suicide Girls in 2001. She wanted, she says, to take pictures of her pierced and tattooed friends, women who supposedly challenged the normative idea of beauty. This despite being pale, thin, white, altered and modified in the least imaginative possible ways and generally given over to the sort of vague nostalgia for pin-up photography and glamour-as-such that so many disaffected young women feel.

"I decided I would create a website for the images, and give each of the girls I photographed a space to write, rant, scream, explain, whatever," she wrote. "I would give them a voice on the Web site, and let them create the site with me, set the tone and share their unique attitudes with the world."

The innermost thoughts and taut bodies of naked hipstresses, steeped in the rhetoric of womanly self-empowerment and in the service of the DIY ethos—the perfect marketing plan.

The real beauty of it was that it worked two ways. The audience was made to feel that far from mere gapers after smut, they were participants in the democratization of sex. The models were made to feel that they were taking control of their sexuality, posing nude without compromising their integrity or fattening the bankroll of a leering, amoral pornographer........

"I was really attracted to the idea of a site created and run by women," says Jennifer "Sicily" Caravella, until her recent departure one of the most popular Suicide Girls. "What really lured me in and made me want to stay was that the community really added a light-hearted dimension (very different from most porn sites) where I could screw off on the boards with my juvenile humor and make friends. I got really into the journals and ended up meeting a lot of people."

This mythology of sexy, pierced women creating a frolicksome community was what drove the site's popularity. As it turns out, though, neither Missy Suicide nor any other woman is the force behind the nudity. That would be one Sean Suhl, one of the four owners of SuicideGirls, and the one the departing girls all say is the power behind the throne, while Missy is mostly merely the public face. Sean's possessed with a unique attitude of his own.

Whores, sluts and junkies are some of the names Caravella says Suhl has used to empower his models when not allegedly declaiming that "You guys are a bunch of vapid idiots," "An ass-sex video wouldn't have paid you as much," or "Why don't you just shut the fuck up, lady. No one asked you!"

Perhaps unsurprisingly, such antics have led to the loss of various exotically named models. "Doesn't anyone wonder why nearly all the models who are leaving the site have had personal/direct contact with Sean? Nearly every girl who has left knows Sean. This is not just chance," says Caravella.

Sicily, Shera, Stormy, Voltaire, Apnea, and, er, Katie, all prominently featured on the Web site, the book and/or the 2004 burlesque tour, are all popular—and all gone.

The Suicide Girl brand was built largely on the images these girls provided—and it was the loss of these models that has brought the company's seedy business practices front and center.

"The ones who left were the icons of Suicide Girls. That subscribers care that these girls left is proof that they regard the girls as humans, not meat puppets," said a former model who spoke on condition of anonymity. "And these new 18-year-olds are not top tier—the whole point is making sure that now there is no top tier, that the site is less about the personalities of strong, charismatic women who can hurt SG by leaving and is more about interchangeable tits."......

"Sean basically told me to 'fuck off' when I requested that we sign contracts ensuring his word on the royalties," says Caravella. "Sean promised all the girls a 5-cent royalty on the DVD after a 200 grand re-coup. He later took back his word with one of the girls because she couldn't do the next tour (though she had done a TON of free promotion for SG). Another girl was told there was no re-coup. Another girl was told one thing from Missy and another from Sean. His whole deal was to use this 5-cent re-coup promise to justify having the DVD girls do free-promotional stuff. He said that it was in our best interest to promote the DVD because it would pay off for us in the future. Hence, the feeling of exploitation. Sean is full of big promises and little follow-through."

The departure of a few (or even several dozen) models from the site amid claims of ill treatment, broken promises, shady money dealings and the rest is interesting but unsurprising. It's the sex industry, after all.

What makes the whole saga truly bizarre is the treatment excommunicated Suicide Girls have received. "Every SG member and model who has attempted to question or speak about this has been archived or zotted off the site," continues Caravella.

The girls also say they have been hounded elsewhere on the Web. "I have had two LiveJournal accounts deleted, two MySpace blogs erased," Caravella tells me. "I have been banned from commenting and posting in all groups and forums on MySpace. I had my last journal deleted off of SuicideGirls. Why all of this effort to shut me up?"

