10 Year Old Model

[Destroit]

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/w_MindBodyResource/10-year-models-grown-high-fashion-high-risk/story?id=14221160

The fashion world is all in a fuss over 10 year old model, Thylane Lena Rose Blondeau, whose ads are considered too adult by some, while others think that it's not only cute, but there's nothing inherently sexual about it, and that little girls play dress up with their parent's clothes and makeup all the time.

Thylane Loubry Blondeau, a 10-year-old model with a sultry stare beyond her years, had the fashion industry drooling after posing for French Vogue. But photos of the Parisian preteen, whose lanky body and gap-toothed pout bring to mind full-grown size-zero magazine cover girls, have reignited the debate over the sexualization of young girls.

Wearing makeup, high heels and haute couture, Blondeau looks a far cry from a typical 10-year-old. Even in childish smocks and cotton tees, her expressions are oddly adult -- a product, perhaps, of living half her young life in the fashion world (she reportedly hit the runway for Jean-Paul Gauthier at age 5). And some say Blondeau's grown-up beauty is giving other young girls unhealthy ideas about how they should look.

"We don't want kids to grow up too fast," said Shari Miles-Cohen, senior director of women's programs for the American Psychological Association. "We want them to be able to develop physically, emotionally, psychologically and socially at appropriate rates for their age."

French Vogue provocatively poked at this principle, running photos of Blondeau and two other tweens playing designer dress-up captioned with, "Quel maquillage à quel âge?" -- What makeup at what age? But a shot of Blondeau wearing a red dress and stilettos lying on a tiger skin rug had critics crying foul.

"This isn't edgy. It's inappropriate, and creepy, and I never want to see a nine-year-old girl in high-heeled leopard print bedroom slippers ever again," wrote Chloe Angyal, editor of Feminsting.com.

Sexualized images can have lasting effects on the young girls who see them. An APA taskforce found that sexualization by the media affects how girls think about femininity and sexuality, promoting "appearance and physical attractiveness" as key values. It's also linked to low self-esteem, eating disorders and depression.

"The research clearly shows that the fashion industry affects girls and women's images of themselves and their self-esteem if they do not meet the industry 'image' that is currently in vogue," said Paul Miller, associate professor of psychology at Arizona State University in Phoenix. "Even the very young are quite conscious of media images of what is 'pretty' and desirable."

In a photo not affiliated with Vogue, Blondeau poses topless on a bed with a young male playmate propositioning a pillow fight. And in another, she wears hip-slung jeans and no top with beaded necklaces covering her would-be breasts.

Many in the industry have defended the work as art. Others say it crosses a line.

"Any creepy child pornographer could plead 'artistic license,'" said Miller.

Blondeau is not the first mini model to stir up the sexualization debate. In 2007, a 13-year-old Dakota Fanning posed in a controversial campaign for Marc Jacobs. Now 13-year-old Elle Fanning has followed in her sister's footsteps as the face of Jacobs' Fall 2011 campaign.

The controversy extends to pint-sized pageant queens and prospective pop stars, too. A YouTube video of 8- and 9-year-olds dancing to Beyonce's "Single Ladies" spurred a similar uproar last year.

"People have always admired young ballerinas in scanty costumes, but those performances weren't explicitly sexual," Vivian Friedman, child psychologist and professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, told ABC News at the time. "There was an aesthetic that didn't remind you of being in bed."

Photos of Blondeau, some in pink tutus and others in bed, illustrate the disparity.

"[The photos] clearly create an image of the girl as an adult woman, both in the clothing, the postures and emotional content of the images," said Miller. "The message is that very young girls can be dressed and viewed as young adult women."

[Destroit]

I personally think the feminazis need to pull their panties out their asscracks, but that's just me.

Not even over this, but imo, feminist ideals are destroying they way we raise our children. If these extremist crusaders for "equal" rights (equal to who?) had their way, children would be raised in a sterile bubble being pumped Barney "I Love You You Love Me" crap all day, and not be able to interact with adults because they're "innocent" and talking to adults may be "obscene".

I believe that there are age appropriate actions to teach your children not to do until a certain point, but I never believe in age-appropriate ideals. There's nothing overtly sexual about the photos, she's wearing makeup, yes, but I want one female in here to speak up if you NEVER put cosmetics on your face once before the age of 10, even if it was just for play (unless you had femimom, as previously mentioned).

