Hollywood’s Favorite Sleazeball Shutterbug

o-TERRY-RICHARDSON-CHANGE-ORG-facebookThe silence is deafening. A depraved photographer accused of abusing and exploiting young models enjoys access to the entertainment industry’s hottest female stars, from Rihanna to Lady Gaga to Beyonce to Miley Cyrus. He counts “progressive” feminist celebs among his most intimate friends. He’s even photographed President Obama. But when confronted with his sordid history and career degradation of women, these elite friends of Terry have nothing to say.

Meet Terry Richardson (but be sure to bring your mental Purell). The Guardian touted him as “the former junkie punk who put the filth into fashion.” The son of a fashion photographer, his first “success” was an image he shot for British designer Katharine Hamnett. “There was a shot of a girl, with her legs open, she had white panties,” he recounted to an admiring New York Times reporter. The see-through underwear left nothing to the imagination. It was a “cool image,” Richardson bragged.

The title of that fawning Times feature: “The Naughty Knave of Fashion’s Court.” Naughty? Try skeezy. Shady. Icky. Pervy. Richardson has mainstreamed overlit soft porn and pedophilia chic as “art.” His “Terryworld” photo exhibit featured women performing oral sex on him while crammed into suitcases and trashcans. He’s the warped mastermind behind Miley Cyrus’s naked, phallic-drenched “Wrecking Ball” video, for which they won an MTV Europe Music Award. He persuaded Lindsay Lohan to pose with a gun to her head. He slathered Lady Gaga in red meat for Vogue. He finagled “Glee” stars Dianna Agron and Lea Michele into simulating group-sex play with the late Cory Montieth, for which Agron later apologized to fans and their appalled parents.

The leering Richardson, who insists that his subjects call him “Uncle Terry,” has convinced countless women in the industry to doff their tops, bottoms, and dignity. A few, brave fashion models have publicly exposed Richardson’s misogyny and manipulation. Model Rie Rasmussen told the New York Post’s Page Six: “He takes girls who are young, manipulates them to take their clothes off and takes pictures of them they will be ashamed of. They are too afraid to say no because their agency booked them on the job and are too young to stand up for themselves.” Veteran supermodel Coca Rocha has spoken out about Richardson’s creepitude and forbidden her agents from working with the lech.

Model Sara Ziff formed the Model Alliance last year to blow the whistle on sexual harassment and abuse, after women “began to speak out in numbers against the photographer Terry Richardson for his practice of putting models on the spot to disrobe on castings, soliciting sex from them, and documenting these exploits.”

These women, alas, are the exception, and not the rule. Hollywood’s elite sisterhood is a sexual predator sanctuary. Powerful starlets continue to flaunt their hipster friendships with Richardson. Lady Gaga just hired him to shoot the video for her newest single, “Do What You Want (With My Body).” High-profile liberal New York City powerbroker Audrey Gelman, press secretary for Democratic city comptroller Scott Stringer, has been dating Richardson for the past few years. Gelman’s bestie and fellow Oberlin College luminary, actress Lena Dunham, posed naked from the waist down for Richardson in a “V” magazine photo spread headlined — I kid you not — “Girl Power.”

These women wear their feminist politics on their sleeves (or their sleeveless, tattooed arms). They take to Twitter regularly to moan about the GOP’s “war on women.” They mock conservatives as retrograde and sexist. But when asked about their relationship with a notorious sexist pig who has made a career out of humiliating women (did I mention the time he scrawled “SLUT” across one girl’s forehead), the femme role models are AWOL.

Last month, the Times spilled a barrel of ink on Gelman’s rising political star. The paper noted her relationship with Richardson in passing, and noted the publicity-hungry couple’s selective reticence: “Ms. Gelman generally refuses to discuss her personal life. And Mr. Richardson, who is 48, declined to be interviewed.” Earlier this month, the New York Post’s Maureen Callahan zeroed in on Richardson’s perv history and asked both the outspoken Gelman and Dunham for a response. Cue the chirping crickets: “Dunham and Gelman would not comment for this article.”

