In February this year, Cosmopolitan reported on the efforts of nine former models to sue their former agencies for damages in a range of instances, among them wage theft, breach of contract and minimum wage violations. The case interested New York judge Peter Sherwood, who directed Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to examine the claims.
The range of allegations cast a sharp light on certain practices within the modelling world. None of these are surprising, though a few are worth scribbling down. One was the classification of models as freelancers, alleviating the need on the part of agencies to provide various benefits incumbent on that employment. Then came the usual nasties: requests for models to get plastic surgery; unnecessary deductions from wages; and the police-state surveillance of diet, weight, exercise and hair quality.
Manipulation and exploitation, to that end, varies. It need not merely be the entire symbolism of the body beautiful, or the body unfed. In a recent instance of more novel exploitation, the modelling premise has been subverted by the very idea of the anti-model, or the figure least likely to make the catwalk.
This is not confined to the field of big is beautiful, or notions that models need to have some flesh and heft. It has been extended to the very idea that even individuals of disability can also make the grade.
This has effectively opened a considerable can of worms: is mental health a matter that can be an asset to…