I also disagree with the feminist ideal that beauty should not be promoted or that "everyone is beautiful no matter what". Simply not the case in reality. Human beings throw so much onto appearance, some do not. Some people, while their image doesn't take over every aspect of their lives, can get up, look at the mirror, and think "I'm pretty decent, I like me." The notion of appearance and beauty is so abstract and has so many meanings to every individual, I think instead of squelching the idea of promoting appearance, it should be in a more positive light and oh, I dunno, here's the equality thing again...but maybe encourage males to take pride in how they look? Male appearance has been downplayed for so long, and guys will always give the "well girls are supposed to care about that stuff, not us", and REALLY...historically speaking boys have been pretty like peacocks . From high heels (originally men's shoes), powdered wigs, petticoats, ancient eyeliner, tribal makeup...well for a gender whom, in the modern day, we've convinced ourselves has no need to look flashy, it seems we'd be wrong. Only now, in the modern age, is male appearance downplayed.

To me, that restrictive type of parenting can be just as harmful as those crazy moms who MAKE their daughters go into beauty pageants because "their little girl has to be the prettiest". It's a pendulum, you swing it too far to one side and it's too much, then when people try to correct the over-swing, instead of putting it back in the middle where it belongs, it is sent over the opposite side.

Little kids love acting like adults...BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE ADULTS! Crazy fucking concept there...

As long as they don't have her in lingerie or posing, you know, seductively with grown-men and shit like that then I don't really take much of an issue with some heels and a little doctoring up.

Edited August 15, 2011 by Chernobyl

[bean]

The pictures I saw that were included in the article seemed fine, but I find this piece disturbing: "In a photo not affiliated with Vogue, Blondeau poses topless on a bed with a young male playmate propositioning a pillow fight. And in another, she wears hip-slung jeans and no top with beaded necklaces covering her would-be breasts." That is not appropriate.

As for the other stuff, most little girls have walked around in their mother's high heels or put on their make-up and clothes, so that's not really a big deal. What bothers me is that society stresses the importance of looks too much, and that you have to wear a gallon of make-up to look good, or that you can only be considered attractive if you look a certain way. I get that looks are important, and everyone finds different things attractive, and some people are just fugly. No problem, but I think society needs to back off on the idea that one's looks are the most important thing and start promoting intelligence and behaving like a decent human being. There are way too many ill behaved, stupid people running around and it's just going to get worse. I'm not saying that beauty shouldn't be promoted at all, but there needs to be some balance.

I agree with Chernobyl that males should be encouraged to take pride in their looks and make an effort.

[Destroit]

The pictures I saw that were included in the article seemed fine, but I find this piece disturbing: "In a photo not affiliated with Vogue, Blondeau poses topless on a bed with a young male playmate propositioning a pillow fight. And in another, she wears hip-slung jeans and no top with beaded necklaces covering her would-be breasts." That is not appropriate.

I missed that somehow, and agree. I could see playing with a young boy, but the topless part? Yeah, that's a bit much, because that actual "genital" exposure (even if they aren't really developed yet) which is child porn. Any "topless" modeling, even little boys (unless it's like a swim suit ad for Kmart or a scene of playing outside in the summer) is too adult imo.

[bean]

I missed that somehow, and agree. I could see playing with a young boy, but the topless part? Yeah, that's a bit much, because that actual "genital" exposure (even if they aren't really developed yet) which is child porn. Any "topless" modeling, even little boys (unless it's like a swim suit ad for Kmart or a scene of playing outside in the summer) is too adult imo.

I agree.

[Destroit]

An interesting aside about the topless issue, because something didn't sit right with me.

Back in the day (maybe not super conservative eras such as the late 1800s) but little girls running around topless, outside even, was NOT a big deal. This may seem shocking to our generation, but the reason is very common sense: They don't have boobs! Why try to hide private parts that aren't even there yet?

I believe that as a society, we've HAD to change, because we're starting to realize that while normal adults see a prepubescent girl running around with no boobs and no top as a child-like freedom, many gross child molesters are staring at your daughter running around in the front yard like "heh heh...yeeeah, I'ma snatch that one up..."

I dunno, just my theory on it.

[Nevar (5)]

I think it's calling all pedos, little to no ten year boys are looking for sex at that age so why should a ten year old girl be dressed in a manner such as this.

[Destroit]

Pestilence DID bring up a good point to me, the fact that there is a distinct difference between a little girl trying to play dress up and act adult at home or with friends, but that it's different when it's for a modeling agency inside of an international fashion magazine.

Now I might have to reconsider...hmm...*ponders*.

[bean]

An interesting aside about the topless issue, because something didn't sit right with me.

Back in the day (maybe not super conservative eras such as the late 1800s) but little girls running around topless, outside even, was NOT a big deal. This may seem shocking to our generation, but the reason is very common sense: They don't have boobs! Why try to hide private parts that aren't even there yet?

I believe that as a society, we've HAD to change, because we're starting to realize that while normal adults see a prepubescent girl running around with no boobs and no top as a child-like freedom, many gross child molesters are staring at your daughter running around in the front yard like "heh heh...yeeeah, I'ma snatch that one up..."

