Samuel Thorne

Zimmerman

English 1A

College of the Redwoods

Summer, 2004

Webe Web Fashion Models

(A Cultural Analysis of Preteen Models at CSM Child Super Models)

Baseball must be in season; what cute Little-League teammates.  Sammi Jo and Aimee look about nine years old.  They’re both wearing Braves’ uniforms.  Wait a minute - they don’t have any pants on!  Sammi Jo has a picture of Snoopy on the front of her of her bright red panties, but is it any of my business to know that?

Sammi Jo’s web site goes through the motions of inviting professional photographers to request bookings.  To her credit, she at least has skimpy clothes on in most of her sample photos.  Still, the primary focus of the site is to sell monthly memberships to view the rest of her galleries.

Most of Aimee’s sample pictures make sure her underwear is showing.  Further, her web site doesn’t even bother to pretend that it has any other goal besides selling memberships.

Both American and international web sites that sell memberships to view little girls in sexually provocative attire and poses have become common.  Further, they seem to face few legal hindrances.  What does this say about popular culture?

Paid memberships for accessing galleries of photos of these children imply only one thing:  they are providing entertainment.  Very likely, from the cultural viewpoint of a child, that is awesome!  She has her own “show” and she’s the star!

The question is; does she understand the significance of what she’s showing?  The possibility that she understands the significance of the unique niche of entertainment she fulfills may depend entirely upon whether she has ever experienced sexual abuse.

What makes this niche unique is that no other genre of “soft porn” subscription uses the “fashion model” web site as a venue.  No other genre needs to.  Pornography of adults is now legal in most places, so it doesn’t need to pretend to be anything else.

The company that designs and hosts these sites is Webe Web Corp.  Their offer to parents and agents is simple:

Does your child or client have an interest in being a model on the internet?  Webe Web Corp. offers an easy Cost Free way to get started.  Here's how it works.  All we need from you are quality images!  We build and manage the site.  You get paid based on the orders the site receives.

Webe Web uses www.childsupermodels.com as a common index to promote the sites.  Www.childsupermodels.com is a Top 100-style index that invites anyone with a web site of this genre to submit her site for display here.  Even competing companies such as PreTeenModeling.tv and Stormy’s Lil-Darlins.com advertise their sites here.

Www.childsupermodels.com neither explains its rationale, nor acknowledges any discussion of it.  Webe Web Corp.’s own web site at www.webeweb.net doesn’t even mention the fashion model sites.

The attitude of Webe Web’s fashion model sites toward the public appears to be “take it or leave it”.  They’re in this business whether we like it or not.  If we wanted to do business with them, they would expect us to accept their terms of business without even knowing what those terms are.  There isn’t so much as a Frequently Asked Questions or Privacy Policy published in the public portions of these sites.  There is a link to a rudimentary Terms of Service page on the order form.  Only the regularity of past shoots implies that models plan to continue doing more shoots.

Each girl has a sub-site devoted entirely to herself, with a unique set of graphics that makes it appear different from the others.  However, the layout of all the girls’ sites is nearly identical, making Webe Web’s work easily recognized.

The girls range in age from seven to sixteen, but tweens outnumber teens by about seven to two.  There are no adults or males.  If the sample galleries are any indication, members see the girls in various skimpy costumes and various states of undress, and in various flirtatious and provocative poses.

Finding out for sure what paid members receive would require a membership.  That currently isn’t in this student’s budget.  All of the sites offer memberships for $20 to $25 per month, which give the visitor access to more photographs without defining how much they'll get.

The target audience is willing and able to pay at least $20 per month, per site for membership; in other words, someone who is motivated to see these young girls under these conditions and who has disposable income.

Professional photographers, advertising agencies, and talent scouts would simply hire a model if she were for hire.  If she isn’t for hire, she has nothing to offer them.

Boys near a girl’s own age may very well be motivated to ogle at her.  Girls near her age might be motivated to view the fashions worn, but there is nothing to indicate that members see more fashions besides those seen in the sample gallery.  Both boys and girls of this age group would likely have both financial and payment method difficulties purchasing monthly subscriptions.

That leaves adults, with “adult” motivations – sexual orientations toward under-aged girls, generally male adults.  How aware are the girls of their audience and the audience’s motivations?

