@evotra89 under US law you can't really do that bc it's considered grooming, but that doesn't appear to be what happened, so the set is staying up. The issue  everyone is upset with was outing Hartt publically, including her personal email, and accusing her of sending anonymous emails to the photographer's employer without providing any amount of "evidence". No one publicly knew about the allegations until this blog post. Additionally, what had been brought to Missy was Hartt telling her privately that girls came forward to Hartt and said this photog bragged about shooting a 17 year old while he was at a shootfest. Hartt wanted it investigated, as did the girls that reached out to her bc they were too scared to say it anywhere on SG. Also, this is a week into the chaos that got a bunch of models archived. There's a lot of posts for context that come before this. For the record bc SG is based in the US, the event taking place in Italy is irrelevant bc the site and team still have to follow US law when it comes to content. This spun off the the chaos that ensued from the Suggestion Box thread in the Everything SG group. This blog is part of a much bigger, ongoing thing happening at SG rn. People are being archived for what happened during this entire event, not just this blog. There's like 4 or 5 threads and a few blogs that all happened from the original Suggestion Box debacle.

@brunhild so the way content laws work is where ever the company is based is the set of regulations it has to follow. For example, when I had content leaked, I couldn't get it pulled down bc the host server the stolen content was on was in the Cayman Islands. And there, there was no law protecting my content so I couldn't legally do anything. So in this case, SG team members have to follow US content regulations bc SG is based in the US. It doesn't matter where in the world an event takes place, they have to adhere to US legal standards to be on the SG site. It's not a judgment of Italian culture or the voice of the model, it's just the law SG as a whole has to follow. Heck, the age of consent varies in the US state to state, but nothing can go on the internet that includes some 17 or younger by federal law.

I do need to say, without accusing anyone of anything, predators don't pray on everyone. If they did, they would never gain trust of potential victims. Again, not accusing anyone of anything here. I just really would like everyone to keep that in mind. Just like child abusers get jobs working with kids, sexual predators get jobs that let them access models. Your positive experience doesn't mean no one has been abused, or no one can be. It just means YOU weren't abused. I'm a survivor so I speak from experience. We should feel safe enough when we have a concern to voice that to powers that be and hope they do their due diligence. Again, NOT ACCUSING anyone of anything, nor criticizing anyone, just speaking from my experiences. I also know this topic can be a trigger so if anyone needs to talk, my DMs are always open. Be safe, and be kind, mega babes 🖤

I actually find this post by @missy very brave. You can't go through life seriously accusing people without evidence and expect to have no consequences. You can completely ruin someone's life by doing something like that. I don't see that anyone has stopped to ask Roberto how he must be feeling when his professionalism and integrity is being questioned. But what I find most incredible is that it seems that everyone's voice matters more than Cecylia's own, who has cleared the whole thing up. What kind of paternalistic, victimizing action is this? I thought this community believed in the autonomy and empowerment of its models.

@brujaja the US law applies on the set and the shooting, not to people talking. Otherwise we couldn't speak about Facebook without being judged on the US law. Also, nothing has happened that could have been considered as illegal even in the US, so the problem doesn't exist. I understand the concern and I'm happy that people want the site and their photographers/models to be safe and aware, but here we're completely ignoring the model's words, while listening to someone else's, someone who wasn't there and that I don't even know if has ever met the photographer and the model she's defaming. If it were the model to say she felt like being groomed or that she felt uncomfortable I'd de in front line defending her, it's just not the case.

@brunhild In the US it can considered a grooming situation if she's under age and planning a shoot. We do have laws in place to prevent that, which SG and its team must follow, even interntationally. But like you even said, in the model's own words that's not what happened. I see her commenting above and I'm listening to her. I believe her. I just wanted to clarify that bc we have the laws we do, international team members have to follow the certain protocol SG asks for, as they adhere to US law. I really just didn't want you thinking it was a statement on how things are done in Italy, or Italian culture. If anything, it's a reflection and statement on American culture.

