Balenciaga apologises for bondage bear advert involving child

[PandorasMailbox]

They're also taking legal action against its creator

What I want to know is who the hell signed it off and why were the parents happy to let it go ahead?

I've included the images for anyone who hasn't seen them.

There’s something off about the photo of the little girl in Utah on her verandah. The choice of toys is really odd. If you look, you’ll see what I mean.

Oh my, the 'body language guy' on youtube was investigating these photos and is not impressed, he was showing some tweets by reduxx then suddenly paused and cut the stream -

Did the parents sign off on these pictures and photo shoots?

Never ceases to amaze how some parents will take their kids to anything: it's just a bit of fun!

Crikey

Candace Owens speaking on it here:

I'm not surprised by this, personally I find the outrage all a bit 1. Late 2. Selective.

It has been obvious for a long time now, that children have been exposed (and intentionally targeted) to incredibly sexualised performances, songs, videos, books and magazines for decades now by an array of high profile people of both sexes, many of them celebrities. Things that were once watershed are daytime, films once considered 18 are 12A. Soft porn music vids on YT. Singers with lots of young impressionable followers simulating sex on stage. All supposedly fine by most people and parents who are at best naive.

Such loosening of standards has helped create a culture where childhood is not sacrosanct from being pervaded by people with evil agendas, since the lines have been blurred. The mass grooming has been done very effectively, and it's now their time to capitalise on the groundwork.

It's a runaway train now. It's too late to realise the problem.

Just watched that clip and she’s sponsored by anti abortion clinics. As well as being very wooden and reading off and auto cue the whole time. Is there really no one else speaking out about this?

And the body language guy with amazing foresight predicts his broadcast will be cut in his opening statement. Talk about staging!

Just watched that clip and she’s sponsored by anti abortion clinics
**
Sigh. So?

She's a woman with a huge following drawing attention to this issue and getting ir out in the world. Or is outrage only valid if it comes through the right people on the left?

It is the 'progressive for progressivism sake' and 'Inclusive for inclusivism sake' attitude of the left that has got society where it is and women in the worst place they've arguable ever been. And still you support them. Blind willfully?

Well said @DysonSpheres Sick of the constant trotting out of conservative = bad and wrong, so I can't agree with them even when I agree with them. It's this type of childish polarising politics that have got us to the point we are at now.

Yes, totally agree @MoirasSaggyBundles it's group think at best.

I don’t know much about the court case but this is from another thread

The documents are a print out of the 2008 Supreme Court case, United States v Williams, which criminalised the publishing of child pornography.

I wonder if they were put there by a stylist who was revolted but couldn’t say anything, hence the suing claims.

It’s removed deniability if so and good for them

If it’s the other way around then that’s just stupidity and I hope criminal case is made, either way I hope it’s made

Really? Is that all you have?

No comment on whether she's making a very valid point here?

I don't understand this line of reasoning ...

So because someone calling out nasty insinuations of child abuse has some connection with someone else who's anti abortion, that means what?

The nasty insinuations of child abuse in the campaign are okay?

Misan Harriman, photographer and Chair of the South Bank Centre, has spoken out about this.

twitter.com/misanharriman/status/1595213794246098950?s=61&t=vHJm1SLL0yKHcLGgS3wg1w

Is it a surprise that women who are anti abortion or anti abortion adjacent don't want kids subjected to child abuse?

Is it now the case that only women who are pro abortion are allowed to speak up?

Enough of this trial by association bullshit. Anyone with fucking eyes could see this for what it was. Right wing. Left wing. Liberal. Whatever.

Jesus Christ what is the world at where only pure people can call out abuse?

Fuck that shit.

The fact that the left are not calling this out is nothing more or less than an abysmal failing on the left.

Child abuse is not a party political issue.

@DysonSpheres there was something similar to this Balenciaga scandal with the video for former Disney Mickey Mouse club girl Christina Aguilera's really horrible video 'Dirrty' directed by star photographer Dave LaChapelle. According to Time, the graffiti in the background reads, in Thai, 'sex tourism' and 'young underage girls'.

There's a lot in the fashion industry that stinks, but it has managed to largely avoid a MeToo reckoning so far because unlike actresses and actors, most models are so powerless and voiceless, their names unknown, many coming to work in the industry very young, many far from home, some not English speaking and with work permit insecurity that put them into a situation where they could be coerced into unpleasant situations and demands.

The whole is there no one else reporting it comment as well. Oh no, I can't have the same views as a conservative on this one topic because if I agree with her it means I agree with everything she says...oh my god I must be a conservative. Aargh. Must have purer thoughts. <out damned spot>

No, that’s not good enough. Advertising campaigns are not just something that happen in the spur of the moment. The theme / content isn’t just down to 1 person.

this, 100%. This was deliberate. “There is no such thing as bad publicity”.

www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/11/23/balenciaga-threatens-sue-photographer-using-children-bondage/

I think they're even more disgusting now they're trying to pretend the photographer acted alone.

After taking those sick photos down and apologising they added another campaign photo which people started investigating. In the photo is a book by Michael Borremans which is a very disturbing book that shows toddlers running around naked covered in blood! They know exactly what they are doing.

I interpreted Karwomanghia's post as despair that there are so few people calling it out.

We shouldn't only be seeing right wing conservatives addressing this.

Why aren't people with more liberal values as outraged as they should be? Why?

Still no mention of it in The Guardian as far as I can see, though they did run a piece mentioning both Adidas and Balenciaga yesterday in relation to Kanye West. Maybe it'll be like Breslow at Mermaids, and it'll take them a month or so to get round to informing their readers.

The photographer says he's the victim:

Balenciaga photographer says he's being 'lynched'
mol.im/a/11463573

Unless someone held a gun to his head, I'm assuming there's always the option to say no. There's plenty of times I could've done the wrong thing at work to progress, or just keep the peace, but didn't. Yes it cost me but once your reputation is gone, try getting it back.

Well Tucker Carlson would wouldn't he.

I'm also disturbed that the right is vocalising this so strongly (and getting it slightly wrong) and the left are doing what? Are their left wing people in the US discussing this? If not, why not? I would like to stand beside people I also have other things in common with ie not TC.

"Child pornography" is a term in US federal law:

lawrina.com/us-law/federal/codes/title-18/part-i/chapter-110/sec-2252a/
18 U.S. Code Section 2252A - Certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child pornography

www.missingkids.org/theissues/csam
"United States federal law defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (a person less than 18 years old). Outside of the legal system, NCMEC chooses to refer to these images as Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) to most accurately reflect what is depicted – the sexual abuse and exploitation of children."

We don't say it here, but if that is their law then it's not a massive leap to substituting "child" for "kiddie".