Genre Model Sues Magazine for Gay Harassment

A model for Genre magazine who claims a series of provocative photos intended for his personal use were reprinted without his permission is suing the magazine after he says he was subjected to unwanted advances and harassment from gay men.

Benjamin Massing appeared in the magazine’s March-April issue in what he considers to be a “cruel and vulgar” shot. Now, according to Queerty.com, he’s suing the magazine and photographer Rick Day for invasion of privacy.

Massing, who is straight, is majoring in molecular biology at the University of Southern Florida. Lawyers for the 20-year-old college student say the photo spread, which flanked advertisements for sex toys and lubricant, has made it difficult for Massing to book jobs.

The suit alleges Massing has been subjected to sexual solicitations from strangers and the model claims he’s suffered humiliation and damage to his career as a result of the photo spread.

"It's definitely put him in a class where he's going to have difficulty obtaining contracts for family-related shows," lawyer Liah Catanese told New York’s Daily News.

Previously, Massing appeared almost in the buff for another beefcake publication -- an Abercrombie & Fitch catalog. The model also appeared in a spread for an issue of Playboy spotlighting eligible college men, pictured here.

Massing says in his suit he never expected his photos to be sold to a magazine that would make him look "lustful and sexually promiscuous." (The Advocate)

Reader Comments

These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.

Name: The Threshold
Date posted: 2008-10-06 12:39 PM
Hometown: USA (Orig. Europe)

Comment:

What do you expect when you're a model. He does have a good case and should sue. The problem with the modeling industry over the years is that sex is become almost unvoiable. Almost all models are going to be asked to do sexy shots of some kind or things that they are uncomfortable with. Sex is every where in the media these days and it sells. I read about a case a while back of a football player who sued, because his picture was used to promote gay singles. He has a good case too. Being seen as gay can definetly ruin your career and make the public hate you not to mention threaten your livelihood when you walk down the street, so I can see why he's so upset.

Name: Joseph Anderssen
Date posted: 2008-09-30 1:18 PM
Hometown: Los Angeles

Comment:

Jennifer: Is seems you have personal knowledge of the case - even know Ben. So let me explain it to you. Scenario 1 (your case): Ben did what is referred to as a test shoot with a photographer. Ben did not sign any model releases allowing for these images to be licensed or used. Ben has a good case. The case however would be based on unauthorized use and he should be compensated regardless of the nature of the magazine that used those images without permission. But that is not what he is saying. His argument is that the images where used in a gay magazine and that is what hurts his image. That IS homophobic. Scenario 2: He did sign a model release and the photographer had every right to license the images. In that case he has no legal claim and his statements are again simply homophobic. So if you are friends with Ben, as you allude to, tell his lawyer to build the case on unauthorized use of images and drop the "My life is over because gay man cruise me" BS. Joe

Name: Jennifer
Date posted: 2008-09-30 2:56 AM
Hometown: Orlando

Comment:

People Ben has done nothing wrong. Yes, he was in Playboy, but thats a magazine with nude GIRLS. He was fully clothed in a suit for that. And he never shot for Abercrombie. He was booked for it but never went through. He has some "sexy" pictures, but hes a male model and most have good bodies and may shoot shirtless ads. He was not consenting to his photos being in a gay magazine. He shot for Rick Day for free to help Day with his portfolio only and in return Ben could use the pictures for his own portfolio. Day did not have permission to use the photos to gain profit and especially not to endorse anything, putting him in the wrong. Ben is not gay and hes not homophobic. If he wanted to shoot for a gay magazine he would, but he didnt. Does that make him wrong?... no! There are plenty of jobs that models turn down simply because it does not follow the career path that they intended, but that does not mean that they are against whatever they were asked to shoot for.

Name: Jeff
Date posted: 2008-09-30 12:30 AM
Hometown: Seattle

Comment:

If Genre doesnt have a release, they don't have a legal leg to stand on. Genre has been around long enough to know this, and if the spread was produced "out of house", it should have been accompanied by appropriate documentation. If the model signed an appropriate release, HE has no argument. Unless very narrowly worded, releases give BROAD permission for usage. If the photo was nude or semi nude, the model had to realize that they might be used in a sexual context. If he was posing for Genre, he had to realize that the sexual context would be of a homosexual nature. Models have virtually no say HOW their image will be used, they just give permission for the usage, they accept payment and shut up. If he is such a worried straight, he shouldnt take his clothes off for the camera, because even if all the print media follows the rules, pretty much anything goes when it comes to the internet, and ANY nude or semi nude shot of a man will find its way to publication on the Internet

Name: Eric
Date posted: 2008-09-29 4:34 PM
Hometown: Dallas, TX

Comment:

As a photographer, I find it reprehensible that the magazine would use the images without a release on file. In defense of the model, I would like to point out that anything said by the lawyer is legal speak intended to win a case, and doesn't necessarily reflect the plantiff's actual feelings on the matter. Also, I'd like point out that advertising geared towards gay men often borders on the sexually explicit (read: pornographic), and I can understand where a model -- gay or straight -- would prefer not to have his image tied to a lube or phone sex ad in a national publication. Lube ads in "straight" publications are not nearly as visually overt.