Young women, whatever your politics, take note. This is not “girl power.” It’s chauvinist power. This soulless shutterbug has supposedly enlightened women right where he wants them: Servile, subordinate and disempowered. Terry Richardson’s enablers, the poseurs of feminism, are selling out their sisters in the name of “fashion” and “art.” It’s not hip. It’s sick.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • Arf

    If someone asks you to take your clothes off and pose in a way that degrades you, you have the right and the ability to say no and leave. If you choose to do neither, then why are you a victim?

    • Rocky Mountain

      You may not be a victim in the strict technical sense but as far as I can tell the girls that Richardson uses are just that; girls and girls who want to please people who can open doors to their dream of becoming successful and rich – a very dangerous combination. This is probably not a lot different than kids doing things because other authority figures ask or demand they do them. And it appears that some girls do say no and maybe their career suffers but they have their self-respect intact.

      • laura r

        its worse than this artical even reports. go to “celebrity life” nov. 5th. in the past the worst that ever happened w/a fashion or commercial photographer was he may make a pass @the model. that was it.

    • nomoretraitors

      True enough, but the point of the story is that for all the left’s talk about how much they care about women, they are silent when it comes to one of their own exploiting women. Which tells us they don’t really care about women (or anyone else)

    • laura r

      my comments have been deleted, so again: i am a libertarian. if women want to pose or have sex w/someone it is their right. these girls are over 18, he is not an authority figure. he hasnt raped injured threatened anyone. is free choice, some girls refuse to work w/him, he has a reputation. its the job of the parents to teach self respect. seems like that crowd is having fun, no one is forcing you to join in. we dont need to go down to the level of the far left. i mean why bash someone because they voted for the opposite party? there are trashy vulgar far right motorcycle skin heads who are just as pornographic. i have never seen these ads/vids, the photographer is irrelevent. there is no need to ever qualify your position michele.

  • Elizabeth Cape Cod

    He’s a liberal…the worst of all protected groups.

  • Guest


  • Elizabeth capecod

    Liberals are fine when another liberal debases females, but have a conservative say ‘Binders full of Women’ and all heck breaks loose.

    • A Z

      Mitt Romney wants to say he looked through the resumes of many. many qualified women to look for a running mate or appoint them to important position in the Massachusetts state government to make sure there women represented in greater numbers and in numbers closer to the proportion of the population.

      It was a sincere and honest effort and all liberals can do is to misrepresent it and the go on to win election and fill their administration with old white guys.

      Par for the course when dealing with leftists.

  • trapper

    Why am I not surprised that he is connected to the Democrat Party?

    • Seek

      What does his party affiliation have to do with anything? Al Goldstein, founder of Screw magazine (R.I.P.), is a registered Libertarian.

    • Everett Vulgamore

      why am i not surprised that this is liberal-related and it has a good old fashioned double standard?

  • nomoretraitors

    So liberal are hypocrites. Tell us something we don’t already know

  • LeftistsStink

    Sadly, despite the “women’s movement” this seems to still be the disgusting way little girls grow up to be big stars.


    He looks like a moron with that thumbs up pose – like someone in a Sacha Baron Cohen movie.

  • A Z

    Gelman’s rising political star?

    She is 25 and a spokesperson. She has not held an executive position. So how do we know she can lead?

    I think that her 18 month relationship is all fun and games for her and not serious. Marriages with age difference greater that 9 years have something like a 2% or less track record of lasting until death do us part. So I think this relationship suits the needs of the parties at the moment. For her it is fun and games and publicity. Would anyone outside NYC know, who she was, were it not for her association with Richardson?

  • A Z

    I read thru 1/2 the NYT article on Gelman. She is a fashionista with a fairly new political science degree.

    And she is oh so successful, because she can get glitterati to campaign events in the NY metro area. This is the same area that elected di Blasio.

    My area is not perfect by any stretch. It is more blue then red. but to say Audrey Gelman is successful a person has to qualify that remark by mentioning the milieu where she lives.

  • A Z

    This is a fairly important essay. It ties together many events that the readers might not associate with each other from Miley Cyrus latest antics to Lady Gaga’s meat dress too much more.

    These things did not just happen in society because they were inevitable or it is progress. They happened because specific people are pushing them.

    … and other people are giving them cover or turning a blind eye.

    • laura r

      it sells, its a business. cheesy, yes it is. i still defend the right of freedom. the only thing that offends me is seeing photos on my servers page w/out clicking on. “in my face” is invasive.

