A simple question. Would you let your 10 year old daughter pose like this for French Vogue? BTW, Tom Ford was the editor for this issue. He seems to think it is ok.
These pictures are a tad...mature, but they don't make me actively *angry.* It's sort of early Brooke Shields-y. She's a lovely child. What a gorgeous face. She reminds me of Daveigh Chase from Big Love.
I'm far more disturbed about the fucking TIGER PELT in that first shot. I'd say that I hope it's a fake, but this is Vogue, and Anna Wintour doesn't let anything cruelty-free appear on her pages. Cunt.
Anyway, I wouldn't let my underage daughter be in the modeling industry at all, period. No way. Nuh uh.
She's a beautiful little girl, and although I don't see these pictures as particularly suggestive, I do think they are rather mature for a 10 year old.
Would I let my daughter - no. Largely because I wouldn't want my daughter in that industry. However, I don't find these pictures particularly scandalous or suggestive. Overly mature, like Ida said, but I don't think they are even as scandalous as the Calvin Klein Brooke Shields ads.
She was all over the news yesterday for some shots of her topless on a bed with a boy, among other shots. People were divided - taken by themselves they look innocent enough, but they also heavily play on the fact that most ads are sexually suggestive.
being the mother of a 9 year old daughter (who has the looks to be a model), i say no. i agree these really aren't all that suggestive, but there are so many perverts who feed off this kind of stuff. my main job is to protect my children from those kinds of things, and allowing her to pose for something like this would be like throwing her under the bus.
She is a beautiful girl and she will have an appropriate time, place and age to stun all men that come her way. Until then she should be the little girl that she is.
Meanwhile why do we have to resort to younger and younger models. Didn't Helen Mirren just get some award for having a great body? Lets celebrate that instead! She rocks ;>
The photos aren't suggestive. But as many have pointed out, they're very mature for a child that probably still has baby teeth.
Such a pretty girl--but couldn't her parents wait until she was 16/17 to let her model? Then she would be old enough to have some say as to what's happening with her career.
Oh that's right, Jezebel had an article on this, apparently her ads are attracting a lot of controversy. http://jezebel.com/5827092/fashion-industry-salivates-over-creepy-photos-of-10+year+old-french-girl
I don't know if there are other pictures in the set that are more suggestive, but these ones aren't that bad. She's wearing entirely too much makeup for a little girl though. I understand they have to put a bit of powder on everyone, but a full face on a 10-year old is a little overkill...*L*
This was in French Vogue many moons ago, Anna Wintour has nothing to do with it. I refuse to read American Vogue because of Wintour.
Anyway, the pictures are definitely not something I would want my child to be known for publicly. I think the concept was children playing dress-up, the execution is too dark. Kids should be kids.
I think that Toddlers and Tiaras is more disturbing and sexualizing in my opinion.
if i had a daughter, and she was in the industry, these pics would't necessarily upset me. any sort of suggestive/naked shots, absolutely not. she'd be out of the business.
I think this little girl is beautiful. I don't particularly agree with the bottom picture with all the lipstick - seems too old. The first picture she looks like a natural beauty.
I would like every pageant for children banned too. In my country they would never ever even be considered, thanks god! I rather see this once in a while and have them labeled as child abuse.
These two pictures aren't that bad, but I would worry about what other pictures came out of this particular shoot. They do come across as mature, but the feel of these two pictures IMO is more dress-up than grown-up.
That said, if my daughter had the opportunity to do a fashion shoot for French Vogue, and she really wanted to do it, and I was able to supervise and make sure there wasn't anything inappropriate happening on set, I probably would allow it. I just wouldn't want her to make a career out of it at this age.
Ummm....am I the only one that sees sexuality in the top pic? She's reclining on a tiger skin rug, her back is arched in a way that pushes her rear end up, red fingernails, red dress with shoulder exposed, pouty lips, arched eyebrows, upswept hair. This is not the typical pose of a 10 year old. I could say she was just playing around if it weren't for that look on her face. If she were smiling, maybe....
To me, the top pic is over the line. It could be interpreted in a sexual way and when you are talking about a 10 year old, that's not acceptable.
Anyone OK with their daughter doing this just wants a meal ticket. The other images were extremely suggestive and creepy. One them, she's topless on the beach with just her hair and some shell necklaces covering her... girl's not even old enough to have anything to cover up!
