They’re gorgeous girls by any stretch. So what’s the problem?
They’re girls. 10-year old girls to be exact, and French Vogue’s styling of the little lovelies has caused considerable consternation.
It’s nothing new for French fashion to push for edgy editorial. It’s nothing new to use girls to model the latest looks and silky skin; 14-year olds seem problematic enough.
Remember the controversy over Pretty Baby Brooke Shields at the age of 14 in a sexually suggestive campaign for Calvin Klein jeans?
Move over Brooke. Here comes Thylane.
Mademoiselle Thylane Blondeau is indeed a simmering sensation in a recent spread that has people talking on both sides of the Atlantic. An unsettling spread at that. And Thylane is a beauty, without question. But she is also 10 years old, propped in provocative poses that some claim are nothing more than little girls playing dress-up. Others, and I would include myself in this group, find this imagery to be inappropriate and disturbing.
Girls, Sexuality; Women, Sexuality
These are not women. These are not even teenagers. Thylane and the other models are little girls.
Jezebel thinks the kiddie spread is no big deal. Be sure to note that the first image in their sequence of illustrations is one of the most innocuous. Some even compare the use of these children to the very American practice of parading young girls through the beauty pageant circuit.
Browse the web and you’ll find a variety of opinions, including Blondeau’s mother defending the pictures, and ABC News coverage which takes a very different view.
Personally, I don’t like the idea of dressing tots or 10-year olds as tiny women, and pushing our precocious princesses down the catwalk – for a trophy or parental bragging rights. And I certainly don’t like knowing that prepubescent girls are being staged in sultry scenes, as if this is entirely acceptable.
Fashion? Art?
For those who call this art, I would reply that these aren’t photographs on a gallery wall with any sort of social agenda, for example, an examination of millennial mores and sexual confusion. Instead, it’s an invitation to more sexual confusion. As for falling back on the right of fashion photography to push the envelope?
Non, non, et non. That’s too facile, too far, and a knee-jerk response to crossing a line I believe we should uphold.
Don’t we make it difficult enough on our young girls – as they absorb the insidious lesson that sexually appealing appearance = value?
Since when do we want to encourage teenage boys or men to gaze at 10-year olds and view them as sexually accessible?
Since when would adult women want to buy any of these fashions or products – draped on a child’s body?
Even the French media seem to be concerned with this maddening move, as some articles call the spread “scandalous.”
Our Culture of Sexuality
I certainly wouldn’t qualify as prudish, by any standard. I’m a proponent of consenting adults being allowed to enjoy their sexuality as they please, in the privacy of their homes, as long as they do no harm. And key here are two elements – adults, and do no harm.
While I realize this publication appeared on French newstands, isn’t this a display of our increasingly global sexual schizophrenia? And the trickle-down effects into contemporary culture? Aren’t our teenage girls and young women confused enough about sexual expectations and relationship dynamics, not to mention body image?
What about our boys and men, and the impact on sexual availability and a sense of entitlement?
While a few of the images may indeed echo little girls emulating their mothers, those that offer up smoldering looks and lounging on beds tell another tale.
I believe that most thinking men and women would be appalled at these shots of their daughters, their little sisters, their neighbor’s children. And parents? Aren’t we outraged at the adults who stage these scenes and shrug it off?
French Vogue?
Bad call.
Images courtesy Jezebel.com, ABCnews.go.com, Melty.fr
© D A Wolf
Very disturbing. My almost 4 year-old is already asking me the meaning of the word “sexy”. Ugh. Thanks for posting. Love your blog.
Scary.
Thanks for commenting, Sherry. Ugh indeed. And how on earth do you explain what “sexy” is to a four-year old girl? The sexy message is everywhere, it seems.
(And thanks for reading!)
I’m hoping they get plenty of backlash, and not of the “all publicity is good publicity” sort.
Others, and I would include myself in this group, find this imagery to be inappropriate and disturbing.
Totally agree — more than bad call, it’s child pornography. But if you have the money or prestige or power (or likely all of the above), you can get away with most anything, even by calling it style instead of crime.
Oh I have so much to say on this topic! Ridiculous. Not just in the emotional well-being of those little models (a close second are the little beauty pageant girls). Even models in their thirties fight body issues which often lead to eating disorders, and these poor little girls are pre-pubescent. They have not even reached that point of body changes they cannot control.
Add to that the horror of thoughts that come to mind when sexual predators, who are ALREADY attracted to these small bodies have availability of such images.
I am outraged!
Would these ‘mothers’ also let their beauties pose with cigarettes, alcohol, sexual aids or other ‘adult oriented’ material as long as they were in Hello kitty pink? Or should she now be called miss kitty?
Maybe I am wrong. maybe I am the one with issues. I don’t know. I am thankful I don’t have daughters so I don’t have to personally grapple with these issues/theories/confusions. But the first thought that comes to mind? Lolita. And it only is made scarier to me because I have recently been made aware of a “life style” (sort of like furries is a life style…) where women (no matter how old) call themselves Lolitas and dress in little girl outfits…
By the way, I think a discussion needs to be had and therefore I tweeted this article.
Shame shame shame on her parents….truly the only ones to blame….
I’m glad you tweeted and agree that a discussion needs to be had – many discussions. In a world that offers the freedom of many lifestyles – and I’m certainly a believer in that – one thing I believe is absolute: protecting children.
As the mother of a ten-year-old girl, I find these pictures extremely disturbing. As you said, what mother would allow her child to be exploited this way? There are so many things wrong with our culture today….
Good heavens. That explains it. I’d been thinking some of the models were looking really young. My gosh. Ten?? For crying out loud.
Have a wonderful day ~ Alexandra
If you dig a little deeper, you see that the girl’s mother responded to the controversy by closing her FB account so she wouldn’t be bothered by others taking exception to the photographs. It’s like trying to close the barn door after the horse has escaped…
Nice to have you here, Alexandra. (Lovely blog you have!)
Shame on Vogue.
And another story this morning- 16yr old with beer and provocative pose on motorcycle. Photographer defends it. Father is suing.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/racy-urban-outfitters-cover-featuring-15-year-sparks-14354330
And yet another reason to hate the French! I have a 10-year-old and three words come to mind… NO EFFIN WAY!!! Do we really want to encourage young boys and even grown men (gasp!) to look at these little girls as sexual beings? These photos are disturbing!
Too soon. Too much. Too sad.
Ew. This is awful. Thanks for posting! I had no idea!!!
I’m floored — bad call, indeed. Sexuality is important to help young girls understand so that they are comfortable with their own bodies and the way others may perceive them. This isn’t the age for quite so advanced a lesson.