Kelly "Shera" Kleinert, another popular former Suicide Girl, also had her MySpace account deleted last month. "When they deleted me, every comment, every message was deleted."

According to both women, Suhl is an acquaintance of Tom Anderson, the founder of MySpace.........

In an email, nominal founder Missy Suicide countered that all girls have left voluntarily or because their membership ended. She later changed stories and told me that "Models receive a membership while they are active on the site." Finally, she decided on a third explanation: "Because these women are no longer contributing members or [do not] represent the community we decided to remove their journals from the site. While we value their past contributions to the community, we are saddened by their recent accusations that we feel are unfounded."

Their pictures, though, remain up. Only the words have been removed.

The complaint at the center of the breakdown happened in spring of 2004, during preparations for the burlesque tour. Five girls were staying at Suhl's apartment, which doubled until recently as SG headquarters, at his request. The accommodations were not all he claimed they would be.

"When I arrived at Sean's," one model wrote in an email, "I was introduced to the dingy, bug-infested, stained walls and carpet, horribly cold and depressing 'basement'. Yes, it was finished and meant to be an apartment...a very, very awful and dreary apartment. The toilet was broken. [One girl] spent most of her time with us in the basement…. You couldn't find her with us, the next best place to look was in the upstairs guest bedroom closet. Yes CLOSET. It's the only place she felt safe enough to talk on the phone or most likely cry.... She wasn't the only girl crying either." .........

"Sean yelled at me every day of the tour and pre-tour," says Kleinert. "He called me a slut, stupid, replaceable and talentless."

"I left SG because I think it is one big lie. I quit SG because I loathe Sean and everything he stands for. I quit SG because we were not aware when we signed certain contracts that the DVD was going to be available at such places as Best Buy, fye, Tower and Virgin, and that Showtime was airing it twice a week every week for two years," she went on. "He made it sound like there would be limited distribution so we agreed to a ridiculously low amount of payment [of] $1,000."

One model who left the site of her own volition to pursue a career as a writer told me that "Sean always seemed to have short man's complex. Like one of those geeks in high school who suddenly gets pussy and he's not overjoyed—he's thinking, 'I'm going to get back at them now.'"........

That the whole thing did get good press, though, despite being an obvious and blatant sexual Potemkin village, says a lot about the natural and proper desire of porn consumers to see healthy, normal people having fun fucking one another, or at least getting naked, which is a good first step. Happily, several sites offer up what SuicideGirls purports to, without invoking a lifestyle or involving the consumer's cash in the sort of scumfuckery of which Suhl has been accused.

One site several of the SuicideGirls have migrated to is GodsGirls.com, which is showcasing the same sort of "punk" naked women. The difference is that the new competitor has no pretensions of forging a community, woman-friendly or otherwise. It's a certain sort of hot girl, shown naked and fuckable, if not in fact fucking. If this is your sort of thing you should also check out BurningAngel.com, a woman-owned site that offers up the softcore tease but also shows some of the freer-spirited girls doing what everyone wants to see them doing, which is in its own way liberating—certainly more so than SuicideGirls' rather prudish half-assery.

I asked Missy to put me in touch with other Suicide Girls, who'd presumably still be loyal to her and the site. She refused.

Missy, after all, is the woman who claimed in the introduction to SuicideGirls' coffee table book of nudie pix that her dream was to capture the beauty of "the post-punk girls who haunted Pioneer Square, Ice Cube on their iPods, decked out in Minor Threat hoodies and miniskirts with a skateboard in one hand, a cup of coffee in the other and a backpack full of Kerouac and Hemmingway slung over one absent-mindedly exposed shoulder."