      • A Z

        It is a business and free speech only go so far.

        When a person sexually harasses women (or men) or in some cases minors, then we can and should do the following things.

        Consider the company he keeps and decide, if we want to vote for the politicians he is associated with.

        Consider the company he keeps and decide, if we want to buy from people who employ him as a photographer.

        Consider all his artwork and decide if it was influenced by or solely flowed out from his views as a lech.

        Write now I am reminded for the last 3 weeks every time I listen to the Rusty Humphries and Jerry Doyle shows about liberals boycotting conservatives. It is time we boycott them and drive them the F____ out of business.

        I listened to the local show in a midsized market. The show’s host are not in the yop 100 at all. and yet they were talking about the same things that the shows in the top 100 talked about and had more or less the same take. It occurred to me that if the left got rid of all the talk show hosts except for Randi Rhodes, Thom Hartmann and a few others, they still would not be happy. They would have to get rid of local hosts and then go after blogs.

        Yes it is past time that we boycott all liberal business.

        • laura r

          if he touches minors he should be arrested. this is the problem of 1) the parents- not you 2) the model agency should be sued for putting the teen in danger. this is between the parent & the agency. if he touches adults they can also sue. 3) it is infantile & a stretch to think about who votes for who. this man himself is not running for office. boycotting is busybody stuff, i stated above whose business this is . (not ours). actually you sound very much like the far left controlling PC campus. put it in perspective, hes a commericial photographer- thats all. you give this guy so much power. IF you looked @ every candidate, you would find a supporter you may hate. that means you would vote for NO one. we may as well just not vote @all. boycotts are studenty. you’re not his market anyway. what business it is of ours about “casting couch”??? this has going on for years. shocked? dont be, business as usual. happends w/politicians all the time w/in all parties. growup america, put your anger towards a better cause.

          • A Z

            These modeling people carrying water thru fear, or ideology are a problem. It is not academic. Not for me anyway. I know people that went to modeling agencies. This is a problem that I though might be “of the past” like the golden age of Hollywood or the 60s and 70s at the latest.

            People are not okay with Universities hiding crime stats. If they are not okay with this then why would they be okay with a dysfunctional industry like this? the universities hide the crime stats and therefore misrepresent themselves to students. The left has boycotted TRN. Because of it Jerry Doyle and Rusty Humphries is off the air. Has the left one in putting TRN out of business? No. but they have put a lot of hurt on other people. They need to be hurt back.

            A politician having a mistress (or the other way around whatever you call that) does not shock me. I expect it. Among almost anyone of power be it derived from politics or wealth.

            The key word is “a” mistress meaning one. where not talking about going thru people like they were cotton candy. That is a security risk and a corruption risk among other things. So yes while I don’t think the parties will ever be impeccable there is a certain level of morality I expect.

            “hes a commercial photographer- thats all”

            And what is seen on sitcoms and influences people’s values or so psychologists have shown. He is part of this milieu. So it matters.

          • laura r

            many of these big clothing comps are owned by corps like proctor & gamble. we are talking about global billions. douteful they would want to change things way on the top. right now the porn violence blood gay shock approach is working. i saw the american apparel websight several yrs ago. it looked like the old fredriks of hollywood. (owner is also a lecher). havnt bought fashion mags in a few yrs. the only fashion/life style mag left is “town & country”. the others have stooped to articals (we are talking mags like harpers bazaar) like: “what puff daddy wants to see on a women” (like i care about his fashion advice). then again he has a clothing line. guess he also paid for advertising pages. corps follow the $$.

          • A Z

            You mentioned American Apparel. Several harassment suits filed so far. Their website is close to soft p_rn and in one case is soft p_rn.But Dov Charney cares, so according to the left he is okay. He is on board with GLAAD, PETA and pays his workers $12 an hour in LA. I do not see how that is a livable wage in LA.

            You can touch anyone. Walmart is the largest retailer. There numbers are down. I think it is due to the economy and they have grown to the limit of their environment. Plus people like “Howard Prescott” eventually find their way into any big organization (IMHO). Point is a boycott might work even for the largest of companies/retailers. Depressing their earning, earning growth or stock price might be enough to make a board cave.

