Model transitions but expects to carry on earning as much as pre transition.

[Rainbowshit]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12890405/Fashion-model-Frances-Coombe-sues-agency-civil-rights-violations-claiming-career-destroyed-came-transgender-told-insufficiently-masculine-work-man.html

they always look so unwell after transitioning.

She destroyed her own career. Did she really expect to just switch to male modelling? 🙈

Surely the "female clothes" doesn't come into it? If a male model wearing "female clothes" was requested by a client, that's what they would get. Why would a "trans man" be any different?

Continue to dress as a woman or we'll fire you for being trans" is a pretty forceful position.

Agencies are not employers. They represent models to clients who employ them on a contract. Agencies (actors / models literary) drop people all the time especially if they are not bringing in money because clients don’t have work for them.

Actually writers have been dropped by agents for things like supporting JKR.

@PrawnLiberationFront

i think this type of nonsense where a trans person takes an employer to court over discrimination l, where it’s clearly someone expecting the world to evolve around them and their beliefs or ideology brings out a lot of negativity from people who would be otherwise uninterested or empathic towards them. These issues, whether it’s being a small feminine male model or demanding to be allowed to take women’s places in sport, or kids being encouraged to transition in school… all this ideological craziness turns people against it.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24234283-frances-coombe

This is the court documentation for this claim, as posted by the Daily Beast to whom Coombes gave a statement. The case has been filed in Manhattan, New York.

There's a lot of detail in there, to say the least. A lot of it seems like shitty management in general, not specifically related to the model's identity. It would be interesting to know what an employment law expert in this particular jurisdiction makes of the claim.

Agree. I have no idea about US or Canadian employment law but in the UK models are in a pretty precarious position. Fashion is an industry that is all about selling a look. It's an industry that has been a bit of a Wild West in terms of employment rights. Low pay (unless you're one of the few who make it to the top), sexism, ageism, racism are rife, hardly any union organisation. Of course the client is king. If the client wants a girl who looks extremely young and thin and feminine with long blond hair, then that's what the agency will offer the client. No one is interested in how the model identifies.
On a very basic level, everyone in the industry is selling beauty. Yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that but I think most model bookers and magazine readers would agree that the model was beautiful before transition. The model is still young and striking but her skin is noticeably worse (testosterone will do that) and she looks neither like a beautiful woman nor like the type of beautiful boy/man who is successful in modelling.
I found a 'one to watch' type of article about her from a few years ago and it praised her doll like features and porcelain complexion. If that was her USP as a model, messing with those features was bound to have an impact on her career.

Wasn't it about the model wanting to present as NB/masculine in the shots the agency send to clients? Agency insisted on her wearing feminine clothes for the shots because they judged that's what was most marketable.

In the Super models doc on Apple Christy Turlington talked about being sent home from a job because she didn’t fit any of the sample sizes. This was towards the end of her ‘super model’ career and she mentions it because she decided she had made enough money and couldn’t be bothered with it any more. It’s not an industry that cares about feelings, even if you are Christy Turlington.

She was very beautiful and as a Lesbian I also find her pre-hormone androgynous look sexy as well; its confident and adult
But the acne, ball cap ugh. Sad and turnoff, she looks like a young teenager ick...shades of Ellen - Elliot page.

I had a click through some of the current male model profiles connected to Coombe’s former agency and the overwhelming majority of them are listed as 6ft 2.

Coombe is listed as 5ft 10, which might just scrape editorial but is way off the mark for a desirable runway model for a menswear collection.

Coombe’s new portfolio images (solo shots so size in comparison to other male models isn’t depicted) is quite nice, but the new agency suggests that Coombe is branching out into acting, so perhaps there is some realisation that modelling isn’t particularly viable post transition? The video seems poor quality compared to the still images, but perhaps that’s an intentional design decision.

Curiously the new agency doesn’t have Coombe listed as a man, nor as a woman, nor in the ‘fluid’ category, only in ‘model’ and then three subcategories ‘LGBTQIA’ ‘Sample’ and ‘Runway’.

https://www.wespeakmodels.com/sample/men/2194299/frances-coombe

Curious as to how the case plays out as while I don’t think a person who changes their look so radically can realistically expect their looks-based employment to continue, the modelling industry as a whole probably does need a boot up the arse re: the balance between fair working contracts and the wellbeing of human beings.