I dunno, just my theory on it.

I think it's calling all pedos, little to no ten year boys are looking for sex at that age so why should a ten year old girl be dressed in a manner such as this.

Exactly. I agree with what both of you wrote.

Pestilence DID bring up a good point to me, the fact that there is a distinct difference between a little girl trying to play dress up and act adult at home or with friends, but that it's different when it's for a modeling agency inside of an international fashion magazine.

Now I might have to reconsider...hmm...*ponders*.

I kicked that idea around in my head too.

[TygerLili]

I wouldn't describe the pictures shown with the article as pornographic, or even overtly sexual, but they do make me uncomfortable for a couple of reasons. There's a big difference between a photo of a little girl with lipstick smeared all over her mouth and her mom's 5-sizes-too-big high heels playing dress up for her own enjoyment, and a photo of a little girl dressed, made-up, and posed like a grown woman for the purpose of making you desire whatever adult product she is advertising. Vogue is a very adult magazine. Not many 10-year-olds read Vogue, and hardly any would be able to buy the products featured in it. To me this is like using 60 year old models to model juniors clothing in Seventeen magazine. It's not age appropriate and doesn't make any sense.

Also, our society has enough body image issues today as a result of how adult models are are airbrushed and portrayed in magazines like Vogue. Should a major magazine really be sending the message that adult women should strive to look like/have bodies like 10-year-old girls? I think not.

[n0Mad]

This is pretty much the antithesis to the ephebophile in me. I prefer a 28 year old who looks 15, not a 10 year old who looks 30. That's just ... backwards.

[~Tszura~]

The pictures I saw that were included in the article seemed fine, but I find this piece disturbing: "In a photo not affiliated with Vogue, Blondeau poses topless on a bed with a young male playmate propositioning a pillow fight. And in another, she wears hip-slung jeans and no top with beaded necklaces covering her would-be breasts." That is not appropriate.

As for the other stuff, most little girls have walked around in their mother's high heels or put on their make-up and clothes, so that's not really a big deal. What bothers me is that society stresses the importance of looks too much, and that you have to wear a gallon of make-up to look good, or that you can only be considered attractive if you look a certain way. I get that looks are important, and everyone finds different things attractive, and some people are just fugly. No problem, but I think society needs to back off on the idea that one's looks are the most important thing and start promoting intelligence and behaving like a decent human being. There are way too many ill behaved, stupid people running around and it's just going to get worse. I'm not saying that beauty shouldn't be promoted at all, but there needs to be some balance.

I agree with Chernobyl that males should be encouraged to take pride in their looks and make an effort.

Pestilence DID bring up a good point to me, the fact that there is a distinct difference between a little girl trying to play dress up and act adult at home or with friends, but that it's different when it's for a modeling agency inside of an international fashion magazine.

Now I might have to reconsider...hmm...*ponders*.

I wouldn't describe the pictures shown with the article as pornographic, or even overtly sexual, but they do make me uncomfortable for a couple of reasons. There's a big difference between a photo of a little girl with lipstick smeared all over her mouth and her mom's 5-sizes-too-big high heels playing dress up for her own enjoyment, and a photo of a little girl dressed, made-up, and posed like a grown woman for the purpose of making you desire whatever adult product she is advertising. Vogue is a very adult magazine. Not many 10-year-olds read Vogue, and hardly any would be able to buy the products featured in it. To me this is like using 60 year old models to model juniors clothing in Seventeen magazine. It's not age appropriate and doesn't make any sense.

Also, our society has enough body image issues today as a result of how adult models are are airbrushed and portrayed in magazines like Vogue. Should a major magazine really be sending the message that adult women should strive to look like/have bodies like 10-year-old girls? I think not.

I agree. I played dress up as a little girl, but by the time I was done raiding my grandmothers closet and make-up, I ended up looking like an 80 year old hobo caught in a windstorm. I looked nothing like this girl. Maybe its because I was perped on as a child, but this just screams pedo to me. There is absolutely no appropriate reason for her to look like that. It reminds me of that group of people who dress their little girls up and make them dance all sexy at the "hoe-down" hoping that a pimp, errrr, I mean a man from their group will take interest and marry her later. I bet all the perps went out and grabbed this magazine. And that mom can go suck dead donkey c#@k for what she said. If she just wanted to protect her, then she shouldn't have put her out there like that in the first place. How is this little girl going to feel about these photos being out there when she gets older and realizes how she was portrayed, and what some people were thinking when looking at them? I don't know. I try to be objective when these things happen, but my first reaction with this is "AGH!!!!"