          • laura r

            i dont think american apparels customers will boycott. they like the product too much. as for walmart, i cant imagine the average person living w/out it. i think its a disgusting place, i dont go to these kind of envirements.

        • laura r

          his fathers photo work was beautiful, the blk/wht fashion in the 1960s. i remember it well. i just caught up w/terrys work, go to CELEBRITY LIFE nov 5th. though i heard of his name, i wasnt familar w/the work. looks like he just lost a major client H&M. understand he has worked on major campaigns for very high end fashion comps as well. there has been many new millionares since say yr 2000. most of them are tasteless & tacky. that also transformed the fashion industry, the retail stores etc. it changed manufacturing as well. the refined classy approach took a back seat to vulgar style wize. that is why so many of the ads are the way they are, also a decline in morality in the entire world. the entire industry knows about him, no need to protect anyone. hes making so much $ for his clients that it seems that losing a few accts wont take him down. many of the girls just accept this as normal, even ones who dont need the $, & are very sophicated like demi moores daughter. she wouldnt do a sex actw/him, but she posed for him anyway. why? i will tell you why, dirty talk is acceptable. if dozens of girls & celebrities refused to work w/him then he may be fired. BUT since this porn photo approach is what sells, they will just hire someone else to take the photos. someone who has a hands off policy & not a dirty mouth. the beat will go on in advertising, galleries etc. this is part of the world today. do you know the % of jr high school girls who send photos of their sex organs to boys? many. im not talking about ghetto schools either, i mean good public& private schools. how many 12 yr old do oral sex w/the boys? again i dont mean the ghetto, i mean good schools. i was a student of advertising also photography, but this was way before this change. i see little difference between violent porn & mainstream ads. richardsons work is technically ok, medicore compositions, its the content which excites the media. the uglier the better. getting rid of this paticular guy wont change the major trend in visuals & selling techniques. sorry to say, there is too much $ wrapped up in these corps. big difference between this & a talk show host.

  • Steeevyo

    It’s funny because both liberal feminist as well as conservatives hate him.

    • laura r

      oviously the clients like him, the model agencies like him, the magazines & ad agencies like him, lady gaga likes him. never gave him a thought or knew he existed untill this artical. i see this as a $$$$ making OP for a group of upstart models. they can hire a lawyer & go after this guy, get it into the papers. all it would do is get him more jobs, thats show biz.

  • Douglas Mayfield

    Just as feminists have been utterly silent about Islam’s ugly persecution of women, so they, and all of their Hollywood ‘sisters’, will be silent about this pathetic creature, because feminists protest only those things which involve freedom and individual rights, the destruction of which may lead to potential gains in socialist/Left wing power.
    So they scream about violations of women’s rights in America but ignore, consciously evade, the vicious predators of Islam and a dismal skunk like Richardson.
    I’m sure there are those who will call Richardson’s work ‘art’, but the ultimate goal of all ‘modern art’, which is neither modern nor art, is destruction of the viewer’s ability to think. Richardson is no slouch in this regard, mixing as he does, the prurient with the stupid.
    As someone once said, modern art is created by the untalented, sold by the unprincipled, and purchased by the unthinking. Anybody who wastes any time looking at Richardson’s work, much less purchasing it, needs a quick brain transplant.

    • Everett Vulgamore

      for that last part, i believe they dont need a brain transplant, but a quick injection of lead in their forehead

  • http://www.MARVINFOX.com/ Marvin E. Fox

    keep up the good work Michelle.
    Marvin Fox

  • Seek

    If there is an act of coercion described in this piece, I must have missed it. Fact check: This guy may be sleazy, but all of the females who posed for him did so voluntarily. They were no more “exploited” than the people who buy the magazines in which they appear.

    Michelle, you’re so cute when you’re mad.

    • laura r

      michele sounds like the old radical feminists: indicting, patronizing, bossing, busy body. boycott for what? save the girls from slavery? another sensationist artical for filler.

  • Johnnnyboy

    In entertainment you can be anything but boring. One way to avoid being boring is to push the envelope of proprietary. And so we should not be surprised if there is always a tendency to do it, and for entertainers to celebrate those who do it the most. They give cover to everybody else.

    The choice is either this or some type of censorship. Our current choice is to let the inmates run the asylum.

