Guess how old this girl is

[Tigger]

I find it alarming that some people can't see the difference between these:



Kids playing dress up: princesses, fairies.
Girls being dressed up by Vogue: sexually available material.

Oh look:

[charlou]

The difference is kinda the point, Tig.

[Animavore]

Where were all the more sensible people while I was being attacked?

[Tigger]

Where were all the more sensible people while I was being attacked?

They were hiding in plain sight.

[charlou]

Where were all the more sensible people while I was being attacked?

You shouldn't have been, disagreement or not.

[Warren Dew]

Where were all the more sensible people while I was being attacked?

In the "Serious Stuff" area, waiting for the thread to be moved, I think.

[Warren Dew]

I find it alarming that some people can't see the difference between these:

And this?

Honestly I don't see much difference, other than the second picture seems to have been taken in a more professional setting, and uses more gothy colors of makeup. I'm unconvinced that pedophiles would prefer the second.

[hadespussercats]

I find it alarming that some people can't see the difference between these:



Kids playing dress up: princesses, fairies.
Girls being dressed up by Vogue: sexually available material.

Oh look:

There is a clear difference in affect between the former and the latter photos.

My sense (and this is backed up somewhat by the article Bella [?] linked) is that the latter pictures are meant to be disturbing, or at the very least, arresting, in that they overtly embrace the fashion industry's fetishization of youth, and at the same time bring it into question by the absurdity of presenting a ten-year-old the way they did.

They are powerful, disturbing images, IMO. But that doesn't make them pornographic.

[Evabot]

Well..ok...I was a child model both runway and print and let me tell you, I would have never been allowed to even wear makeup that visible, much less be positioned like that. Some of the photos are beautiful and tasteful but there has to be an add campaign going with it like "stay young, feel young, blah blah"....It looks like they're using her as they would any ol' model and that makes me a bit

I mean, I ask myself. What's the point? We already know that the fashion industry highly values youth, the skinny, and now the under age? No...The EXTREMELY under age? I just don't think most of this shoot is age appropriate. It's not giving the message "stay young and innocent, enjoy your childhood"...To me, it screams "get on with it already, grow up, worry about your hair/makeup/jewely" and also "you're never too young to want to wear labels!"..consumerism at its finest.

I mean come on. There are plenty of 18 and over models they can use that look "young" but this is REALLLLLLLY fucking ridiculous.

[charlou]

Well..ok...I was a child model both runway and print and let me tell you, I would have never been allowed to even wear makeup that visible, much less be positioned like that. Some of the photos are beautiful and tasteful but there has to be an add campaign going with it like "stay young, feel young, blah blah"....It looks like they're using her as they would any ol' model and that makes me a bit

I mean, I ask myself. What's the point? We already know that the fashion industry highly values youth, the skinny, and now the under age? No...The EXTREMELY under age? I just don't think most of this shoot is age appropriate. It's not giving the message "stay young and innocent, enjoy your childhood"...To me, it screams "get on with it already, grow up, worry about your hair/makeup/jewely" and also "you're never too young to want to wear labels!"..consumerism at its finest.

I mean come on. There are plenty of 18 and over models they can use that look "young" but this is REALLLLLLLY fucking ridiculous.

That's part of the point, yes.

[charlou]

Highly recommend this film .. .

[Evabot]

I mean, there's the obvious "child exploitation" part of this argument. But knowing the fashion industry, I believe this is more about getting customers that are younger and younger. Kids in LA are already "label crazy" and this only kicks it up a notch to HIGH fashion. hip mommy and daddy's buying 20 lipsticks and 100 dollar rings? It's like "being self conscious at 16 isn't good enough, we want them questioning their self worth and needing our products at 10, bitches!!!!"

Not to mention, she looks miserable in every photo, even lying under a christmas tree? They aren't utilizing her age for anything but to look like a regular model. I just don't see the point in using someone that age at all if that's the case.

[klr]

I mean, there's the obvious "child exploitation" part of this argument. But knowing the fashion industry, I believe this is more about getting customers that are younger and younger. Kids in LA are already "label crazy" and this only kicks it up a notch to HIGH fashion. hip mommy and daddy's buying 20 lipsticks and 100 dollar rings? It's like "being self conscious at 16 isn't good enough, we want them questioning their self worth and needing our products at 10, bitches!!!!"

Not to mention, she looks miserable in every photo, even lying under a christmas tree? They aren't utilizing her age for anything but to look like a regular model. I just don't see the point in using someone that age at all if that's the case.

Bingo! This is exactly how I see it as well. The kids will want, their parents (who have the money) will find it harder and harder to resist.

[Seth]

Okay, I didn't read the whole thread, but I have two words:
Brooke Shields

[Evabot]

Okay, I didn't read the whole thread, but I have two words:
Brooke Shields

that movie is so bad it's good. The acting gets me every time.