Or at least it's her name signed to the marketing director–style rigamarole.

http://www.nypress.com/18/40/news&columns/ros%C3%A9ralatmaldonado%20.cfm
 
This is actually old news as this happened back in september. And the reason why a lot of the pics were taken down were thanks to the United States Code Title 18, Section 2257 which was also passed in september. It was a preemptive move by SC to show compliance with 2257 and thus avoid the scrutiny of the FBI. More info here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuicideGirls
 
[quote name='jaykrue']This is actually old news as this happened back in september. And the reason why a lot of the pics were taken down were thanks to the United States Code Title 18, Section 2257 which was also passed in september. It was a preemptive move by SC to show compliance with 2257 and thus avoid the scrutiny of the FBI. More info here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuicideGirls[/QUOTE]

Ya, I'm aware of the pic removal part. But this is an entirely seperate issue. It kind of takes the feel good porn aspect out of the site.

These girls left though, their pics are still there. I've read a couple blogs from ex suicide girls as well, and the allegations are consistent.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Ya, I'm aware of the pic removal part. But this is an entirely seperate issue. It kind of takes the feel good porn aspect out of the site.

These girls left though, their pics are still there. I've read a couple blogs from ex suicide girls as well, and the allegations are consistent.[/QUOTE]

I'm more surprised that ppl are shocked that Missy wasn't the sole creator of this company. In a modern day business, there's really no such thing as a single owner. You have many collaborative efforts to nurture and grow a successful business. Even Martha Stewart doesn't own her brand solely. Neither does The Hef completely own Playboy. And by the success of SG, one shouldn't be naive in thinking that Missy did it all by herself. To manage a website, including the burlesque show as well as the dvd, of course there had to other enterprising minds involved. As for the girls' disputes, they should've read their contracts more carefully or had a capable lawyer scrutinize it. To sign something without verification, then they have no one to blame but themselves. Buyer Beware and all that. If there were any human rights violations, then there should be more than lawsuits; there should be a criminal investigation. AFAIK, there's none so I'm still not completely convinced that the girls are in the right.
 
[quote name='jaykrue']I'm more surprised that ppl are shocked that Missy wasn't the sole creator of this company. In a modern day business, there's really no such thing as a single owner. You have many collaborative efforts to nurture and grow a successful business. Even Martha Stewart doesn't own her brand solely. Neither does The Hef completely own Playboy. And by the success of SG, one shouldn't be naive in thinking that Missy did it all by herself. To manage a website, including the burlesque show as well as the dvd, of course there had to other enterprising minds involved. As for the girls' disputes, they should've read their contracts more carefully or had a capable lawyer scrutinize it. To sign something without verification, then they have no one to blame but themselves. Buyer Beware and all that. If there were any human rights violations, then there should be more than lawsuits; there should be a criminal investigation. AFAIK, there's none so I'm still not completely convinced that the girls are in the right.[/QUOTE]

It's not so much that she's not the creator, it's the reprehensible behavior the actual creator is accused of committing. If there was a halfway decent guy behind the scenes, lie or not, I wouldn't be that disturbed. Whether you think it's a reasonable assumption or not, most people on that site and in the media do honestly believe the lie, or believed the truth was close enough for them not to care. I had originally found the site when it was still rather small (usually a photo set a day on weekdays, none on the weekend, now they have 4 a day), so the fact that I knew it before it became this marketing empire reinforced that opinion.

If it wasn't for the strong female presence, open preaching of feminism and such, it wouldn't be so disturbing.
 
[quote name='triforcer']pay for porn?... on the internet?![/QUOTE]
Softcore, no less. People should probably turn in their cheap-ass badges if they're subscribers to SG.
 
[quote name='jmcc']Softcore, no less. People should probably turn in their cheap-ass badges if they're subscribers to SG.[/QUOTE]seriously! empornium forever!
 
Huh. I didn't know Zia McCabe was a SuicideGirl. And a pregnant one, at that. I'm going to have to channel Subby to find the perfect smilie for this situation:

:whistle2:k
 
[quote name='jmcc']Softcore, no less. People should probably turn in their cheap-ass badges if they're subscribers to SG.[/QUOTE]