Name: Jonathan
Date posted: 2008-09-29 1:39 PM
Hometown: Lewiston, ME

Comment:

Scott, Any model who was a "Playboy" model who goes to a gay magazine like "Genre" and has their picture taken, and then turns around and say they did not consent to having those pictures used is a liar. What I want to know, is how were the pictures taken if he didn't consent to them? And if he is so morally objectified by them, why do the "Playboy" shoot. I stand by my original post. And I stand by my criticism of the San Diego FD. These are people sworn to protect all people. If they can't look beyond their own prejudices for the sake of city ordinance, how can we expect them to look beyond it in a split second of a life-saving moment like a fire? Prejudice is wrong. And time has shown that offering milk and cookies to the bigots of the world doesn't work. Sometimes you have to bring the hammer down. As for your hypocrisy claim, you speak for yourself, not for me. NOONE speaks for me, and you'd do kindly to remember that.

Name: Bill
Date posted: 2008-09-29 12:38 PM
Hometown: Boston

Comment:

Some clarification would be very helpful. Is he suing for being harassed, or is he suing because his photos were used without permission? If his photos were used because he had given permission for them to be used, then isn't that just a risk any model takes when they put photos of themselves out in public? Hard to feel sorry for someone who has exploited their own looks and body with racy photos and then didn't get the kind of attention they really wanted. I wonder if the women who saw his photos and treated him in the same manner as the gay men allegedly did, would that be an issue for this model - and would he be suing the magazine then?

Name: Joe Anderssen
Date posted: 2008-09-29 4:19 AM
Hometown: los angeles

Comment:

The article is pointless unless someone can answer the only issue in question: Did he sign a commercial model release or not? If the pictures where taken at a photo shoot for which he signed a release allowing them to be commercially exploited than he has no legal right to ask for the opposite and his suit is simply homophobic. If he did not sign a release for these images to be used, than Genre and the company marketing the sex toys (in which advertisement his images where used) must be suit. That however has nothing to do with the fact that Genre is a gay magazine, its a legal issues relating to unauthorized use of imagery in a non-editorial manner. So - can one of your investigative reporters please find out? Joe

Name: Jonathan
Date posted: 2008-09-28 5:53 PM
Hometown: Lewiston, ME

Comment:

It's getting to the poing now where if you are a gay owned, gay supportive, or gay oriented business, and you hire or fire a heterosexual because they are discriminating or refuse to be tolerant, or embrace diversity etc you expose yourself to a lawsuit. For years gays had to suffer in jobs putting up with homophobic policies and couldn't do anything about it. If straight people don't like a companies "inclusive" policies embracing diversity and promoting civil rights, they don't have to take the job, like the firefighters in San Diego. As for this magazine, while I don't like what the magazine did, I highly doubt the model went into the contract blindfolded, he is a model, and if he posed for Playboy, he surely isn't innocent. I think his issue is more with his audience and less with his photospread. He's a homophobe, pure and simple. If these issues are going to persist, here's a radical approach. Stop hiring straight people. See how they like it.

If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above.

All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.

See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.

Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.

More Exclusives

View From the Hill: The End of DADT?
Defense Secretary Robert Gates revealed that lawyers are exploring ways to ease enforcement of the military's gay ban, but cautioned that the law doesn't leave much wiggle room. He need look no further than DOD history for a lesson in altering the policy.

Hot Sheet: Week of July 5
When you get back from that big 4th of July barbecue, unwind with Sacha Baron Cohen's Bruno and your favorite B-movie-mocking, basic cable robots.

Hungry Like the Wolf
A master of viola, ukulele, piano, and harp, Patrick Wolf is a music prodigy -- one who, the night before this interview, spit on a cop and got himself arrested.

Soapside: Advocate's Guide to Daytime
Forbes March talks about playing gay, Otalia fans outraged, update on One Life to Live’s Patricia Maurceri’s firing over gay plot point, Phillip Chancellor III big reveal, and Erica Kane goes to Africa.

The Faces of Federal Prop. 8
With the federal challenge to Prop. 8 moving full speed ahead, Advocate.com sits down with the two couples named as plaintiffs in the suit.

Mommy, the Gays Are Coming
After a year of advancements and celebration for gay and lesbian Colombians, the community takes to the streets of Bogota for the country's biggest pride ever.

The Pride of Antwerp
Advocate.com hits the gay-friendly streets of Antwerp with openly gay police commissioner Serge Muyters.

Excerpt: Mean Little Deaf Queer
In an excerpt from her humorous and harrowing new memoir, Mean Little Deaf Queer, Terry Galloway recalls her early childhood, describing feelings of ugliness, confusion about gender, and being one of the boys.

Top Political Blogs
From Joe.My.God to The Daily Beast, Advocate.com spotlights a few of the best blogs that cover politics, inside and way outside the Beltway.

The Diva of French Television
A hot young screenwriter who has made gay OK for millions of French viewers, Nicolas Mercier sips champagne, dons a feathered hat, and says he wants to see Colin Farrell and Jude Law go at it.