  • cacslewisfan

    More proof that modern Feminism = Daddy Issues.

  • Charlene

    Im making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do…..




  • pat roberts

    I wonder if Michelle Malkin would resist the temptation of dropping her top, bottom, dress in front of dirty, filthy Richardson, when asked to.

  • Rick

    Richardson also photographed Amy Winehouse, but she did not strip for him, Maybe because her boyfriend Blake was there.You can see that on youtube.

  • Richard

    Looks like I’m going to have to turn in my conservative/libertarian credentials. I, in the past bought a Gaga book, photographed by Richardson. Yes it was riske’, but in the past I had a crush on Gaga, untill she went to sing at Obama’s reelection party. Then I started deleting pics of her. Saw on You Tube that Richardson had been taking pics of Amy Winehouse with her boyfriend Blake there. If he started with Amy, Blake would have punched his lights out (if he wasn’t too stoned) for Blake later was put in jail for 15 months, punching out a bar tender.

  • Rocky Mountain

    Laura, I think the combination of Libertarians and women or girls is not a healthy one. Of course there are trashy, vulgar, far right types who have long ago roared past the conservative starting gate I just don’t want girls or women to be tempted by the trashy or vulgar part because if all go down that road all we’ve got left is a sewer and we may be there all ready.

    • laura r

      again it starts in the home. unfortunatly there is little difference between porn & art galleries exibits. the advertisemenst are almost porn as well. what i am saying is that you cant control global corps, they ARE the sewer. being a libertarian i believe in personal freedom, as long as it doesnt infringe on other people. i do think there should be restrictions on where these advertisements can appear, like bill boards can be offensive. the whole society has degenerated. i dont just mean younger girls, but all ages. there are millions of people walking around in what looks like underwear & pajamas, 30s, middle aged & elderly. flashing their fat ugly &old bodies in public. (while screaming on cell phones, & stuffing their faces). there is little differerce in white slovenly america & ghetto. the average person looks like a bum in the street. there is no dignity, or dress code. this is all races, lowerclass, lower middle, middle & beyound. youre correct, we are in a sewer.

  • laura r

    i dont think american apparels customers will boycott. they like the product too much. as for walmart, i cant imagine the average person living w/out it. i think its a disgusting place, i dont go to these kind of envirements.

  • marliii

    My Uncle Hayden got a stunning metallic Cadillac CTS-V Wagon just by some parttime working online with a laptop. visit this website 9­­­­­­­­­m­­­­­­­­­s­­­­­­­­­n­­­­­­­­­.d­­­­­­­­­d­­­­­­­­­p­­­­­­­­­.­­­­­­­­­n­­­­­­­­­e­­­­­­­­­t­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

  • russell owl

    yes,others have binders full of perverts and predators

  • russell owl

    so does this give all men a PASS for sexual harrassment in the workplace in the eyes of the feminists and or the law?
    Are men now allowed to breath a sigh of relief in the offices around the country when the gal he likes decides to press charges because he smiled at her a lot? sensativity training is only for corporat wogs, not the mixed up minions of media.

  • russell owl

    HE IS NOT THE reason these companies are making money. His work is just pervy and trite., its that the trends are shoved in our face by the media and no alternative is allowed to surface. People magazine is the victomclass rag, each victim class carefully covered in each issue and all the terry richardson hollywood all seeing eye types. they promote what is toxic in a closing circle. Time, vogue, people…. W magazine will not work with him. they are much more respected than Vogue in the fashion world. Vogue has become the celebrity pusher that Harpers also is, both devoted more to prog politics and celebrity Richardson victims and layouts that subvert womans beauty into clownish perverted and dystopian gulag slaves.
    take a look. fashion is dead except for the elite and a stronghold of middle class. Wintour has killed it. the devil wears more than prada. cultural pessimism contributor.

    • laura r

      @one time vogue/bazaar were creme de la creme. i was thrilled when i had a chance to work some of the editors as an fashion asst. yes anna wintour did kill it. i prefer diana vreeland & the others. they jazzed things up but still had class. i dont read these mags, only town & country, i like beautiful photos. i dont like to see a girl w/a shaven head in a $200,000 usd evening gown w/sneakers & she is posing like a guy. this started in the late 80s or early 90s.