Quote:
Originally Posted by Nettio
The photos in this article Traci linked to bother me a lot more than the Vogue spread photos.
I can see how the Vogue shoot could be a play on dress-up with the overdone make-up and the clothing (too big shoes and such), but some of the other photos she's done seem rather inappropriate for her age. Is it really necessary to pose a ten-year old kneeling suggestively on a bed or in an "implied nude" photo? Is she even old enough to understand the connotation behind those photos?
This is what I find ridiculous about the fashion industry. They are so obsessed with youthfulness and thinness that somehow ten year old girls are seen as appropriate models for adult brands. Not only does it set this impossible standard for all women, but it sends a message to young girls that this is somehow appropriate behavior, clothing and make up for their age group, long before they understand what being sexy even means. It's sad really. |
I agree on this. The other ones are way more disturbing because they're the real thing - the Vogue ones are, after all, meant to be "ironic", but these ones are real ones...
But they do make the Vogue ones (which are IMHO also not OK) make look disturbing, because they criticise something that the kiddo normally does - which weakens the critical part. And let's say that even if Vogue aims at criticism, it is itself guilty of the very "crime" it tries to try attention to, so the criticism itself is dubious. Selling the mag by shocking people is by no means a new method of raising sales, so I kind of doubt the honesty behind it. But I don't deny it's effective.