As someone who practices law for a living and has lost a position in 2021 due to my modeling photos being spread around all the partners at my firm aside from me by someone I never was able to pin-point. Let me say this, #1) there are many legal issues involved in this situation but knowing the company and the legal allegations they went to court for and eventually settled in the past I would recommend no one seek legal actions again the company as they have endless resources and as a practicing legal official I know what endless resources can pull out of case law studies to build a defense.                          This all aside  #2) I am not shocked but extremely disheartened by the way this was handled and the lack of one on one conversations that could have been professionally handled but we're not. #3) Back in 2014-2015 similar issues were brought up in relation to big model @Damsel & I will never forget how I felt seeing missy posting person to person email screen-shots, ect. It was so unprofessional of the CEO of the site as well as blasting the post on the FP. #4) Yet again some models are bringing the issues to the front so they can be addressed. While it maybe a rushed means of voicing their opinions, it is not ok to SILENCE them by REMOVING THEIR ACCOUNT ACCESS &  make statements and post this while not even posting censored screenshots of the "emails sent to employers", if you're saying that's why this is not ok then at least provide your evidence because in court you'd have to. But you're selectively picking the evidence your presenting and since this is missys & Sean's company they can blast this to every single member. It's messy, unprofessionally handled, violates multiple legal codes and ethics & since I practice & have been targeted for my modeling by someone to my employer and had to deal with losing my job because someone attacked me for my outside activities in a southern state (where blue collar laws are still legal) I think the allegations are serious but can you prove it? Versus posting selective evidence?  This is messy & @missy & @seanson should know a lot about being legally messy.

@brujaja here 14yo can have consensual sex with +18 people unless the +18 has a "power relationship" with them (teacher, coach, etc), so it's probably different from the US way. In any case, for what I understand, the model contacted the photographer asking him to shoot her, his first question was about her age and when he discovered she was still 17 he asked her to contact him when she'd turned 18. It NEVER was him reaching out to her saying creepy things like "OMG you're so beautiful, such a shame you're 17, please text me when you're 18 I can make you a queen". I'm so sorry that people decided to throw all their energies on a non-problem, not willing to listen to the "victim" they victimised and then got so angry that couldn't control themselves, it really makes me sad, I believe in dialogue and listening and what is happening here is a failure.

Okay, so a person publicly accusing someone of being a predator and aiming a series of damning allegations at the people who own and run this site is seen as "brave and "courageous", and yet when the people she has PUBLICLY accused then choose to PUBLICLY defend themselves, suddenly it's seen as "petty" and "unprofessional"? Interesting double standards. And as for the archiving of girls who "are speaking up": there's a way to make your voice heard without being an absolute dick about it. And some of the things I've seen people saying about @missy, @penny, @Lemon, and other members of SGHQ are vindictive, malicious, and downright disgusting. It's like we forget that these are PEOPLE who also have feelings. In any other workplace, many of these venomous, hate-filled rants would be grounds for termination but suddenly here it's seen as "silencing people's voices"? And who exactly are those who are speaking up trying to defend, exactly? Because this so-called "victim" you're championing is TELLING you that she was not groomed. So, who exactly are you still fighting for? As someone who was a victim of childhood sexual trauma, I find it very offensive that people would throw around words like "predator" and "grooming" as if they're buzzwords used to make a point. The only thing sad about this situation is how much ugliness it's bought out in some of the girls on this website.  Nobody needed to be archived, if they were so unhappy here, and this is such a toxic environment, and management are such horrible people, then they should have just left.

