The controversial social platform is known for posting racy photos of teenage girls.
To some, having their photos posted on local social media platform SgInstaBabes seems like a shortcut to becoming an influencer.
However, SgInstaBabes’ recent push for a Patreon page has drawn claims that they are objectifying women.
What’s going on?
SgInstaBabes is a media publisher whose main content consists of pictures of Singaporean girls, from as young as 15 years old. They are also known for posting photos of scantily-clad girls on their site.
On Aug 23, SgInstaBabes launched a Patreon campaign, where supporters can subscribe to several tiers, ranging from S$4 ($3 USD) to S$5,000 ($3,750 USD), in exchange for perks like exclusive access to their photoshoots and invites to yacht parties with the young girls.
Their Patreon campaign was met with instant criticism online, forcing SgInstaBabes to take damage control measures and shut down their Instagram page.
The founder of SgInstaBabes, 28-year-old Lai Wee Kiat, responded to criticism on his now-defunct Instagram page. He said that the platform was meant to celebrate women, and that they “aren’t trying to objectify women”.
However, most youths felt that the page was taking advantage of naïve girls.
Local social media influencer Dee Kosh spoke about the issue on his Instagram: “Do the parents know? Do they know that these girls are online with racy photos?”
School of The Arts graduate Annabel Gray was disgusted when she read about the controversy.
Annabel, 19, said: “They have nothing to gain monetarily as some have volunteered to work for him. I hope that these girls will be able to find a way out of this group.”
I see that majority of Singaporeans are flaming the girls on “SGInstababes” calling them sluts or criticizing their English when they should be defending these youngins from their pimp employer. Get your priorities right, Singapore.— Sumalatha Navan (@Sumahateslatha) August 28, 2018
Some were disappointed with the way the public derided the girls.
why is sginstababes still a thing? it’s a 27 year old man hanging out with 16 year olds and objectifying them under the guise of body positivity and empowerment
— Darth ✨GoodVibes✨ (@Aaronnntan) August 28, 2018
Some youths felt uncomfortable with the wide age gap between the founder and his models.
Student Miguel Tan, 19, noted that the whole situation was very inappropriate.
Miguel said: “The founder uses young girls for bikini shoots by paying them.”
While many felt that the page was taking advantage of these girls, others felt that they had autonomy in their decisions and should be allowed to make a choice.
Miles Davis argued that as long as SgInstaBabes did not break the law, it was fine.
The 24-year-old undergraduate said: “If they are okay with it, they want the fame and be seen on Instagram then it’s okay – that’s why it’s trending.
“It’s their liberty if they want to do but if someone is offended, then someone is going down for it because we live in a very conservative country.”
Student Li Anne also questioned the “vulnerability” of the girls.
The 21-year-old said: “They’re taking advantage of the platform and their “sex appeal” to become famous as much as that disgusting founder is taking advantage of their need for fame.”
RIP sginstababes and their patreon
— Yukira (@mikoyukirax) August 28, 2018
What’s your take?
1. Do you think it is okay for SgInstaBabes to monetise content featuring young girls? Why?
Film Review: Ah Girls Go Army Again is an absolute fever dream
Five things to do this weekend (Jun 24-26)
HDB flat owners can continue to adopt larger mixed-breed and K9 sniffer dogs under AVS’ Project ADORE scheme
Parade and Ceremony, Total Defence Display: What to expect at NDP 2022
This 28-year-old founded Singapore’s arm wrestling scene
Fun things to do at a sleepover with your friends
10 Korean fashion online websites that will leave you spoilt for choices
NDP 2022 launches #DoingGood campaign website, over 100 opportunities available
K-pop boy group Seventeen to perform in Singapore on Oct 13
New Codes of Practice proposed by Government to enhance online safety, protect users from harmful content