But then I’m old enough to remember the ‘Heroin Chic’ phase and not much seems to have been learned from that.

Yes I believe in reality and keepong men out of womens and childrens spaces. Don't care if you think that's nasty. I also don't care if you think its prejudiced to protect children and women.

What looked cool and androgynous pre transition, just looks awkward and nothing special post transition.

Nothing has changed except your perception of it. That seems like a you problem.

Why the fuck would an agency send a weak candidate that was not likely to work in the selection the client requests unless there was no other model available. And if the agency doesn’t have enough selection for the client’s needs the agency needs better recruitment policies.

What part of the expertise of this agency that got this model high quality gigs and knowing their clients and their client’s needs do you doubt, or that you know more about than them?

Unless the agency specialised in gender fluid or transman models, why would the agency slip this candidate in if there was not a strong chance they would get selected. Again, do you believe that you know the agency’s business better than the agency ? Or do you believe an agency can send unlimited choices to a client? That seems very unlikely.

Actually, it seems like a ‘Frances Coombs can no longer book modelling work’ problem.

No need to insult other MN users, plenty to discuss re: the modelling industry and how it chews people up and spits them out wether they model menswear or womenswear.

I thought it a harder to be a male model anyway. I’m sure I read that they expect them to be an exact size. Like 6ft and not 6ft2 as they won’t spend the time fitting to them as much as female models.

An agency is not going to feck with its reputation with its clients by sending weak or unsuitable portfolios. Do that more than once and they won't be getting asked for models again. Again, they aren't a charity. They have an obligation only to their business and to ensuring they stay afloat. That ensures that successful models get employed and paid.

If it was a case of just sending out any portfolios then we'd all be signed up.

I'm 5 10 and would consider myself too short for female modelling nowadays (and there are many other inhibiting factors too... 😂) I'm definitely too short to be a male model.

It’s not nearly as well paid and there is less work. It’s one of the few industries where this is the case. (I can’t think of another). There just isn’t as much money to be made in men’s fashion.

I am hoping that we get some indication why a poster believes they know so much about this agency and their clients that they can deny that this model has effectively broken a contract that this model had to provide specific services. And why any cut throat high quality clientele agency would carry talent they didn’t believe they could place. Considering the articles also stated that there was a permanent employment arrangement in place.

One contingent on that model performing the specific services covered by the contract - wearing the clothes a client wants to model for women. Again, the agency rejected this person’s request to be represented as a male model- because they already had enough male models fitting their needs.

I hope we can get some clarity.

"Nothing has changed except your perception of it. That seems like a you problem."

Nope. It seems like Frances has destroyed their own career. I think the fact they are struggling for work speaks for itself.

"Do you think it's ok for people to lose their jobs because they are trans?"

This is a blatant strawman. They aren't firing Coombe for being trans, they are telling Coombe to continue modelling women's clothes as before or not. They don't want Coombe as a male model, because that was not the contract they signed with Coombe.

"Do you think it's ok for people to lose their jobs because they are trans?"

They literally said "continue with your job as a woman's model as before". Which is already more than nice in a job that depends on looks and Coombe clearly starting to not look as good as before.

"It seems unlikely there are zero modelling jobs out there for someone androgynous, non-binary or visibly trans masc, especially in this day and age".

There happened to be zero with this agency.

Coombes seems to think that being a model is like being a doctor, ie a profession that you qualify for.

But it's not, is it? If a doctor gets a silly haircut and changes pronouns they're still medically qualified.

The only qualification to be a model is looking marketable. The second your agency can't sell your look any more, you're gone.

they always look so unwell after transitioning.

Massive doses of testosterone can do terrible things to a woman’s body.

But I guess also that men don’t want things marketed to them by androgynous looking women.

but it is reasonable not to expect to be dropped by your agency completely without warning.

I’ve read the article - it wasn’t without warning. It reads as though there were ongoing discussions.

Here’s a thought experiment: Coombes has a very beautiful face and is so thin that the androgynous look was their style. What would the agency have done if Coombes had doubled her size? Had deliberately put on weight over, say, a year, told her agency, but refused to change this course of action after discussions with her agency?

Because that’s a near equivalent. I doubt they’d be trying to sue their agent because they’d put on a load of weight.