It's creepy as hell and they've just given some pedophiles some great fapping material. Ick.
no. children are beautiful as they are. makeup and all that seems...to dirty it (to me). and i don't want my girls thinking that they aren't "pretty enough" and they need makeup, hair fussing, etc.
I feel really sad that mothers enter children into beauty pageants at the age of two and spray tan them, make them up to resemble mini Delta Burkes and teach them how to dance like they are teenagers at summer camp. I feel even sadder that a parent allowed a photographer to tart up her 10 year old and become the epitome of what is next in fashion magazines, and have other 10 year olds lining up to do the same. Children are only children for a very short time. Let them be kids and save the pageants and the fashion modeling until they are at least 16.
Brooke Shields was 14 or so when she did "Pretty Baby". This KID is 10. Years. Old. 10 year olds should be climbing trees, not being made up to look like 40 year olds.
No way. @Voice o' Reason "Meanwhile why do we have to resort to younger and younger models." Exactly. This is a magazine for adults. Sexualization and exploitation of children makes me sick.
What could this possibly be SELLING? That's the motivation for advertising, except when the company is just going for sensationalism for the sake of the free publicity it garners.
I think it's awful. It's exploitative and absolutely sexual. There were more pictures. One has her in a top open to the waist.
Reminds me of a few photo spreads that I recall from around 1977 to maybe 1979? Brooke Shields was in them .. there was another girl named Lisa something .. she was prettier than Brooke, imho. But .. I guess it was kinda salacious then .. and I guess it kinda is now, as well.
I will say it is ironic given the timing of that worldwide child porn bust a few days ago. Perhaps Tom might wanna keep that in mind the next time he has a spiffy idea like this.
Not any worse than the pageant queens. Maybe better - this is just a shoot and not a life (I hope). I have a ten year old beautiful daughter (not just my opinion) and it is hard keeping her away from these 'things'. Done it so far, but ????? I get more calls...and try to not let her know.
ITA with people who say that T&T is way worse. I have no idea what I would do with my own child, but this doesn't seem half as bad as some of the things that happen on that show. The pictures are beautiful, and I think they are fitting with that theme. I havent seen any of the other pictures though.
No I wouldn't. Honestly, this disturbs me and saddens me more than angers me. It's almost like dangling your kid in front of the pedophiles and all the porcine men out there. Let's not sexualize prepubescents. She's a beautiful girl without being slathered in makeup, jewels, having her shirt pulled off the shoulder, posing on a tiger skin like a sacrificial lamb. WTF? I think of what happened to Jon Benet Ramsey when I see this kind of thing.
It's bad enough we objectify and sexualize adolescents in our culture. Women are still struggling with this crap.
The pictures are clearly meant for pedophiles. My daughter would be an intelligent feminist and would herself never commit to such an audacity as these disgusting photos suggest. They are clearly intended for the "male gaze" and are giving license to child rape. Boo on French Vogue.
Pretty fucked up how it's okay to sexualize young girls (HELLO child molesters!!). If young boys got pimped out like this, it would be AN OUTRAGE and a PERVERSION!
why are people suddenly talking about this? this magazine came out last DECEMBER.
PS this is VOGUE PARIS. anna wintour had nothing to do with it. sheesh..... what people pretend to know for the purpose of forming absolutely useless opinions.....
er.. nobody mentioned Anna Wintour in relation to this. In fact, the original post as well as comments say that it was the French Vogue and that Tom Ford was the editor.
NEVER.
ReplyDeleteNO.....but she is a beautiful child.
ReplyDeleteThese pictures are a tad...mature, but they don't make me actively *angry.* It's sort of early Brooke Shields-y. She's a lovely child. What a gorgeous face. She reminds me of Daveigh Chase from Big Love.
ReplyDeleteI'm far more disturbed about the fucking TIGER PELT in that first shot. I'd say that I hope it's a fake, but this is Vogue, and Anna Wintour doesn't let anything cruelty-free appear on her pages. Cunt.
Anyway, I wouldn't let my underage daughter be in the modeling industry at all, period. No way. Nuh uh.
She's a beautiful little girl, and although I don't see these pictures as particularly suggestive, I do think they are rather mature for a 10 year old.
ReplyDeleteOnly if there was no such thing as pedifiles. So, no.
ReplyDeleteWould I let my daughter - no. Largely because I wouldn't want my daughter in that industry. However, I don't find these pictures particularly scandalous or suggestive. Overly mature, like Ida said, but I don't think they are even as scandalous as the Calvin Klein Brooke Shields ads.
