Am I a hypocrite?

You're not a hypocrite, bc it wasn't you're decision. In this case it was or publisher on their style and what they want to publish... If it was a paid shoot I'd say I mean they paid so it's their choice but it's a little different since it was trade.. I think maybe if it's a trade shoot like this next time I'd try and put a clause in to have them left in since as trade your ideas and brand should be represented well. End of the day you're not a hypocrite you are just and artist and business person who wants to be represented consistent with the brand for yourself that you've established, and in this case it wasn't done 100%. I'd accept the collab since it was trade and maybe after a week or so remove the collab, or by that point it's buried under other posts anyways.

not hypocritical but not from them either. They do the needful for selling the mag and you do what is true to you. both can be true, anyone who cares enough can find it.

The hypocrite is not you, but the magazine. If the interview questions do not edit out your candidness about the tiger stripes, that should have been a cue for the magazine editor to leave the stripes on your photos as they are. If you choose to promote the cover on your socials, the magazine would have to be called out that the editing was done in post production without your input. I somehow doubt that the magazine would want that mark on their budding reputation. Nevertheless, I would a collaboration would be one where there is a mutual sense of safety, viz., one where you have accepted your own vulnerabilities and where the magazine editors accept you as you are. If the editors will not accept that and will only accept a partial version of you (and dare I say, an alternate version of you), they do not deserve you. That they have chosen to re-define you says more about them than you. Neverheless, the decision for future collaborative work is still there. It seems there is doubt in your voice on whether they would respect and honor you for you. If you are leaning towards, “No. Now isn’t the time. Perhaps later.”, I would say your fans will stand beside you.

You do have the opportunity to (perhaps diplomatically 😅) use this as an example of the subject you raise, and share an image you are proud of that is not edited while discussing the issue. You can acknowledge that this magazine edited against your preference without completely throwing them under the bus (acknowledging their style, etc).

You’re not a hypocrite, you didn’t do the editing, how would it be if you shared the cover but wrote the fact they edited them out or down load the image and add them in then post it

You're not a hypocrite, honest and naturale. You are you. Maybe post the originale also on Instagram.

It's nothing you did wrong, but maybe next time you put in the contract that certain alterations can not be made to your photos. Spell it out in legally binding form.

I think art photography is a collaborative thing and it's unfortunate that your wishes were ignored. However, I wouldn't consider you a hypocrite. You have your role in the process and so do the photographer, editors, et al. I think anyone who is interested enough to view your body of work will see your stripes on full display, and anyone who isn't all that interested wasn't going to pay much attention to the interview questions anyway. Also, are the photos for the spread all retouched, or just the cover?

That's a tough one... the crux of the problem is that "Playboy" style idealizes bodies making them "perfect" to the detriment of many a little girl's perception von herself growing up. That style doesn't look for "meaning" in the way you mean. I can see how it's quite disappointing because it's a real missed opportunity, made explicitly so because the interview hits upon that exact topic. What to do? It's a tough one since it's already in print I assume. If it's not in print and only digital versions exist I'd express that to them and not feel guilty or like a hypocrite not fulfilling a perceived obligation to collaborate and promote it. The photographer (speaking for one now) in my view owes a good degree of editing autonomy to the model. I don't think they are meaning to be disrespectful but that's what it is. I was going to say that the TF doesn't really matter but it does a bit... it increases the "collaborative" nature of the whole venture and therefore your feelings of how you want to be portrayed are even more valid. And finally they made a decision to use you on their cover in part because you have a name and exposure and that partnership increases their own exposure. It's the normal using of each other for overall gain. You wanted the exposure too, and like the individuals involved and wanted to support, but they too should support your wishes. That's my two cents. I've always wanted to work with you and now even more so. The editing process is really important and the communication in that process is vital. I personally, as a male photographer photographing mostly women, lean more into the collaborative nature of the interaction because I find it to be more valid to be truer to the wishes of the models and how they want to be portrayed. I think it gives the images more meaning to use that word again. Thanks for posting this and for the conversation because these are important things.

I don't believe that you are being a hypocrite, as you have taken ownership of your body, though I would suggest that you take this issue to the publisher or interviewer and ask for their input.

You're not a hypocrite as it's the publisher's decision for how the final image looks, not you. Since you aren't responsible, you're not a hypocrite. I'd go ahead and collaborate since it's obviously too late to change it.

howdy ma'am...perplexing situation...my opinion is strictly my opinion and hold no legal bearing anywhere...first of all, I admire you decisions...I personally would not have noticed or cared about your tiger stripes unless you asked my opinion...you have a beautiful face and that's what I look at..that and personality...now, if I understand, they are wanting you to post the results on your site as well..is there any reason you cannot add a caveat to the post indicating the the wash was not done at your request...you should not feel hypocritical as it was not your request or you intent for the washout...sadly it was probably done with the intent of selling more media thereby making more profits....the greed of man knows no boundaries...and I don't want to sound like an *ss but that's how it's gonna sound...if you had any written agreements with them, you should look and see if there are procedures you authorize by signing, i.e. photoshopping, etc...if there are none, you have the ability to request they redo the pictures..but they would have the option of cancelling the whole set and label you as "difficult" to any future projects...if all of the agreements were verbal, you will pretty much have to suck it up unless you have more witnesses than them as to what was agreed upon...and the photographer seems to be on their side, probably due to a paycheck, and he knew what you wanted and is embarrassed for going along with them which is why he's not in any hurry to respond...I'd call it a learning experience and drive on..and you can always post more photos than them saying this is the real me...anyways, my two cents and best wishes for the future..

I personally don't think you're a hypocrite, but if you share the magazine cover on your socials it could give the impression of being one. I don't like the idea of you having to be silent to keep the peace. Can you ask the photographer for an edit that does not have your tiger stripes removed? You could then be a collaborator on the post and follow it up with the tiger stripes version explaining that you had a different artistic vision and wanted to make sure it is also seen.