It is arguable that some of the flirtatious expressions and provocative poses insist that the girl knows she’s addressing someone with at least the potential for romantic or sexual interest in her.

The models are generally clothed scantily, with swimwear being the most common garments.  Most sample galleries also include shots of the model wearing underwear, and shots in which the color of the girl’s underwear - or the fact that the girl is not wearing underwear - is visible through her clothing.  Many include shots in which the model appears to be starting to take off what little she is wearing while aware that someone is watching.  A few models seem to specialize in wearing costumes or sport uniforms with the pants missing.

The model almost always poses alone in all her pictures, although rarely two or three of them will appear together in a picture.  While they often address the camera with a child-like spontaneity, even innocently friendly facial expressions may seem anything but innocent in the company of provocative clothing and poses:

• As Alyssa lifts the edge of her skimpy skirt and shows what’s underneath, she raises a shushing finger to her lips to signal to the viewer that what she’s showing is a secret between just the two of them.
• Laurie likewise starts to lift her dress, but the look on her face is one of excitement at the prospect of displaying herself.
• She also puts on a swimsuit, gets wet, and does a recognizable impression of Bo Derek’s 10 pose.

However, poses are just that:  poses, a form of acting.  Facial expressions are also a form of acting.  This begs the question whether the girls are aware of the significance of their poses and expressions.

Consider Valerie.  Her Bio professes that she dislikes “anything to do with boys”.  Yet, she strikes poses that only people with sexual interest in her could appreciate, including more than one in which the slits along the sides of her dress gape well above the waistband of her underwear.

The older the girl is, the more likely she is aware of the significance of her poses and expressions, and vice versa.  What happens when a girl achieves this awareness?  Most of the tweens retire from this career at the age of 12 or 13.  This is an age when they not only are more likely to be aware of the poses’ significance and be embarrassed by them, but also when they begin to think more for themselves and increasingly desire to assert their own opinions, or at least the opinions of their peers.

Most of the teens began modeling as teens, and few of them display such blatant flirtatiousness or provocativeness as the tweens do.  Moreover, according to the ages stated on their web sites, some of the teens seem to have remained 14, 15, or 16 years old for a number of years now.

The target audience is a narrow niche, but it is unexpectedly influential, as evidenced by the words “pedophile” and “hebephile” used by the rest of the population to describe them.  The word for any other sexual orientation blatantly identifies itself by the suffix “sexual”.  After all, they are becoming progressively legal and acceptable in popular culture.  On the other hand, the words pedophile and hebephile, used to indicate people with sexual orientations toward children and adolescents, inappropriately identify themselves by the suffix “phile”, as if their interests were more friendly or affectionate than sexual.

The open availability of this form of entertainment implies a change in popular culture – particularly the culture of childhood.  Many children have nightmares during puberty about appearing at school in their underwear.  What could motivate a child of this age to have pictures taken of her in her underwear, and display them publicly for all kinds of people to see, including possibly her classmates?

Being the star of a web site would be extremely desirable to a child who aspires to be the next Britney Spears or Charlotte Church; apparently desirable enough that the child would rather endure the potential trauma of being seen in underwear than endure not being the star of a web site.  Can she also believe that being a star requires publicly displaying pictures of herself in her underwear?  Seeing the other girls doing so may very well be enough to accomplish that, but it had to start with one of them.

Nevertheless, what is so traumatic about not being stars, that it could outweigh what these girls risk?  Does popular culture put that much pressure on children to become media stars?

Then again, is it possible that some of these children enjoy the attention they receive, or even experience titillation, while displaying themselves for the camera?  While many people would presume not, my own experience belies that presumption.  When I was eight years old, a child who was three years older trained me for roles I was to play for her father’s “special home movies”.  What she trained me to do was to copulate underwater and to feign death by drowning.  The copulation was real, and included sexual climax.  The performances given by the models on Webe Web are extremely mild by comparison, and hopefully the titillation the children there feel is mild by comparison as well.  However, it may still be a motivation for performing, as it was for me.

The open availability of this form of entertainment also implies a change in the popular culture of parenthood.  Most adults, upon observing one of these web sites should ask, where are that child’s parents?  However, Webe Web Corp. only conducts business with a child’s parent or agent, never with the child herself.