ReplyDeleteShe was all over the news yesterday for some shots of her topless on a bed with a boy, among other shots. People were divided - taken by themselves they look innocent enough, but they also heavily play on the fact that most ads are sexually suggestive.
ReplyDeleteNo. Never. I just keep thinking about what the photographer told her to do to get that look in the first pic. To her, what does this look say?
ReplyDelete10 years old is 4th grade.... that is way too young to model. The world that she is being exposed to...scary.
being the mother of a 9 year old daughter (who has the looks to be a model), i say no. i agree these really aren't all that suggestive, but there are so many perverts who feed off this kind of stuff. my main job is to protect my children from those kinds of things, and allowing her to pose for something like this would be like throwing her under the bus.
ReplyDeleteShe is a beautiful girl and she will have an appropriate time, place and age to stun all men that come her way. Until then she should be the little girl that she is.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile why do we have to resort to younger and younger models. Didn't Helen Mirren just get some award for having a great body? Lets celebrate that instead! She rocks ;>
The photos aren't suggestive. But as many have pointed out, they're very mature for a child that probably still has baby teeth.
ReplyDeleteSuch a pretty girl--but couldn't her parents wait until she was 16/17 to let her model? Then she would be old enough to have some say as to what's happening with her career.
The way mothers allow their children to look and pose on Toddlers and Tiaras enrages me way more than this.
ReplyDeletehell no.
ReplyDeleteOh that's right, Jezebel had an article on this, apparently her ads are attracting a lot of controversy.
ReplyDeletehttp://jezebel.com/5827092/fashion-industry-salivates-over-creepy-photos-of-10+year+old-french-girl
I don't know if there are other pictures in the set that are more suggestive, but these ones aren't that bad. She's wearing entirely too much makeup for a little girl though. I understand they have to put a bit of powder on everyone, but a full face on a 10-year old is a little overkill...*L*
ReplyDeleteThis was in French Vogue many moons ago, Anna Wintour has nothing to do with it. I refuse to read American Vogue because of Wintour.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, the pictures are definitely not something I would want my child to be known for publicly. I think the concept was children playing dress-up, the execution is too dark. Kids should be kids.
I think that Toddlers and Tiaras is more disturbing and sexualizing in my opinion.
if i had a daughter, and she was in the industry, these pics would't necessarily upset me. any sort of suggestive/naked shots, absolutely not. she'd be out of the business.
ReplyDeleteI think these are way too mature. Let's sex-up the 10 yr old!!
ReplyDeleteOf course Tom Ford doesn't see a problem, he's a perv.
I think this little girl is beautiful. I don't particularly agree with the bottom picture with all the lipstick - seems too old. The first picture she looks like a natural beauty.
ReplyDeleteI would like every pageant for children banned too. In my country they would never ever even be considered, thanks god! I rather see this once in a while and have them labeled as child abuse.
ReplyDeleteI'm with Ida, reminds me of Brooke Shields years ago. It's not that bad, IMO.
ReplyDeleteThese two pictures aren't that bad, but I would worry about what other pictures came out of this particular shoot. They do come across as mature, but the feel of these two pictures IMO is more dress-up than grown-up.
ReplyDeleteThat said, if my daughter had the opportunity to do a fashion shoot for French Vogue, and she really wanted to do it, and I was able to supervise and make sure there wasn't anything inappropriate happening on set, I probably would allow it. I just wouldn't want her to make a career out of it at this age.
Er, no. It doesn't come off as a little girl playing dress up at all. 14/15 or older, yeah. 10 year old? No way.
ReplyDeleteUmmm....am I the only one that sees sexuality in the top pic? She's reclining on a tiger skin rug, her back is arched in a way that pushes her rear end up, red fingernails, red dress with shoulder exposed, pouty lips, arched eyebrows, upswept hair. This is not the typical pose of a 10 year old. I could say she was just playing around if it weren't for that look on her face. If she were smiling, maybe....
ReplyDeleteTo me, the top pic is over the line. It could be interpreted in a sexual way and when you are talking about a 10 year old, that's not acceptable.
Anyone OK with their daughter doing this just wants a meal ticket. The other images were extremely suggestive and creepy. One them, she's topless on the beach with just her hair and some shell necklaces covering her... girl's not even old enough to have anything to cover up!
ReplyDeleteIt's creepy as hell and they've just given some pedophiles some great fapping material. Ick.
