In August 2018, the founder of SgInstaBabes, a social media collective known for featuring young women in revealing outfits, drew national outrage after launching a membership programme that charged up to S$5,000 a month for access to teenage girls. Lai Wee Kiat, a former bodybuilder, launched the programme on the crowdfunding platform Patreon, promising paying subscribers photos of the girls in his collective in bikinis and other revealing outfits, as well as invitations to join them at private yacht parties.
The initiative was immediately likened by critics to a social escort service, and many questioned whether it would put the young women involved at risk of sexual exploitation. The backlash intensified when veteran blogger Xiaxue, one of his most vocal critics, posted screenshots on her Instagram Stories alleging that Lai had exchanged inappropriate messages with a 15-year-old girl. In the screenshots, a man could be seen cajoling the teenager to send him bikini photos, describing her as crazy hot, and trying to ask her out on a date. The girl later came forward herself, sharing further screenshots in which he asked what she was willing to do with her photos and online presence, including whether she would chat with random men or accept an overnight stay with one.
Lai denied any sleaziness, insisting in media interviews that there was nothing beyond partying and fun, and that events under the membership programme would be held in groups. But the damage was done. SgInstaBabes' Instagram and Patreon pages were taken down amid the furore, and Lai announced that if the page were ever revived, he would no longer be in charge, stepping back from social media while a possible revamp was discussed. The collective later said any revival would involve stricter and higher age limits, with 16 as the minimum age for shoots and 18 for parties.
The episode became one of Singapore's most heated influencer controversies, exposing the dark side of an industry built on the commodification of young women's images. It also demonstrated the power of collective online outrage: within days, a business model that its founder had defended as harmless fun had been dismantled by public pressure, advertiser flight and platform enforcement.
Before the controversy, SgInstaBabes had presented itself as a legitimate influencer collective with real commercial traction. The community, which had amassed more than 100,000 followers, promoted events such as Ultra Music Singapore and Eden Music Festival, and had worked with brands including Okamoto Global and the bar and club Get Juiced. DBS had previously engaged the collective through an event agency partner for an on-site activation, while bike-sharing firm oBike had used its influencers for a one-off digital marketing campaign. That mainstream commercial footprint made the Patreon scheme all the more jarring to observers: a platform that had been courting family-friendly sponsors was simultaneously offering paying strangers intimate access to teenage girls. After the backlash, the collective said its family-friendly content on food, trends and influencers would migrate to a new page called Join the Circle SG, described as safe for all ages, while the SgInstaBabes name would be reserved for adult-oriented content, a split that did little to repair the brand's reputation.