Photographer
Eagle Rock Photographer
Posts: 1286
Los Angeles, California, US
Some models show '100' or '107' or other nonsensical 'age.'
I'm perplexed. Is there a reason to not show accurate info?
Photographer
Springfield Fotografiya
Posts: 277
Springfield, Missouri, US
Maybe I was being naive, but I thought that the combination of old age and youthful looks meant that they were either angels or vampires.... 
Photographer
Blonde Pony Photography
Posts: 203
Los Angeles, California, US
Probably for the same reason they'll check off No for tattoos, yet have full sleeves on their profile pictures.
Photographer
kickfight
Posts: 35054
Portland, Oregon, US
Maybe because some models have received one too many Lolita-type or MILF-type inquiries, and would thus prefer not to be further singled out by age.
It's one way to ensure they won't show up on age-specific searches, but will still show up on general searches (those which don't specify a particular age range).
Photographer
Jeffrey M Fletcher
Posts: 4861
Asheville, North Carolina, US
Just a way of saying they don't want to answer questions about, or be identified by, their age.
Model
Nat has a username
Posts: 3590
Oakland, California, US
kickfight wrote:
Maybe because some models have received one too many Lolita-type or MILF-type inquiries, and would thus prefer not to be further singled out by age.
It's one way to ensure they won't show up on age-specific searches, but will still show up on general searches (those which don't specify a particular age range). Pretty much.
Some people don't want to pop up on searches, some people are marketed by their agency as a certain age range and it might be different than their actual age. There have been many threads about exactly this.
Photographer
L o n d o n F o g
Posts: 7497
London, England, United Kingdom
Eagle Rock Photographer wrote:
Some models show '100' or '107' or other nonsensical 'age.'
I'm perplexed. Is there a reason to not show accurate info? The reasons are simple...
- It's because they are really 45 but state they are 28!
- They want any general searches to pick them up
- Don't want to be identified as being past a certain age
It's yet another cloaking device!
Retoucher
3869283
Posts: 1464
Sofia, Sofija grad, Bulgaria
The membership requirements clearly say: You must be at least 16 years old and have the correct birthday listed. Which means any profile violating the rules can be reported to mods who can take care to verify the info.
Photographer
FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY
Posts: 6597
Uniontown, Pennsylvania, US
anchev wrote:
The membership requirements clearly say:
Which means any profile violating the rules can be reported to mods who can take care to verify the info. debatable, one could use their correct birthday but not birthdate.
Photographer
Risen Phoenix Photo
Posts: 3779
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Hats off to models who are honest about their age. It means they are comfortable with who they are.
For those who state in their bio . "I am 41 but everyone tells me I look 26." The truth is they have been listening to their Friendster too much.
Most of them look every bit of 41. You can always tell.
Age hides in the neck, the hands and even the breasts.
But that is no worse then the model who who lists her breast size as 36 DDD and her weight as 1 pound. Most of us can figure out what that means.
Photographer
Risen Phoenix Photo
Posts: 3779
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
debatable, one could use their correct birthday but not birthdate. Really? Interesting when asked on applications for your "birthday" they typically mean month, day, and year.
Perhaps you feel it is acceptable to give only the right day and month and then lie about the year. Very interesting.
Retoucher
3869283
Posts: 1464
Sofia, Sofija grad, Bulgaria
FIFTYONE PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:
debatable, one could use their correct birthday but not birthdate. If truth and clarity are not respected but debated (as they are) you can see the result: a thousand threads about incorrect relationships between site members. If you think this will be healed by a disclaimer or clever argumentations - it won't.
Artist/Painter
Hunter GWPB
Posts: 8179
King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US
Is the age of the model any more important than any of the other stats? He/she either has the look that one is seeking, or doesn't. If a photographer is seeking the look of a youth, then it may be frustrating when models list their age well below what it is. It should hardly matter if one lists their age over 100, because it is very unlikely that anyone is looking for a centenarian model on this site.
Just for the heck of it, I searched the 100 mile radius around my home town for models over 75. Male and female. 31 were returned. The youngest was a spry 85 (vava vavoom), another at 95 and one that is about to celebrate the big 100. There were a few over 120. One at 216 with amazing skin. The oldest is a guy that seems well preserved at 1341.
Photographer
G Reese
Posts: 913
Marion, Indiana, US
I don't pay much attention to the stated age. If they have the look i want, that's all that matters. The apparent age is very subjective. I showed an image to a person outside the trade. That person insisted the model was 15 when the model was in fact 19 like it stated on the model's drivers license.
A stated age of 100+ tells me the model has a sense of humor. A sense of humor as well as a thick skin are absolute requirements on here. :-)
G Reese
Retoucher
3869283
Posts: 1464
Sofia, Sofija grad, Bulgaria
G Reese wrote:
A stated age of 100+ tells me the model has a sense of humor. A sense of humor as well as a thick skin are absolute requirements on here. :-) I would say - this confirms that the site lacks a decent member rating system. If there was one - such profiles wouldn't survive for long (or at least wouldn't be very visible).
Model
MatureModelMM
Posts: 2843
Detroit, Michigan, US
It seems to me that using a drastically incorrect age like that would keep the people you wanted to find you from finding you easily. Self-defeating, so it doesn't make much sense to create a modelling profile but then give inaccurate information that seriously hurts your chances of success.