@jeckyl you nailed what I've been wanting to say for a week. Like @skisby, I have raised issues with staff several times in my tenure in the site. I have flagged concerns about photogs, other models, and members. I have emailed with concerns over how my images were handled in a set, and at one point I sent some very panicked, probably not coherent, emails after I was doxxed several years ago. I never felt like staff was angry with me for contacting them about those things - they handled each situation with due diligence. But I also approached them professionally, gave them time to respond, and also a couple times learned to sit with my own emotions - and with time to process felt they made the best possible call even if it didn't feel perfect at the time. In this situation it has just felt like there's been a lot of hypocrisy. Calling for more equality for trans models, while yelling at and *intentionally attacking and misgendering* trans members of staff. Being told things are being looked into, yelling that it's not enough and demanding transparency, and posting defamatory screenshots and being mad when they get the transparency they asked for. Asking for a public forum to voice concerns and then absolutely dogpiling the given forum and using it to yell and abuse staff. There were valid concerns in that thread. Staff were not the ones drowning them out. And I'm not saying every staff update on those posts was perfect but they continually readdressed and reassessed. Folks pointed out that they didn't feel Penny could be unbiased given that folks raised concerns with her - she was pulled from the model council and they added oversight to her communications. Some folks said they weren't comfortable sharing in a public forum - an anonymous forum was created. Missy *got on the phone* with several models during a week where most businesses *are not in the office* between two major holidays. What CEO does that? And none of it was enough for them. There was absolute refusal to admit that simply *processing* every concern is a time consuming process, given the response - nevermind the time to implement changes that require re-coding the site, and making sure that changes are being made in a correct and sustainable way. Just a whole lot of what felt like entitlement in the utter nwillingness to acknowledge that SG is a business and not a democracy (yes I'm sure we'd all love to be posted on socials all the time and have every single set bought). I've gone on enough here and on my own page and man this has been a ROUGH week to care very much about folks on both sides of the table (and to agree with points on both ends). But to pretend that folks were archived for "speaking up" is obtuse.  It wasn't what they said - it was how they said it. Repeatedly. It does seem like some folks got swept up in it that didn't behave badly - but people came shouting for war, not ready to make conversation, and if that caused causalities...I'm not sure the fault lies with SG.

I’ve had nothing but pleasant interactions with staff in my almost 19 years on the site, but that’s not my issue here. Regardless of what side of the ‘argument’ you are on I do not see how any situation warrants posting private correspondence, personal details and naming people UNLESS all parties agreed on it beforehand.@nebula

@nebula didn’t mean to specifically tag you in my post above and I can’t edit now, sorry!  :/

I’ve been too busy with my professional and personal life to comment on this post immediately but, am doing so now. First and foremost, before being a suicidegirl hopeful, I’m a social worker. It’s in my profession to speak up and advocate when I become aware of something unethical. It was unethical/unprofessional to post personal information that was meant to be kept confidential, where @hartt did nothing wrong to voice concern about the safety of another model. This is how like in NYC, there’s a Good Samaritan law where if any person thinks a child is being abused (e.g. sees bruises, signs of neglect) they can call child services and make a report without their identity being exposed to have the guardians and living situation of the child investigated without fear of being retaliated against. Regardless if the parents of the child are actually guilty of abuse or not, this does not negatively impact the whistleblower in any way. It’s encouraged to report suspicion (even if in fact there’s no abuse to be found), because making a call will always potentially save a life if there is actual abuse occurring. In this case, I get the sense @r_girardi is someone you trust, and you felt defensive for a member on the site making an accusation against someone you personally believe would never groom/prey on a minor. And you could be right, (You are allowed to feel the way you feel, that’s not wrong or bad) but what wasn’t right, was your actions following the way you felt and displaying all of what @hartt addressed here on SG to see. She was genuinely worried, and people on this site shouldn’t be made to feel unsafe, and be silenced/archived for voicing concern or worried that their grievances will be made public for the concern of their own safety and other’s safety. With all that being said, I’ve always loved this site and still do. You’ve made my dream (and obviously thousands of other women’s dreams) a reality to feel empowered in their skin and individuality, and to form a community based on this. So listen to your members, don’t shut them down. They share in your vision ultimately, they just want the best for you. They also want the best for suicidegirls as a whole.