Heh, I got it on sale. I had joined for a month and they later sent me an offer to sign up for $29 for a year, instead of the normal $50. The reason many people join it (besides liking that particular type of women) is because it was feel good porn. You don't get the guilt of thinking a girl is only allowing a triple pentration because she needs the drug money, or that the guy is a jerk and really doesn't care how much the girl hates what he's doing to her (on some internet porn sites you can see tears running down the womens faces during some scenes), as long as he gets his money and doesn't get arrested.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']
If it wasn't for the strong female presence, open preaching of feminism and such, it wouldn't be so disturbing.[/QUOTE]

:rofl: PWNED by corporate america.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Heh, I got it on sale. I had joined for a month and they later sent me an offer to sign up for $29 for a year, instead of the normal $50. The reason many people join it (besides liking that particular type of women) is because it was feel good porn. You don't get the guilt of thinking a girl is only allowing a triple pentration because she needs the drug money, or that the guy is a jerk and really doesn't care how much the girl hates what he's doing to her (on some internet porn sites you can see tears running down the womens faces during some scenes), as long as he gets his money and doesn't get arrested.[/QUOTE]

So do you wish you could take back all those masturbation sessions you had?
 
[quote name='Mr Unoriginal']So do you wish you could take back all those masturbation sessions you had?[/QUOTE]

:lol: , it just means it lost the feel good element.

:rofl: PWNED by corporate america.

Along with most others who are familiar with the site.
 
[quote name='U2K Tha Greate$t']Suicide girls post on this forum?

hmmmmmm, this is news to me.[/QUOTE]not the girls, members to the site.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']you can see tears running down the womens faces during some scenes[/QUOTE]
and this is what makes it all worth while...
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']
Along with most others who are familiar with the site.[/QUOTE]

Well there is a sucker born every minute, although I'm pretty sure most of the subscribers where just there for the pron.;)
 
Interesting to see that such a quote-unquote "rebel" or "punk rock" site dropped images in order to appease the Meese Commission 2005.

To good to be true, regarding the "community" mythos of SG. Ever since I first heard The Buzzcocks selling automobiles with the song "Ever Fallen in Love?," I knew that any viable threat the punk rock culture had to offer was dead, dead, dead. The power of capitalism rears itself, such that it can appropriate threatening culture and sell it right back to you, while you think you're contributing to something unique and worthwhile.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Interesting to see that such a quote-unquote "rebel" or "punk rock" site dropped images in order to appease the Meese Commission 2005.

To good to be true, regarding the "community" mythos of SG. Ever since I first heard The Buzzcocks selling automobiles with the song "Ever Fallen in Love?," I knew that any viable threat the punk rock culture had to offer was dead, dead, dead. The power of capitalism rears itself, such that it can appropriate threatening culture and sell it right back to you, while you think you're contributing to something unique and worthwhile.[/QUOTE]

At the end o' tha day ya gots ta eat... and buy some shit.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']I know there are a bunch of suicidegirls members here, so I figured this may be interesting. [/QUOTE]

Holy shit really?
 
[quote name='zionoverfire']Well there is a sucker born every minute, although I'm pretty sure most of the subscribers where just there for the pron.;)[/QUOTE]

You've never been involved with the website. They have a huge online community there, which many models participate in. It's not a typical porn site. The porn alone, while obviously the main part, is not the only reason it has become so huge, the whole community has played a large role in it. The girls are respected there, and there conversations rarely focus on the fact that they're naked on the site (unless you're posting in response to a photo set). The message boards have a strong female and feminist presence. The community there reflects what suicide girls presents itself to be, the owner does not. Any member who engages in insulting the models, using demeaning terms to insult women etc. would be attacked on those boards.

The perception of suicide girls as porn that respects woman is believed by the models (except those who had significant contact with the real owner), the majority of its members, and throughout the press. To suggest that only suckers would actually think it wasn't run by a typical, chauvinist porn guy isn't true in this case.
 
[quote name='Moxio']Holy shit really?[/QUOTE]
I didnt know that either. I never really bothered to check out the website though. I'm not really a fan of the Suicidegirls although I commended them to for doing something interesting and different.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']You've never been involved with the website. They have a huge online community there, which many models participate in. It's not a typical porn site. The porn alone, while obviously the main part, is not the only reason it has become so huge, the whole community has played a large role in it. The girls are respected there, and there conversations rarely focus on the fact that they're naked on the site (unless you're posting in response to a photo set). The message boards have a strong female and feminist presence. The community there reflects what suicide girls presents itself to be, the owner does not. Any member who engages in insulting the models, using demeaning terms to insult women etc. would be attacked on those boards.