I have never had an issue using my correct age, and I was 35 when I started out 30 years ago........will turn 65 in just a few weeks. Either you want me because of my age, or because my age doesn't matter and you like what I have done, both possibilities work OK for me.
Model
Laura UnBound
Posts: 28745
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
kickfight wrote:
Maybe because some models have received one too many Lolita-type or MILF-type inquiries, and would thus prefer not to be further singled out by age.
It's one way to ensure they won't show up on age-specific searches, but will still show up on general searches (those which don't specify a particular age range). That's part of it. There are people who hunt for 16-18yos exclusively. If theyre under 18 they keep an eye on them, some try to start planning the girls first nude shoot (some just fucking prey on them). The messages you get when a persons ONLY search criteria was your birthday are fucking gross.
The other part is that a lot of people have the ability to play a wider or different age range than what they actually are. When I was 18 I was still regularly getting mistaken for 16 or under. When I was 21 people thought I was barely 18, when I was 25 I was always told I looked not a day over 21. At 25 I'd "aged out" of a lot of potential work from people who think that only 23 year olds look hot and youthful and everyone above that are old hags. Fitting the look should be more important than your actual age, so people lie about it. When I'm searching for a model the only age I need is above 18, everything else is based on what they ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE
Photographer
TomFRohwer
Posts: 1601
Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Eagle Rock Photographer wrote:
Some models show '100' or '107' or other nonsensical 'age.'
I'm perplexed. Is there a reason to not show accurate info? Once upon a time there was a big modelling website with a huge database...
One day a big dragon snorting sulfurous flames from his nostrils came by and trampled through the database and because the database got terribly frightened it ran amok.
So all the digits were riddled and joggled and tumbled over and since these days a lot of models have a bust or hips measurement of 0 inch or are a hundred and more years old or something like that.
After the members of the crown counsel who had hidden under the crown pricess' underskirt had dared to come out again and stopped gazing after the dragons twerking bottom and the ground had stopped shaking from the dragon's powerful kicks the crown counsel decided not to repair the database because nobody could guarantee that the dragon or an even more terrible and frightening dragon may come back again and trample through the database once more.
And they all lived happily ever after.
Photographer
Black Z Eddie
Posts: 1903
San Jacinto, California, US
L o n d o n F o g wrote:
The reasons are simple...
- It's because they are really 45 but state they are 28!
- They want any general searches to pick them up
- Don't want to be identified as being past a certain age
It's yet another cloaking device! I tend to agree with this. Of the ones I've seen over 100, then I hunt down social media, they definitely are on the older side.
Photographer
Mark Salo
Posts: 11723
Olney, Maryland, US
Eagle Rock Photographer wrote:
Some models show '100' or '107' or other nonsensical 'age.'
I'm perplexed. Is there a reason to not show accurate info? TomFRohwer wrote:
. . .
So all the digits were riddled and joggled and tumbled over and since these days a lot of models have a bust or hips measurement of 0 inch or are a hundred and more years old or something like that.
I'm amused by the models whose hips are smaller than their waist.
Model
Nat has a username
Posts: 3590
Oakland, California, US
TomFRohwer wrote:
Once upon a time there was a big modelling website with a huge database...
One day a big dragon snorting sulfurous flames from his nostrils came by and trampled through the database and because the database got terribly frightened it ran amok.
So all the digits were riddled and joggled and tumbled over and since these days a lot of models have a bust or hips measurement of 0 inch or are a hundred and more years old or something like that.
After the members of the crown counsel who had hidden under the crown pricess' underskirt had dared to come out again and stopped gazing after the dragons twerking bottom and the ground had stopped shaking from the dragon's powerful kicks the crown counsel decided not to repair the database because nobody could guarantee that the dragon or an even more terrible and frightening dragon may come back again and trample through the database once more.
And they all lived happily ever after. Yeah MM is always broken
Any time I update my profile it changes my hips to 0, hair to bald, and ethnicity to Asian
Photographer
TomFRohwer
Posts: 1601
Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Mark Salo wrote:
I'm amused by the models whose hips are smaller than their waist. They do have dragons with that shape...
Photographer
SavageDigital
Posts: 13
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, US
Mark Salo wrote:
I'm amused by the models whose hips are smaller than their waist. Searching MM - I've never seen a collection of people with such disparate heights and body-types, yet all weighing exactly 115 lbs. It's a statistical and observational novelty, fascinating...
...as an aside, not being critical of models - just genuinely curious if there is a special meaning or desirability to the 115 number?
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9775
Bellingham, Washington, US
Why would anybody think that bringing up a topic that has been discussed endlessly with no resolution or change could possibly be of any use to anybody ever? Why do photographers post that they have been shooting "professionally" for umpteen years, have a degree from bla bla bla, will only shoot for pay and then when you look at their port you wonder why they don't sell their camera and take up golf? Oh wait, that's not a new topic either. 
Model
Koryn
Posts: 39496
Boston, Massachusetts, US
SavageDigital wrote:
Searching MM - I've never seen a collection of people with such disparate heights and body-types, yet all weighing exactly 115 lbs. It's a statistical and observational novelty, fascinating...
...as an aside, not being critical of models - just genuinely curious if there is a special meaning or desirability to the 115 number? I am, literally, 115 pounds.
If I eat a big lunch, I'll be like 116.2 for a couple hours afterwards. You know, food babies and stuff.
I have weighed 115 pounds for the last 20 years.
|