That means that parents are making the final decisions.  One may even speculate that some parents may promote the idea to their children, and wonder exactly how willing the child is.  However, most parents worry enough about the possibility that someone may abduct or harm their child without advertising her in her underwear for the gratification of an entire world of pedosexuals.

Does popular culture create so much pressure on adults to seek stardom when it’s far too late for them to grow up to be stars themselves that they will try to do so by proxy through a child?

On the other hand, could a percentage of the $20 per month that members pay motivate them?  According to Webe Web representative Evan Gordon in a 2001 Wired News interview with Julia Sheeres, "Many of these girls are making more money than their parents make".

Of all the cultural groups involved, the pedosexuals are the easiest to understand at this point.  They have desires that are repulsive to most people, harmful to children, and therefore illegal.  Either they live in fear of being caught or they live in frustration.

The open availability of this form of entertainment must also have an impact on America’s culture as well – particularly the culture of childhood.  Anyone who has ever been a child or parented a child knows the plea, “they’re doing it - why can’t I?” 

Will little girls observe these web sites and deduce that they too should dress and act the same way?  The past few years already see teen and tween girls going just about anywhere public in their pajama bottoms.  The past year saw teen and preteen girls sporting thong underwear pulled far above the normal location for the waistband, with pants pulled down to display their coccygeal and upper pelvic areas.  In addition to those, this summer sees teen and preteen girls wearing shorts and miniskirts so transparent that even underwear of the same color is visible through them.  Can swimsuits or underwear independent of outer clothing be far behind?

Will boys observe these web sites and come to expect girls to dress and act that way?  Alternatively, will they decide they want to be web site stars and display themselves in underwear too?

Will adults observe these web sites and conclude that children can and do indeed sexually provoke others?  Will this lead to earlier ages of sexual consent, or to stricter guidelines for the use of children in entertainment?

The open availability of this form of entertainment already indicates a change in American society’s standards.  When I studied television broadcasting in the late 70s, showing children in underwear as a part of entertainment was forbidden.  That no longer seems to be true.

The pedosexual segment of American culture is not new.  However, getting away with openly marketing it is new.  Does it indicate a trend?  Some people believe it is.  A commentator anonymously identified as StarryderJ stated:

As deviation from the natural way has gradually become increasingly acceptable to society, inctreasingly …[sic]… deviated ways of having sex have become accepted.

1. It became acceptable to swap wives.
2. Then it became acceptable to have premarital sex.
3. Then it became acceptable to "shack up".
4. Then homosexuality became acceptable.
5. Then it became acceptable for late adolescents to "experiment" with each other and young adults.
6. Then it became acceptable for kids in puberty to "experiment" with each other.
7. Then it became unacceptable to criticize "alternate lifestyles".
8. Then was expected that middle schools dispense condoms.  ...[sic]...
9. Next it will be acceptable for kids to "experiment" with adults.

I haven't begun to imagine what happens after that.  The disease is not just in individuals, it's in society.  And the symptoms are getting worse.

He predicts that sexual contact between children and adults will become acceptable.  Organizations such as North American Man/Boy Love Association, North American Woman Girl Lover Association, Association for Acceptance of Child-Adult Relationships, and Youth Attracted Network International certainly hope so.

Webe Web’s child model sites have existed since 1999 according to an interview with an anonymous Webe Web representative by The Black Table.  That means that they are a product of the Dot-Com Boom that survived the Dot-Com Bust.

The design and marketing of these sites incorporated aspects of a number of phenomena of online culture that were extremely popular during the Dot-Com Boom, and continue to use them successfully.  These include Top-100 Ranking Pages, Affiliate programs, legitimate fashion model sites, and blatant child pornography sites.

The complete design of ChildSuperModels.com is a Top-100 web site ranking page.  A webmaster may enroll his web site into a ranking page like this one and then advertise the ranking page on his own site to have his visitors vote for his site’s rank on the ranking page.  A webmaster whose site ranks highly gets bragging rights and better visibility, while a webmaster whose site ranks lower gets more advertising for his site because higher-ranking sites have sent more voters to see the ranking page.

Web sites that advertise on a ranking page usually have a theme in common so that visitors to one site may be interested in others.  However, Webe Web took this a step further, nearly filling the entire ranking page by enrolling all of their own “fashion model” sites.

