Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

In the newest issue of Vogue, 6 year old girls are dressed up as adults and the sexual subtext is pretty obvious. It's a trend that has been ongoing for some time, from beauty pageants to children designer clothes.

 

I think it's disturbing, but Vogue might just want to start a debate (and sell some magazines)..

 

Cadeaux means gift/present

 

vogue-kids-6.jpg

 

vogue-paris-kids.jpg

 

vogue-paris-kids-5.jpg

Fortune favors the bald.

Posted

Doesn't even look 6 in the first photo, just shows you what makeup can do.

 

In the Korean context it's a topic I've been following for quite some time - ironically, as a more conservative neo-Confucian Asian society, it's much easier to tell what's happening rather than this wall of blase you sometimes get in the West (see: Gorgon ;)). Last year or so there was a furore at a 14 year old shooting an advertisement topless with a male model. Actually, this isn't so prudish - this year New Zealand had a mild fit over a ~16 year old filming nude as part of the "Next Top Model" TV programme.

 

The media will be media, of course, but I've also seen some frankly disturbing reflections of that in ordinary people. Last time in Korea I ran across a family at a random building, where they were shooting their ~3 year old girl for something or other. The kid actually knew enough to, without direction, make various "sexy girl" poses like leaning against the wall and pushing out her bottom, and the parents loved it - they literally couldn't contain their excitement at how 'precocious' their little girl was and how pretty she looked, and gave her pointers on how to do it better. You might still have parents that baulk at their girls demanding frilly bras at the age of 9, but they're in a losing battle.

 

To be honest, one of the overall impacts of all this sexualisation and beautification for me has been that I place a lot LESS importance on how women look, now. For one, I know that so many beautiful women you see on TV or wherever are at least partially the result of photoshop, lighting and other computer fudgery, and/or the product of extremely time consuming and expensive makeup, clothing, accessories, etc. It just starts to feel so far removed from reality that it's kind of pointless - why ogle at a model if she only looks that way because they airbrushed her skin, cut away her stomach fat, trimmed down her arm muscles, erased half of her lower jaw and even trimmed her hair on photoshop?

 

(All of this applies to men, just not as much... yet. :p)

Posted

I suppose it was inevitable that some advertising/marketing asshat would try and push this boundary to shock. ;)

"It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"."

             -Elwood Blues

 

tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.

Posted

The one thats always made me slightly shocked is walking through the village when school finishes, and all the girls who have "designer" bags or jackets with the playboy bunny on.

 

I know there's expanding your market.. but turning it into designer labels for kids clothes and such seems a bit of a strange thing.

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Posted

This thread now has:

456474931_0356ba4a8d.jpg

I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Posted

Seriously now:

 

Quite frankly I think they should revise the legislation that allows these pageants and photoshots, seems like they are tiptoing on the edge of "artistic representations" and exploitation.

Moreover I don't see this appealing to anyone other than pedophiles, specially since most models are marketed as desirable representations of beauty. I can't fault the kids since they are just imitating and have no concept of what they are doing, but the adults behind it should be put on trial.

I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Posted

This reminds me: I was thinking that what we need is a new regime of justice.

 

Basically there are some things which are debateably criminal, but which should be discouraged, and it occurred to em that a neat solution would be to make an offender liable to assault by the public, short of serious bodily harm.

 

For example, if a person were carrying out teh above shoot, or was Piers Morgan, then officials would paintgun the bastard and let nature take its course for the duration of the colour of shown (by day). Rotten fruit, open handed slaps, or ramming with a wheelchair would all be acceptable, as would verbal abuse.

"It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"."

             -Elwood Blues

 

tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.

Posted
This reminds me: I was thinking that what we need is a new regime of justice.

 

Basically there are some things which are debateably criminal, but which should be discouraged, and it occurred to em that a neat solution would be to make an offender liable to assault by the public, short of serious bodily harm.

 

For example, if a person were carrying out teh above shoot, or was Piers Morgan, then officials would paintgun the bastard and let nature take its course for the duration of the colour of shown (by day). Rotten fruit, open handed slaps, or ramming with a wheelchair would all be acceptable, as would verbal abuse.

I think that a concise interpretation of the law; explicitly forbidding these acts under serious penalties, would work best. Assault by the public could result in cases where the accused is innocent, or be overly cruel with their punishment since there is no limits to it.

 

In case that you were being sarcastic please disregard this comment.

I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Posted
In case that you were being sarcastic please disregard this comment.

 

I believe the mention of Piers Morgan marks this as more wishful thinking then sarcasm... :blink:

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Posted
In case that you were being sarcastic please disregard this comment.

 

I believe the mention of Piers Morgan marks this as more wishful thinking then sarcasm... :blink:

I don't know British celebrities :mellow:

I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Posted
I don't know British celebrities :blink:

 

More of an annoying, smug, self-satisfied personality. Ran a couple of tabloid newspapers. Muckracker. Took the place of Simon Cowell as the "scathing english-guy" on a couple of those talent shows in the States.

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Posted

Piers Morgan should be the 'proof of concept' for my system.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3716151.stm

 

Lazy **** who grossly harmed the Forces while at war. So personally I think freeform abuse ought to be mandated. As I say, along with parents who soft-pimp out their kids.

"It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"."

             -Elwood Blues

 

tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.

Posted
Yeah, he's the "mean" judge on America's Got Talent.

I don't know American celebrities :p

I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Posted

This is just plain wrong

"While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before"

Thomas Sowell

Posted
I don

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein
 

Posted
I don
I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Posted

I don't find anything overtly sexual/provocative about those pictures either.

 

However I do find it a little disturbing how the media (and pageants and some parents) keep trying make children look grown up. It's one thing, to me, to put on a little blush & lip gloss, do their hair all nice and put them in a fluffy dress for church or a portrait, and another to go to this sort of level. They're children. Let them be children. I don't understand it. Well, I do understand (marketing, sales, blah blah) but I still find it a little creepy when they're only six?

 

...ah well, I was raised where you couldn't wear makeup at all until you were at least 12, so y'know, I'm just behind the times I guess.

“Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts
Posted
I don't find anything overtly sexual/provocative about those pictures either.

 

However I do find it a little disturbing how the media (and pageants and some parents) keep trying make children look grown up. It's one thing, to me, to put on a little blush & lip gloss, do their hair all nice and put them in a fluffy dress for church or a portrait, and another to go to this sort of level. They're children. Let them be children. I don't understand it. Well, I do understand (marketing, sales, blah blah) but I still find it a little creepy when they're only six?

 

...ah well, I was raised where you couldn't wear makeup at all until you were at least 12, so y'know, I'm just behind the times I guess.

My problem is that the overly sexual fashion from adult it's being marketed towards pubescent children. Normally I wouldn't have a problem with this if our sexual views on maturity went on to admit that biologically sex life starts at an 14-15 average years of age. It's just something that seems weird to me, maybe because I was raised in another culture.

Anything below that age I consider deeply depraved, and I hate those pageants you mention. I think that they should be categorized as child labor and banned.

I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Posted

You think it's not a widespread development?

 

500x_640_toddlers_bustier_1711.jpg

A toddler as part of a pageant.

 

abercrombie-thong-for-10.jpg

Thongs for 10 year olds, decorations say "wink wink" and "eye candy".

 

pic-500x356.jpg

Needs no explanation.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...