The perception of suicide girls as porn that respects woman is believed by the models, the majority of its members, and throughout the press. To suggest that only suckers would actually think it wasn't run by a typical, chauvinist porn guy isn't true in this case.[/QUOTE]

No, you're suckers for buying something corporate then becoming shocked when it turns out to be run like a buisness and I'm pretty sure most of the members don't spend much time in the messages boards, it is all in all a porn site.
 
[quote name='zionoverfire']No, you're suckers for buying something corporate then becoming shocked when it turns out to be run like a buisness and I'm pretty sure most of the members don't spend much time in the messages boards, it is all in all a porn site.[/QUOTE]

The business started as just suicide girls, it wasn't like microsoft started it. It became corporate, but started out as one of a handful of similar sites.

But, seriously, to understand how suicide girls really presents itself, and how accepted that view is, you really need to be familiar with it. It's not a typical porn site, and to understand its draw you really have to go beyond simply the nude images. The respect for woman, porn for those who don't like the degrading nature of some other porn, is one of its main selling points. If it did not preach a sort of feminist porn it would not have achieved the success it has.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']The business started as just suicide girls, it wasn't like microsoft started it. It became corporate, but started out as one of a handful of similar sites.

But, seriously, to understand how suicide girls really presents itself, and how accepted that view is, you really need to be familiar with it. It's not a typical porn site, and to understand its draw you really have to go beyond simply the nude images. The respect for woman, porn for those who don't like the degrading nature of some other porn, is one of its main selling points. If it did not preach a sort of feminist porn it would not have achieved the success it has.[/QUOTE]

Again it's a unique type of porn, but it's still porn. When you see people post about that site what do they do? Except for you they post about which girl they find the most attractive not which girl is working towards a buisness degree. The community helps make the porn more real to people, it's why playboy and other porn magazines throw some BS story in with the pictures.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']You don't get the guilt of thinking a girl is only allowing a triple pentration because she needs the drug money, or that the guy is a jerk and really doesn't care how much the girl hates what he's doing to her (on some internet porn sites you can see tears running down the womens faces during some scenes)[/QUOTE]

Man, chicks cryin is the best part.
 
[quote name='zionoverfire']Again it's a unique type of porn, but it's still porn. When you see people post about that site what do they do? Except for you they post about which girl they find the most attractive not which girl is working towards a buisness degree. The community helps make the porn more real to people, it's why playboy and other porn magazines throw some BS story in with the pictures.[/QUOTE]

The community there involves discussions on current events, politics, music, lifestyle (ie. hobbies) etc. The boards with the fewest topics? Silliness, sex talk, and hook up. And yes, I have seen models education being discussed. Though most topics there do not revolve around the models.

Except for you they post about which girl they find the most attractive not which girl is working towards a buisness degree.

Giving specific emphasis to this sentence, this shows you have no seen how the actual community on that site conducts itself. That is part of it, but it's one of many discussions. Hell, there are topics where guys post pictures of themselves nude.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']You've never been involved with the website. They have a huge online community there, which many models participate in. It's not a typical porn site. The porn alone, while obviously the main part, is not the only reason it has become so huge, the whole community has played a large role in it. The girls are respected there, and there conversations rarely focus on the fact that they're naked on the site (unless you're posting in response to a photo set). The message boards have a strong female and feminist presence. The community there reflects what suicide girls presents itself to be, the owner does not. Any member who engages in insulting the models, using demeaning terms to insult women etc. would be attacked on those boards.

The perception of suicide girls as porn that respects woman is believed by the models (except those who had significant contact with the real owner), the majority of its members, and throughout the press. To suggest that only suckers would actually think it wasn't run by a typical, chauvinist porn guy isn't true in this case.[/QUOTE]that's only because those guys believe that they may have a chance with those girls in the back of their minds.
 
bread's done
Back
Top