[Strange But True]

What bothers me in particular is that these pictures do not just blur the line between what is considered art, and, what is considered child pornography… they obliterate it. As a society we try to protect our children from exploitation by setting certain boundaries. This just seems like a step backwards.

[Slogo]

and REALLY...historically speaking boys have been pretty like peacocks . From high heels (originally men's shoes), powdered wigs, petticoats, ancient eyeliner, tribal makeup...

Yeah well....

It's good to be the king

Edited August 16, 2011 by Slogo

[Raev]

I think it's calling all pedos, little to no ten year boys are looking for sex at that age so why should a ten year old girl be dressed in a manner such as this.

I think Pest has hit the nail on the head here.

[candyman]

Far too long have we put emphasis on teaching education and life skills early...it is high time that we teach children the harsh realities of eating and then throwing it right back up instead. Hookers starting late have trouble establishing a client base and a very bad at arguing over price...I also find that early ebonics lessons and teaching them to fight the man before they can even do a simple math problem is key to success.

Even though this is a news story and should be fine I am now constantly looking around waiting for a voice behind me to say..."why don't you sit down"...or just a taser and handcuffs...ahhhh I fell DIRTY now! WTF?

[LadyKay]

10 year old's are children. They are not old enough to have sex and to make them look like they are is sending the wrong message. While playing dress up around the house trying on clothes and makeup is one thing, taking photos of your child in a sexy pose then putting them on display for all the world to see is sending a message to the world that this child is ready for sex. People can raise their children as they see fit. But I would never allow my child to be displayed in such a manner.

[Oh_My_Goth]

I am most certainly NOT impressed with this type of thing & I am glad I don't have a daughter.

I don't think the pic in the article is cute or playful... I think it's twisted & many pervos has already spanked it to that pic a million times.

For fuck's sake... I don't understand what the hell people are thinking when they come up with this kinda stuff. I would like to meet the mother and father of this child and shake them.

[Simon Bar Sinister]

her parents should be kicked in the teeth.

[wormsinwombs]

I wouldn't describe the pictures shown with the article as pornographic, or even overtly sexual, but they do make me uncomfortable for a couple of reasons. There's a big difference between a photo of a little girl with lipstick smeared all over her mouth and her mom's 5-sizes-too-big high heels playing dress up for her own enjoyment, and a photo of a little girl dressed, made-up, and posed like a grown woman for the purpose of making you desire whatever adult product she is advertising. Vogue is a very adult magazine. Not many 10-year-olds read Vogue, and hardly any would be able to buy the products featured in it. To me this is like using 60 year old models to model juniors clothing in Seventeen magazine. It's not age appropriate and doesn't make any sense.

Also, our society has enough body image issues today as a result of how adult models are are airbrushed and portrayed in magazines like Vogue. Should a major magazine really be sending the message that adult women should strive to look like/have bodies like 10-year-old girls? I think not.

Pretty much my thoughts. I found these photos really odd I kinda get what they were going for but I think they missed the mark and went off into creepy territory.

[LadyKay]

I was watching a show where a former model was being interview. She was taking about how she became anorexic. She started modding at the age of 12 doing adult modding such as these photos are. She explain that what these magazines are trying to do is to show that to be the beautiful and the "ideal women", that your body needs to look like it belongs to a child. She said that there is something really twisted about making a 30 or 40 year old women, (I am guessing that most of the readers of this magazine are 30 to 40 year old women) think that they have to have the body of a 10 year old child in order to be beautiful. So I think that this is what this magazine is trying to sell us. That women have to have the body of a 10 year old in order to be beautiful. This kind of crap leads to eating disorders and low self esteem.

I would say that this little girl is going to be in need of some serious counseling in years to come.

Edited August 17, 2011 by LadyKay

[Simon Bar Sinister]

looks like the bar has dropped still lower:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2026694/French-label-Jours-Apr-s-Lunes-launch-lingerie-girls-young-FOUR.html

[*Siren*]

her parents should be kicked in the teeth.

I couldn't agree with you more. Now, where did I put my steel toe boots?

[LadyKay]

looks like the bar has dropped still lower:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2026694/French-label-Jours-Apr-s-Lunes-launch-lingerie-girls-young-FOUR.html

Have people lost their minds?

[Destroit]

looks like the bar has dropped still lower:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2026694/French-label-Jours-Apr-s-Lunes-launch-lingerie-girls-young-FOUR.html

WTFNONONO...WAAAYTOOMUCH...GRODY

*sigh* We are seriously reverting back to the hedonism of the late Ancient Roman era, fast. We all know how that ends...

Humanity has always had a pendulum that swings between strict moral order and chaotic pleasureful individualism. What I don't understand about humans is WHY the HELL we can't just stay in the middle of the two sides...

Edited August 17, 2011 by Chernobyl