Affiliate programs are business partnerships that allow one business to market another business in exchange for a commission on sales.  For example, Cognigen Networks, Inc. offers affiliates, known as Agents, from six to eleven percent of sales volume for customers they refer to a variety of telecommunication services.  Residual Commissions recur each month as customers continue to use the services.

 Webe Web’s offer to parents and agents is a classic example of the Reverse Affiliate Program.  According to Brian Clark of ReveNews, ‘Under these types of deals, you know your audience would be interested in the products of a merchant and offer to "introduce" that product to your audience just for a percentage of sales’.  Webe Web determined that there is a market eager to view provocatively dressed and posed preteen girls and approaches parents and agents with the offer to market the girls.  Parents and agents who accept the offer then become affiliates who receive commissions for supplying content for the web sites instead of for marketing them.

Legitimate sites promoting preteen fashion models may seem on the surface to legitimize Webe Web’s sites simply by the fact that such sites can be legitimate.  However, comparing one legitimate fashion model site to those produced by Webe Web shows that there are striking differences between the two.  NewFacesTalent Inc.’s Teen & Preteen Models & Actors web page displays thumbnail photos of 30 models between the ages of 9 and 16, on which the visitor can click to see each model’s portfolio.  That’s where the similarity ends.

The most striking difference is that about one third of the models are boys.  Aside from one open-shirted boy, all the models are fully clothed.  The site contains testimonials, both of models who have found work, and of agencies who have found the models that they need.  Each portfolio explains the model’s experience, aspirations, and the region and type of work for which the model is available.  There are no memberships to join.  Anyone wanting to see more of a model will have to send for booking information.

Blatant child pornography puts anyone caught producing or possessing it in serious legal jeopardy.  The legality of clothed, but sexually provocative displays of children is subject to argument.  In fact, that argument has gone as far as the U.S. Supreme Court, which returned United States of America v. Knox to a lower court for reconsideration.  When deciding what Congress meant by “lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area” at 18 U.S.C. § 2256(2)(E), The United States Court of Appeals finally decided:

In contrast, it is not true that by scantily and barely covering the genitals of young girls that the display of the young girls in seductive poses destroys the value of the poses to the viewer of child pornography.  Although the genitals are covered, the display and focus on the young girls' genitals or pubic area apparently still provides considerable interest and excitement for the pedophile observer, or else there would not be a market for the tapes in question in this case.  Thus, the scantily clad genitals or pubic area of young girls can be "exhibited" in the ordinary sense of that word, and in fact were exhibited in the tapes which are the subject of Knox's conviction.

However, the conviction mentioned here was for videotapes in which it was apparent that adults coached the girls to display themselves provocatively.  According to the 2001 Wired News article, the mother of “Jessi The Kid”, one of Webe Web’s models who later retired at age 12 said that, “her daughter enjoys planning the themes for the photo and video shoots”.  Obtaining convictions for the provocative displays of the girls on Webe Web’s sites would require proving either that adults choreograph the displays, or that the children choreographing them understand the lascivious significance of the displays well enough to commit the offenses “knowingly” (assuming that we really want to convict the children).  Chances are that they can’t even pronounce or define “lascivious”.

According to a 2002 Wired News article by DeClan McCullagh, Representatives Mark Foley and Nick Lampson co-sponsored a bill intended to overcome exactly this sort of problem by prohibiting commercial photography of anyone under 17 years old.  Unfortunately, such a law would have made all modeling by children, and even sales of posters of child stars such as the Olsen Twins who were then going on 16, illegal.  Considering the effect such a change would have had upon popular culture, along with the fact that there has been no outrage concerning it, we can safely infer that Foley’s and Lampson’s bill didn’t pass.  That means that for the moment, freedom of expression is safe from that particular misguided legislation.  However, it also means that the popular culture of childhood is continuing to endanger the very people who should enjoy it the most, for the sake of entertaining those who shouldn’t.

Works Cited

Aimee  Grand Opening, circa March 2004  <www.aimee-model.com/series/011.jpg>

Alyssa-Model.com  1 May 2004  <www.alyssa-model.com/series/054.jpg >

ChildSuperModels.com  <www.childsupermodels.com/>

Clark, Brian  Reversing Affiliate Programs  ReveNews  <www.revenews.com/advice/strategy/reverse.html>