WHY?? Why pose a child in an adult fashion? That child has more make-up on then I wear in a week.(I am not allowed to wear it to work.)
ReplyDeleteIt has a high creep factor. I haven't even seen the other pics but it reminded me of Brooke and Pretty Baby.
no. children are beautiful as they are. makeup and all that seems...to dirty it (to me). and i don't want my girls thinking that they aren't "pretty enough" and they need makeup, hair fussing, etc.
ReplyDeleteI feel really sad that mothers enter children into beauty pageants at the age of two and spray tan them, make them up to resemble mini Delta Burkes and teach them how to dance like they are teenagers at summer camp. I feel even sadder that a parent allowed a photographer to tart up her 10 year old and become the epitome of what is next in fashion magazines, and have other 10 year olds lining up to do the same. Children are only children for a very short time. Let them be kids and save the pageants and the fashion modeling until they are at least 16.
ReplyDeleteBrooke Shields was 14 or so when she did "Pretty Baby". This KID is 10. Years. Old. 10 year olds should be climbing trees, not being made up to look like 40 year olds.
ReplyDeleteNo way. @Voice o' Reason "Meanwhile why do we have to resort to younger and younger models." Exactly. This is a magazine for adults. Sexualization and exploitation of children makes me sick.
ReplyDelete@rocketqueen. Maybe if Father's attempted to parent their children as well we wouldn't be having this discussion.
ReplyDeleteWhat could this possibly be SELLING? That's the motivation for advertising, except when the company is just going for sensationalism for the sake of the free publicity it garners.
ReplyDeleteI think it's awful. It's exploitative and absolutely sexual. There were more pictures. One has her in a top open to the waist.
Reminds me of a few photo spreads that I recall from around 1977 to maybe 1979? Brooke Shields was in them .. there was another girl named Lisa something .. she was prettier than Brooke, imho. But .. I guess it was kinda salacious then .. and I guess it kinda is now, as well.
ReplyDeleteI will say it is ironic given the timing of that worldwide child porn bust a few days ago. Perhaps Tom might wanna keep that in mind the next time he has a spiffy idea like this.
Not any worse than the pageant queens. Maybe better - this is just a shoot and not a life (I hope). I have a ten year old beautiful daughter (not just my opinion) and it is hard keeping her away from these 'things'. Done it so far, but ????? I get more calls...and try to not let her know.
ReplyDeleteITA with people who say that T&T is way worse. I have no idea what I would do with my own child, but this doesn't seem half as bad as some of the things that happen on that show. The pictures are beautiful, and I think they are fitting with that theme. I havent seen any of the other pictures though.
ReplyDeleteHell to the NO.
ReplyDeleteNo I wouldn't. Honestly, this disturbs me and saddens me more than angers me. It's almost like dangling your kid in front of the pedophiles and all the porcine men out there. Let's not sexualize prepubescents. She's a beautiful girl without being slathered in makeup, jewels, having her shirt pulled off the shoulder, posing on a tiger skin like a sacrificial lamb. WTF? I think of what happened to Jon Benet Ramsey when I see this kind of thing.
ReplyDeleteIt's bad enough we objectify and sexualize adolescents in our culture. Women are still struggling with this crap.
No. She is a beautiful little girl. But no, never.
ReplyDeleteHow many creeps are having wet little pedophile dreams over this little girl.
Shame on everyone involved for going the pageant make-up routine in a high end glamour magazine. Especially for doing it on a child so young.
The pictures are clearly meant for pedophiles. My daughter would be an intelligent feminist and would herself never commit to such an audacity as these disgusting photos suggest. They are clearly intended for the "male gaze" and are giving license to child rape. Boo on French Vogue.
ReplyDeleteHELL NO!
ReplyDeletePretty fucked up how it's okay to sexualize young girls (HELLO child molesters!!). If young boys got pimped out like this, it would be AN OUTRAGE and a PERVERSION!
ReplyDeleteWarren Jeffs must be loving this! Nobody said prostitot yet?!?!?!?!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletewhy are people suddenly talking about this? this magazine came out last DECEMBER.
ReplyDeletePS this is VOGUE PARIS. anna wintour had nothing to do with it. sheesh..... what people pretend to know for the purpose of forming absolutely useless opinions.....
er.. nobody mentioned Anna Wintour in relation to this. In fact, the original post as well as comments say that it was the French Vogue and that Tom Ford was the editor.
ReplyDeleteNo but agree that T&T is worse.
ReplyDelete